Dear Hearing Witness, would you mind not selling our future?

There will be another congressional hearing about the climate bill tomorrow, and guess who is on the stand? Five people representing fossil industries, one faith leader, and an economist from the most corporatist ‘environmental’ organization around.

There are no young people on the panel and our only ally, Maria Castellanos from the United Church of Christ, is also the only witness who isn’t white, a man, and whose pockets aren’t lined with bloody fossil fuel cash. Wouldn’t it be nice to let these people know what we think they should be saying? I looked around for their e-mail addresses for you. Pick one person, and send them a quick note. I chose Mr. Keohane from the Environmental Defense Fund and this is what I’m writing him:

Dear Mr. Keohane,

I am a climate activist concerned about the direction that Waxman Markey is taking. The youth movement agrees that auctioning 100% of pollution permits is the only way to ensure that polluters, not working people, pay for reducing our climate emissions and eliminating the climate threat.

As you know, young people were not invited to testify at the hearing tomorrow.So I was hoping that in your statement you would recognize that the people who will inherit this planet do not want another corporate bailout. We want bold climate legislation. If conservative politicians need to be bought out, it is our job as environmentalists and concerned citizens to call them out on it, and not to play their corrupt games.

I look forward to hearing your statement as I will be in the audience with other young people – listening and hoping that someone will represent our true interests and take a stand. Will it be you?

Tommaso Nicholas Boggia

Here are your other possible targets and the e-mail addresses I could find:

Thomas F. Farrell II – CEO, Dominion – thomas_farrell@dom.com
Rich Wells, Vice President, Energy, Dow Chemical Company – [Couldn't find the address]
Nat Keohane, Economist, Environmental Defense Fund – nkeohane@edf.org
Reverend Dr. Maria Castellanos, Minister for Policy Advocacy, United Church of Christ, Justice and Peace Ministries [make sure to be nice to her!] – castellm@ucc.org
G. Tommy Hodges, on behalf of the American Trucking Association – [Couldn't find the address]
David Sokol, Chairman of the Board, Mid American Energy Holdings Company – [Couldn't find the address]
David Montgomery, Vice President, Charles River Associates – dmontgomery@crai.com

If you write a letter, leave it in the comments so we can compile a list of the best ones to send to other environmental blogs.

Have fun!

Tommaso Boggia is the Climate Advocacy Associate at Campus Progress. Check out his other blog posts about the American Clean Energy And Security Act on FundingourFuture.campusprogress.org

About Tommaso

Tommaso Boggia is the Climate Advocacy Associate at Campus Progress, the Center for American Progress youth outreach program, and the PowerShift 09 Media and Communications Committee co-chair. Prior to joining the Center, Tommaso was the Sustainability Event Coordinator for his alma mater, UC Santa Cruz, where he received a degree in Sociology with an emphasis in environmental justice. He led numerous climate change campaigns on his campus, including one to offset 100% of UC Santa Cruz’s energy use and others implementing energy efficiency programs saving UC Santa Cruz over $30,000 in utility costs. Tommaso has worked extensively with student groups, including the California Public Interest Research Group, the Alliance to Save Energy's Green Campus Program, and the California Student Sustainability Coalition. When he's not working to make the world a greener place, Tommaso can be found riding around town on his Gary Fischer bicycle that gets infinity miles per gallon.

3 Responses to “Dear Hearing Witness, would you mind not selling our future?”

Feed for this Entry Trackback Address

1 Ben Wessel Jun 8th, 2009 at 7:23 pm

Here’s my letter:

Hello Mr. Keohane,

My name is Ben Wessel and I’m a 20-year-old student and a dedicated climate advocate. I have been following the progress of the Waxman-Markey climate bill for quite some time and I am a little worried about the direction in which it’s heading. While I applaud the representatives of USCAP and Chairmen Markey and Waxman for their ability to compromise in order to get emissions reducing policy through the Energy and Commerce Committee, it seems to me that some of the crucial tenets of science-based and equitable climate policy have been left by the wayside. I believe, along with many other advocates, economists, policymakers and even the President, that 100% auction of emissions permits is essential to guarantee the most efficient and just policy to control carbon pollution.

Tomorrow you will testify about auction allowances. I strongly urge you to use this position to point out that, while politics is surely “the art of the possible,” justice and the American taxpayer are not negotiable. It is inevitable that compromises will be made in the policymaking process, but as an environmental advocate I feel it is your duty to stand up for the principles upon which your organization was built: “to create innovative, equitable and cost-effective solutions to society’s most urgent environmental problems” (http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=370). Please know that, as someone who will be living with the ramifications of the decisions you help make tomorrow for the most of this century, I am counting on you to speak up about our responsibility to future generations.

I look forward to hearing you talk tomorrow and will hopefully have an opportunity to meet you after you give your testimony with the other young people in attendance.

Thank you so much,
Ben
2 morgan Jun 8th, 2009 at 8:29 pm

Working on sending some very personal and heartfelt emails right now. And planning on being in line at 6am so that the people who are paid to wait in line by lobbyists don’t take all the spots. see you all tomorrow
3 Peter Wood Jun 9th, 2009 at 3:38 am

Approximately 17.1% of permits will be allocated for free to polluting industries. While having no free permits for polluters would be better, the Waxman-Markey bill is far better in terms of permit allocation than can and trade schemes in other countries. How permits are allocated does not effect the amount of emissions, the amount of emissions is determined by the cap, and the reserve price when permits are auctioned. But there is an opportunity cost associated with allocating permits to polluters.

Under Waxman-Markey, 1-4% of permits will be allocated for funding of international adaptation; 1-4% will be allocated for funding international low emissions technology. What is needed in terms of permit allocation is for these figures to be much higher — then we might even get an international agreement.