RK on Barker and Bulova

Apparently George Barker and David Bulova are environmental frauds.

Good for RK for noticing!

Comments

So Ben...

who were you visiting at the General Assembly today?

[Not Larry Sabato]

I visited about 30 different members today. Full report coming tomorrow.

David and Chap are having a joint town hall meeting -

Feb 2nd - 10 to 11:30 a.m.
City of Fairfax City Hall

You mean there are Democrats who are NOT environmental frauds? The green fish rots from the head -- from Al Gore on down!

[Church Hill Dem]

While I'm a full supporter of renewable energy and a clean Renewable Portfolio Standard for Virginia, that bill isn't all hunky dorey.

Namely, it doesn't touch the horrible incentives the reregulation bill of 2007 put in place for coal and nuclear. As a matter of fact, carbon-capture compatible coal (read: new technology-compatible, but not necessarily in use) is given the same bump renewables are.

Chap needs to go the whole nine yards before he should expect green legislators to sign on to his bill.

Church Hill Dem: That's one of the most politically clueless comments I've ever read on this blog. Chap's supposed to do everything before he does anything? Brilliant!

[TheGreenMiles]

Yeah, there some people demanding a coal moratorium or a carbon tax. Which would be great, but, um ... YOU tell Dems in other parts of the state to stake their political futures on that. This is a bill that has the potential to pass NOW with support from all parts of Virginia. We can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Its not about staking political futures, northern va green miles, its about staking jobs for a vast majority of their constituents. People matter too, ya know.

[Church Hill Dem]

Anon 8:58, I beg to differ. This thread is based on political naivete, so I'm keeping form. Expecting legislators to sign on to a flawed bill that has no legs and won't pass is even more foolish.

[TheGreenMiles]

Church Hill Dem, stop attacking Chap without proposing an alternative. Be specific - what would you rather see that would have "legs"?

[Church Hill Dem]

Mary Margaret Whipple had an RPS last year (SB 1275) that had a better chance of passing than this--she brought in stakeholders from the environmental and power producing communities.

Specific enough?

[TheGreenMiles]

Have you read Chap's bill? It's SB1275 with a higher RPS of 20% and added green jobs and Virginia production provisions. In fact, the first part of Chap's bill is virtually identical to SB1275 from last year.

Check it out, 2007 bill ...
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?ses=071&typ=bil&val=SB1275

2008 Clean Energy Future Act ...
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?ses=081&typ=bil&val=sb446

And I can't even believe I'm arguing this because MMW is a co-patron of Chap's bill, so your best example disagrees with you. What else you got?

[Church Hill Dem]

No, there's no conflict in what I said. That the bills are similar doesn't mean they're identical. And that MMW signed on as a co-patron doesn't mean she thinks his bill is better than hers.

Stop drinking your CCAN kool aid.

[TheGreenMiles]

So you'd basically support the bill if it had a lower RPS, no green jobs provisions, and no provisions to make sure the green power was produced in VA? That would make the bill "greener"?

[Church Hill Dem]

No, it would give it legs; that was your original question.