TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

Taxation, fees, and restrictive regulations are the wrong way to stimulate the economy. Positive incentives are much more effective.

The TCI while sounding good on paper will do nothing for us and the environment. Vehicles are already producing less and less pollution every year, meanwhile other countries across the world such as China and India are producing more and more pollution every year... This is where our focus needs to be on, not us, them.

I strongly support the Transportation and Climate Initiative's plans to limit pollution (including carbon emissions) of the transportation segment of our economy. I am a Vermont resident, and am keenly aware of the need to use public resources to improve non-fossil-fuel transportation alternatives in our rural state. I am aware that the transportation sector is the largest source of global warming emissions, in the state, regionally and nationally. I am glad that Vermont is already part of the TCI, and urge VT State government to improve our commitments to lowering emissions, for the sake of ourselves, our environment, and our children's futures. I am pleased that this is a non-partisan effort, because these problems affect us all, now and in the future, not any one segment of our population.
I urge that the transportation plan include a strong component of equity in the investment in infrastructure, to benefit those who have been over-burdened by pollution, and those who currently do not have access to "clean" transportation options. It is critical that limits on fossil fuel use (which are necessary) NOT reduce the ability of those with lower incomes, or living in more rural areas to get to work, health-care, recreation and commercial areas.
I also support the regional nature of this planning, since the needed solutions cannot be implemented solely on a local or state level. Our existing transportation infrastructure crosses state lines, and will need to be re-configured on that basis. Different transportation modalities will need to be complementary, not separately designed as has been the case for far too long. Looking at the interlocking needs of citizens, businesses and institutions on a regional scale should increase the quality of the planning and the outcome on the ground.
I further urge that the planners "push the envelope" to make the most aggressive improvements in our carbon emissions in this region, as part of a global effort to save us from our past mistakes--many of which result from a lack of any coordinated, regional (or national) plan. It's time to step beyond the influence of those who already have economic and political power, and to look at the global needs of all of us--not just humans, either, but all life on earth. We have shown that we can set the Earth on a path toward destruction of species (including ourselves), now it is time to see if we can set our course to maintain bio-diversity, human diversity and the eco-systems on which we all depend.

Because the federal government is destroying EPA standards, states need to take the initiative on climate change, pollution and renewable energy. Please make it happen.

Hi,

I am a resident of Vermont and I am opposed to the creation of the TCI. I attended a meeting, one of several held around the state, where we were told that this regional compact was based on another successful regional compact, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). We were lead to believe that RGGI was successful in it's mission and that TCI would be as well by building off these successes. In fact, RGGI has failed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but instead has created a tax that emitters pay to emit greenhouse gases. Like most corporate taxes these days the tax ends up being pushed onto consumers, while the benefit of the tax is to support home upgrades to reduce energy usage for heating and cooling, the end result is a failure of it's promoted mission. From the presentation given, it was clear that TCI would do a similar thing by taxing those who import gasoline and diesel into the participating states which would then cause the price at the pump to increase. So the tax on the importers would be passed directly onto consumers. While the mission of TCI is commendable, to reduce the impacts of climate change in the transportation sector and to use the funds raised by the tax to support battery powered and other vehicle purchases by consumers to lower the amount of emissions from the transportation sector. This is an important goal to have and to realize. I am not convinced that creating a bureaucracy to increase taxes which may or not be successful in it's goals is the best solution. Are there alternatives to this approach that can have the same effects? A direct tax at the pumps that is designated for the support of transitioning our vehicle choices away from low mpg and high emissions ones? I am asking for a better and more well-thought out solution or an honest approach to the citizens of those states attempting to join this compact. This is a tax that will be directed onto consumers. Can we accomplish the same things with a direct tax on gasoline and diesel that is set aside in a fund to support this work? The gasoline and diesel market in our state is already a mess with prices much higher in the Chittenden County area even after the main owners of gas stations were sued by the state for price-fixing. Can we trust these people to not price fix when they are passing on a tax to us? A region-wide tax at the pump that is protected for its desired use is a much better way to accomplish our goals and doesn't try and pass off the plan as not a tax when it clearly is a direct tax to anyone who drives a vehicle.

Please oppose TCI until the plan is modified to be truthful to consumers and nullifies any possibility that the monopolies that already cheat consumers to do so in the name of minimizing the impacts of climate change. We must shift our transportation sector away from the use of fossil fuels which will not last forever and have negative impacts on our environment, TCI as it was laid out to the public is not the best way to do this.

It is a sad statement that I have to write in support of a concept that is such a no brainer for anyone who recognizes that we are in a true climate crisis. Electrifying transportation is one of the most significant things we can be doing to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. My grandchildren's future depends upon initiatives like this becoming the norm.

I feel that by increasing the cost of fuel would have a negative affect on customers and vendors as the additional cost would have to be passed on to the end user.