Carbon was the issue of the day on the campaign trail. The Brown campaign released a press statement urging Attorney General Coakley to renounce her support for Cap and Trade, the proposal to reduce America’s carbon footprint by imposing a new tax on the burning of fossil fuels. The statement cited high Massachusetts electricity costs and a National Association of Manufacturer’s study predicting the loss of 2.4 Million American jobs if the Cap and Trade becomes law. According to the press release, “Cap and trade is anti-jobs and anti-growth. It would be bad for our economy and bad for working families. We all want a clean environment and we all want to reduce our dependence on carbon-based fuels, but we shouldn’t do it at the expense of jobs. I think a better idea is to pursue alternative sources of energy, including nuclear power. Massachusetts can’t afford Martha Coakley’s giant new tax on energy,”
Rather than refuting these arguments, Coakley responded by accusing Sen. Brown of flip-flopping on the issue. In a press release of its own, the Coakley campaign pointed to the Senator’s January 2008 vote in favor of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). This accusation is true. But since the reason for the flip-flop was that RGGI led to an increase in electricity rates, rather than the decrease that its sponsors expected, I hardly see how this is an argument in Ms. Coakley’s favor.
Perhaps even more significant is a flip-flop of Ms. Coakley’s. Her initial campaign strategy was to ignore the Republican candidate. That she is now responding at all to Mr. Brown suggests that he is making inroads with the voters.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home