TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

I support the TCI as a way to take an external cost (the cost hydrocarbon combustion places on the environment) and internalize it back on those supplying and consuming the hydrocarbons for transportation. If the taxes can then be invested in public transportation that does not rely on carbon fuels, and serves those who are currently relying on private automobiles, focusing on currently underserved populations, then I believe the TCI will be a success.

The study showed the benefits for the state economies, jobs, and asthma rates, etc. of the cap and invest program proposed. However I was shocked at how the proposal from this whole effort would only result in 1-6% emissions reductions from the baseline case. This is simply not at the scale of the problem we face. Incrementalist approaches are no longer an option--we have to get transportation emissions down in the decade of 2032 by as close to 100% as possible. Our study showed how that could be done in one TCI state, Rhode Island. See: https://www.sei.org/publications/deeper-decarbonization-in-the-ocean-state/. My concern is that this initiative will create the perception that something is being done about climate change, when this is utterly, utterly, inadequate. Thank you.

I support this initiative because transportation is one of the primary barriers to equality in our state, and also the largest contributor of carbon emissions in RI. Many patients at the Pawtucket, RI, medical clinic where I work miss important appointments because of transportation limitations. Pedestrian and bicycle options are poor in Pawtucket--people feel unsafe walking in areas with no pedestrian crosswalks, lights, or lights that do not work. If more of our patients could walk or bike to work, school, their clinic, or the grocery store, we would undoubtedly see improvements in markers of chronic noncommunicable disease (e.g. obesity, hypertension, high cholesterol, etc.). Additionally, if public transportation options were improved, many of our patients' daily stress levels would be reduced: their work commute times could be lowered and they could accomplish essential tasks more easily and cheaply. If public transportation options were increased while simultaneously lowering average vehicle emissions, one would also anticipate significantly lower rates of asthma, a condition which has direct relationship to exhaust particulate matter (in fact, the likelihood of an asthma-related pediatric emergency department visit tracks closely to house proximity to major highways in RI). More, better, and greener transportation options would create a healthier Rhode Island.

Reducing transportation sector emissions is important to me because I'd like to leave a cleaner Earth for my grandchildren. I would like to
thank Gov. Lamont for being involved in the regional design process and request that Connecticut formally sign on to the initiative. We need the TCI leadership to choose the most aggressive greenhouse gas emissions cap since we have already lost precious time in our environmental efforts.
I'm also asking TCI policy has to include equity and investment in overburdened and under-served communities as a first and foremost priority.

see attached document (corrections to previous document)
28FEB20_BTBCoaltion_01a.pdf