Op-Ed on Energy

In reply to yesterday's Poughkeepsie Journal Op-Ed about Global Warming and NY's 20th District Race, people should check out the differences between Gillibrand and Sweeney when it comes to energy policy and fuel standards. The Post Star ran an issue feature on this subject on October 1st in which Gillibrand said:

Energy independence is our nation's greatest challenge and opportunity; and must become a national security priority.

A new energy policy will invigorate our economy, promote conservation and improve our national security by decreasing our dependence on foreign oil.

Targeting federal investments in alternative energies -- such as biofuels, solar, wind, hydropower and fuel cells -- and offering incentives for consumers and producers to choose to adopt new technologies is a necessary first step. Providing national leadership to bring in private investment will strengthen our farming and manufacturing base by driving investment in alternative technologies and new products and creating new jobs in this region. Today, we have the technology to develop a full range of 60-mpg cars. And locally, our farmers could be harvesting more switchgrass and corn to produce ethanol.

But making these advancements more widespread takes a national commitment.

As for the price of gas today; I will not go to Washington and support billions in subsidies for big oil corporations while gas prices surge.

Our goal as a nation must be to pursue real energy solutions and better promote public/private sector partnerships to leverage the strength of our nation's research and manufacturing base.

In my opinion, Gillibrand's energy policy is a win-win. Democrats like Gillibrand realize it is important that we talk about energy issues in a way that makes sense to people in our district. Farmers here need lower gas prices, higher fuel standards will help their bottom line, they need new sources of income.

Yes, these things will bring economic benefits, they will also reduce Global Warming.

Compare Gillibrand and Sweeney on this for yourself by reading the Post Star's article.

Sweeney's energy "policy" is laden with excuses about why fuel economy standards can't be raised within 10 years beyond what he supports (just 33 mpg).

Gillibrand knows that if we could put a man on the moon in 10 years, we can reach a 60-mpg standard in the same time.

Sweeney cites an increase in the cost of cars as an excuse, but if you think about how much less fuel would cost at 60 mpg, the number he cites is nothing. Besides, ten years down the road the cost of gas might be $5 a gallon for all we know. Gillibrand's policy will put more energy money in people's pockets. Sweeney literally can't see the forest for the trees. Where there is a will there is a way.

Every obstacle Sweeney throws out to prevent real change will be overcome if we get American ingenuity at work. The way to start that is to hire Kirsten Gillibrand on November 7th.

If you think Gillibrand is better for our district, weigh in with the Poughkeepsie Journal by sending a letter to the editor.