<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Technology Fifteen vs. Coal State Fifteen</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2009/02/03/technology-fifteen-vs-coal-state-fifteen/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2009/02/03/technology-fifteen-vs-coal-state-fifteen/</link>
	<description>Dispatches from the Youth Climate Movement</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 08:12:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jesse Jenkins</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2009/02/03/technology-fifteen-vs-coal-state-fifteen/#comment-70665</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jesse Jenkins]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:19:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2009/02/03/technology-fifteen-vs-coal-state-fifteen/#comment-70665</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Excellent analysis Alex.  Thanks for posting it.  I&#039;m curious on your thoughts about how best to make the kind of things we want to see a winning proposition for the 12 democratic senators you identify and at least a few of the five potential swing Republicans that&#039;d be needed to get over 60 votes?  

We dubbed our slightly different set of 15 Democratic Senators the &quot;Technology 15&quot; because among their concerns is a concern that they have yet to see a serious effort to invest heavily in the clean energy technologies their states (and the nation) will need to replace the coal they now rely heavily on, and to make such technologies affordable enough so as to not slam their already weak, often manufacturing-heavy economies with higher energy prices.  

Some of them (perhaps the folks from WV) may be simply too tied to the dying coal industry to embrace a new energy future.  Others though, like Sherrod Brown (D-OH) or Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), are probably more interested in the health of their states&#039; manufacturing sectors (and the cost of electricity they use) than the coal industry.  How can we convince them this is a win-win situation for them, and not about sacrificing their state&#039;s economic well-being in the interest of climate objectives advanced by &quot;coastal-state interests&quot; (as it&#039;s no-doubt all to easy to perceive the folks in charge of key committees now, i.e. Boxer, Markey and Waxman)?

No doubt it will take a strategic combination of public pressure and organizing muscle and the right policy design that looks attractive enough to these middle America states to be worth taking a shot at passing.  Solve that riddle and we may be in business.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent analysis Alex.  Thanks for posting it.  I&#8217;m curious on your thoughts about how best to make the kind of things we want to see a winning proposition for the 12 democratic senators you identify and at least a few of the five potential swing Republicans that&#8217;d be needed to get over 60 votes?  </p>
<p>We dubbed our slightly different set of 15 Democratic Senators the &#8220;Technology 15&#8243; because among their concerns is a concern that they have yet to see a serious effort to invest heavily in the clean energy technologies their states (and the nation) will need to replace the coal they now rely heavily on, and to make such technologies affordable enough so as to not slam their already weak, often manufacturing-heavy economies with higher energy prices.  </p>
<p>Some of them (perhaps the folks from WV) may be simply too tied to the dying coal industry to embrace a new energy future.  Others though, like Sherrod Brown (D-OH) or Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), are probably more interested in the health of their states&#8217; manufacturing sectors (and the cost of electricity they use) than the coal industry.  How can we convince them this is a win-win situation for them, and not about sacrificing their state&#8217;s economic well-being in the interest of climate objectives advanced by &#8220;coastal-state interests&#8221; (as it&#8217;s no-doubt all to easy to perceive the folks in charge of key committees now, i.e. Boxer, Markey and Waxman)?</p>
<p>No doubt it will take a strategic combination of public pressure and organizing muscle and the right policy design that looks attractive enough to these middle America states to be worth taking a shot at passing.  Solve that riddle and we may be in business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

