On May 26, 2011, Republican Gov. Chris Christie punched New Jersey's environmental community in the nose with this announcement: Gov: NJ's pulling out of climate-change compact, RGGI.
Within days, Democrats in the state legislature were holding hearings to question the governor's decision (NJ's withdrawal from RGGI contested in Assembly) and introducing legislation A4108/S2946 to keep the state in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative compact.
Since then, the legislation cleared both houses along partisan lines and was delivered to the governor. As expected, he vetoed it on August 19.
But RGGI (pronounced Reggie) is not yet dead, as its allies are now pushing for a vote this fall to override the veto. And they have a hot new argument to use.
Secret meeting between governor and industrialist
Last week, blogs and newspapers reported that, before he delivered his surprise RGGI-withdrawl pronouncement, Christie met secretly with fossil-fuel billionaire David Koch (pronounced Coke) who is financing a number of right-wing think tanks and activist groups opposed to carbon-control efforts like RGGI.
Op-Eds, pro and con
With that as a backdrop, let us point you to two Bergen Record op-ed pieces that take up the RGGI stay or RGGI go debate.
Writing on September 1 in support of Governor Christie's decision (Taking sides on the environment) was Mike Proto, the communications director for Americans for Prosperity New Jersey.
Writing in rebuttal of Proto's piece on September 11 (Facts on RGGI contradict its critics) were Peter Shattuck, the carbon markets policy analyst at Environment Northeast and Xavier Walter, who is president and co-founder of The Energy Team in Southampton, NJ.
We suggest that you read them both and let us know what you think in the comment box below. If the box is not visible, click the tiny 'comments' line, also below. If you're not sure where you stand on the issue, don't worry. With every seat in both houses of the State Legislature up for grabs in the November election, and environmental issues playing their normal role, you can expect to read a god deal more about RGGI between now and then.
Our most recent posts:
Where do you get your environmental news?
Do environmental regulations kill jobs?
Obama Visits Flood-Ravaged New Jersey
Obama decision blindsides enviros-and his own EPA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like this post? You'll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics.
A regional greenhouse gas system strikes me as an expensive way to achieve little. Having the world go to the Kyoto protocols would only lower global temperatures by about a degree by 2100; a regional compact would have no discernible impact. Take the money and put it all into energy conservation measures, including mandatory energy conservation codes. Let's actually get something done rather than do things that "make a statement".
ReplyDeleteNo one mentions that, during a time when health care cost increases are killing companies and government health programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the number of Americans who can afford health care is dropping, eliminating the proposed EPA health care-related environmental regulations is a way of shooting ourselves in the foot. There is no mention that EPA has done cost-benefit analysis that shows that not only would these regulations create a net increase in jobs from business meeting the rules, they would also lower future health care costs for respiratory diseases and other illnesses caused by industrial emissions of air pollution for all Americans, and save billions in future health care expenses.
ReplyDeleteThis is another example of American short-term business thinking that let to the near-disappearance of the American auto industry because it was too busy hiring lawyers to delay fuel-efficiency rules whereas the Europeans and Asians were building more fuel-efficient and economical vehicles that were more successful in the marketplace than the energy hogs Detroit kept on making...