Wednesday, June 27, 2012

After the primary - which of our U.S. congressional candidates&officeholders support ending the $12b/yr taxpayer subsidies to fossil fuel industry?

Spoiler: Only Reed and a McClintock aide have responded. 
It's past time for a post-Primary blogpost putting candidates and officeholders on the record as to whether they support ending subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, and in particular, the Sanders/Ellison End Polluter Welfare Act (S.3080 or H.R.5745, respectively; Thomas.gov will give the bill's current status), which was introduced in May.
(My pre-primary blogpost putting candidates on the record is here. )  I'd started asking last month, & then 350.org asked people to call their congressional representatives and ask whether they supported ending fossil fuel subsidies, and then - since said reps' aides waffled like Shrove Tuesday, when asked - they're suggesting that those curious ask via Facebook. 

(Note: One problem with just asking this one Q is that (of those candidates who did respond, when I'd asked earlier) many candidates from one party replied "yes, let's end ALL subsidies", which is a safe answer since hell will freeze over first, etc.  So the followup Q should(?) be "how would you vote on a bill that would only end the subsidies to the fossil fuel industry?" - for which the EPWA bill serves as an exemplar.)

After the winnowing of the primary, our Congressional candidates and officeholders are Feinstein, Boxer, Emken, McClintock, Reed, and LaMalfa, and of these I've had substantive response from just
Reed and a McClintock aide, although it's unclear whether the aide checked with McClintock himself.

So it's time for a new round; I'll keep tabs here.

Jim Reed said "I supported ending subsidies to the petroleum industry"

McClintock, as understood by Igor Birman: against all subsidies, and against all(?) hypothetical questions.

Still no answers from Emken, LaMalfa, Feinstein or Boxer, as of June 27:
On June 11 I asked via a Facebook comment, for candidates LaMalfa (link) and Emken (who I also asked by email); as of the 27th, no answer.

Phoned Feinstein and Boxer's DC offices on Mon the 11th.
(Followed up with Feinstein Tue 19th; still no position.  Boxer's office phone was giving a "fast busy" signal when I tried to reach a human; this happened on more than one day.)

Left the query as a comment on Boxer's recent Facebook post June 27.
Feinstein doesn't appear to have her own Facebook page.

(As of June 27, Thomas.gov says S.3080 still has no cosponsors; the House version, H.R.5745, now has 2 cosponsors, Lee and Conyers.)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Welcome, and thanks for caring enough to donate your time and thoughts toward greater collective wisdom...

Terms of engagement:
* Please be civil.
* * * * Please do not post anonymously * * * (I'd remove this choice if I could, and I may remove your comment if you do) - instead, do this:
Click on the 'Name/URL' radiobutton, then enter your real name (if you're brave) or a pseudonym (if you're not). (You can leave the "URL" field blank.)
Or go ahead and click "Anonymous", but put your name in your comment.

* The Management reserves the right to delete comments (Moderation Certificate can be found here). You can always post it on a blog of your own.

If you run into technical difficulties, please a) accept my apologies, then b) email your comment to aherror2011 at gmail.com with "Comment for [name of this blog]" in the Subject line.

New policy re climate contrarianism comments as of 11/11/2009:
Comments questioning the climate science community's understanding of climate change (97% of active climatologists now believe that the earth is currently warming and that it's human-caused - link) will be deleted unless the commenter:
a) is local
b) uses his real name
c) provides link(s) to substantiate his claim(s)/inference(s)
d) is willing to collaborate on constructing an argument tree, to get us past the usual sterile point-counterpoint-countercounterpoint.
(For people who can't read the above, a summary:
1) Be civil;
2) Don't post w/o giving at least a pseudonym;
3) Don't espouse climate-denial crankery unless you're local and willing to stand behind it.)

Caveats:
1. Comments could be delayed: they are being moderated, and I'm sometimes away from the computer for a day or more.
2. : Perfectly legitimate comments are sometimes miscategorized (by the blogging platform) as spam, & not published. If this happens to yours, please notify me, else I might not notice for a day or two.