(Disclosure: The author of this diary accepts that there is sufficient evidence of human-caused global warming to merit serious attention, and also believes in evolution. - promoted by ClubTwitty)
Citing economic impacts to his rural Third District, Rep. John Salazar was one of forty-four House Democrats to vote against the American Clean Energy Security Act (ACES), which would have taken a first step toward limiting carbon emissions.
A story in the Post-Independent quotes an email the paper received from Salazar's press secretary Eric Wortman:
"The CBO [Congressional Budget Office] estimate that folks like to use - $165 annual per household is a national average. Some areas of the country fall under that, some over, and a rural district like Colorado's 3rd would be on the high end."
The article goes on to note that Salazar was barraged by calls from angry citizens urging that he oppose the legislation. But Salazar's vote is now drawing fire from those who think that addressing climate change and developing new energy policies should be high priorities for the Democratic Party and Congress. The Post-Independent article reports:
"I simply don't buy his reasons," said Rifle attorney Ed Sands, chair of the Garfield County Democratic Party. "I mean, it will be 10 years before the caps are fully effective. Who knows where the economy will be in 10 years? I think we [Democrats] believe it's very important, landmark legislation, to turn around the direction this country's been going in" regarding global warming and energy consumption.
Rep. Salazar's position is certainly part a product of his district-which although ranging from deep red to deep blue, remains reliably conservative even as the Democratic Party makes inroads.
Still, many would think that Salazar is overly cautious, perhaps too fearful of being labeled as green-and that he is wrong on this vote. Rather than taking the first important step toward a solution, Rep. Salazar has aligned himself--on this issue--with the Party-of-No.
|
