Vermont’s GWSA legislation will go back to the Vermont House of Representatives for another look when lawmakers return in late August. Before they make it law, they should do the kind of cost-benefit analysis New Zealand did.
Again, I say that by passing such a radical bill, the Democrats and Progressives in Montpelier have demonstrated that they are perfectly willing to sacrifice our state’s economic integrity in exchange for the hypothetical of an unmeasurable and unprovable reduction in global greenhouse gas emission effects.
Six weeks from now the Global Warming Solutions Act will likely be on Gov. Phil Scott’s desk. There are five compelling reasons for him to veto it.
Governor Scott must demand that the Legislature respect constitutional structures that preserve balance and equity in government. He must duly inform the progressive supermajority that their one-sided domination in a time of economic crisis and public health emergency will not be tolerated.
The Vermont Senate has passed the Global Warming Solutions Act, but pulls $1 million funding. Also, the House gives itself a new pay raise, and pro-lifers and others suggest new “legal” graffiti messaging.
While Democrat lawmakers strongly support a bill that would allow the state to enforce emissions standards for energy, heat and transportation, Republicans say now is not the time for new costs while Vermont suffers through a self-inflicted economic collapse.
It’s crunch time for the Climate Action Network’s most urgently sought legislation: the Global Warming Solutions Act. If it doesn’t get a Senate vote this month, the bill is dead until next year.
Vermont Democrat/Progressives are not failing to use COVID-19 as an opportunity to slip some very detrimental bills through this year’s session of the Vermont Legislature. That is what is happening right now with the so-called Global Warming Solutions Act.
This bill is designed to feed climate change lawyers and send the bill to taxpayers. It’s high time to scrap the whole sorry thing.
The Global Warming Solutions Act allows the Conservation Law Foundation to go to court, like it did in Massachusetts, and get a court order to demand that the secretary of Natural Resources issue even more sweeping and invasive rules.
This bill is a total abrogation of democracy, a guaranteed economy wrecker, and a shameful attack on our liberties. It should be taken out and burned.