In a press release issued by the campaign for Congressional candidate Jon Powers this afternoon, Powers criticizes his rival Jack Davis for his close ties to "Big Oil" — including Davis' financial disclosure that he owns $35 million in "oil and energy stocks."
"We now know Jack Davis has up to 35 million reasons to vote against lower gas prices. Exxon Jack is no different than George Bush and the politicians in Washington, DC who are already bought and paid for by the oil companies. Western New York needs a Congressman who will look out for their interests, not Exxon/Mobil's bottom line" stated Powers Campaign Manager, John Gerken.
Powers released his own energy policy that says the candidate would support legislation that would reduce carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2020. He also says that oil companies should be required to install bio-fuel pumps at 25 percent of their stations and that the country should get 25 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2025. Rather than giving so much in tax credits to oil companies, Powers wants to provide "tax credits to investors who empower scientists to develop renewable energy."
For more about Powers' energy policy, download the full document here.
UPDATE: Note, Davis has been invited to respond.
Comments
Pool rules
Most Towns and Villages around here have refused to allow wind energy. Is he going to force them to allow wind farms to meet his 25% renewable energy target? Or is he going to try and buy votes by saying Genesee County will be excempt?
I agree, end tax breaks for oil companies, but I don't want them for any business either. At the same time I don't want some guy who has almost no business experience telling business how to run. We have enough left wingers in Washington now
In terms of financing the tax credits, we can end the tax-giveaways to oil comapanies and refocus the funding into areas that are investing in alternative energies, that way we can re-shift the general focus of our energy strategy. Right now, under the "pro-business" method, were paying over 4 dollars per gallon, its time for a new plan. The only people that this is going to be a boon for is major oil companies, who will probably see a hairline fracture in their windfall profits, and it will force them to start investing in more efficiant and renewable fuels, there will be profit incentive to do so.
Just because someone has been successfull in owning a business doesn't meant that their remotley qualified to be a congressman, if Jack Davis gets elected he'll be one out of 435, and given the way that Jack has said that he'll approach the political leadership in both parties, no one will want to (nor will they) listen to his agenda or provide badly needed help to Western New York, in short, you need someone who will go to Congress with a consensus building mindset and someone who will work with others. That man is Jon Powers, by far.
Gas prices are creeping closer and closer to $5 a gallon. And will it stop there? I don't believe so. Some of us just can't afford to ride this out and wait and trust that businesses will bring all the answers and that the marketplace will work this thing out. I think this crisis is too big and needs intervention.
Taxes aren't driving up the price of gasoline either. Say what you will, but the market determines the price. Taxes come after the market sets the price. If the market says gasoline is $3, then you apply the taxes. This is why the whole gas tax holiday idea was terrible. Gas prices are now well over $4. Cut the taxes away and gas is still in the $3.40 or $3.50 range. It was at those prices that a gas tax holiday was first being discussed. See how ridiculous that idea was? All the pro-gas tax holiday people needed to debunk their theories was time. Time has told them they were wrong for suggesting such a gas tax holiday.
Also, most towns and villages oppose wind energy because they are (A) Not educated on wind energy and (B) They see wind energy as another "big corporation" moving in. I'm sure I could name other reasons, but those are two of the big ones. I have debated wind energy with anti-wind energy people and they will never debate the technology of wind energy with you. Why? Because they don't know it. All they know is that wind turbines are "ugly" and they don't want them "in [their] backyard."
Small businesses should get tax breaks. I don't believe a Wal-Mart should get Empire Zone tax breaks. I also don't think oil companies should get tax breaks when they are making $10 billion a quarter (Exxon Mobil). Small businesses and corporations are different. We need to remember that.
Saying that pumping billions of tons of chemicals into the atmosphere will have no impact would require the suspension of disbelief, in other words, its a ridiculous notion.
I have my personal opinions on how to solve the problem, but to deny that there's a problem that we can fix is absurd.
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/globalwarming/index.html#
While I always try to keep an open mind -- I ask you can all of these scientists be wrong? For my children's and grandchildren's future I will err on the side of science. While change is slow, the evidence is pretty staggering that the green house gas emissions are playing a role in the heating of our planet.
Here's a site with some scientific information -- http://www.pewclimate.org/global-warming-basics
I remain conflicted and uncertain -- in a warmer globe, for example, Southern California would be getting more rain, not less.
While some parts of the global ice caps melt, others grow.
Well before human-driven climate change could have made a difference, middle America suffered a three year drought (leading to the Dust Bowl).
But if you look at the temp. graphs from 1880 to 2000, it's a pretty convincing visual argument that the world was getting warmer. And it does happen to coincide with industrialization.