TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

This is mandatory! And needs consideration immediately!!! If we ignore Climate Change and do not address it head on our world will be imperile.

I agree with the Transpiration Climate Initiative in concept, but not with the timing of it. Vermont is one of the most environmentally clean states already and will struggle to meet the goals set by this plan. I include the following comments:
I. In Rural Vermont, this tax (that you say is not a tax) is discriminatory and will place an undue burden upon most lower and middle class citizens who are already working two jobs to make ends meet and pay their taxes. This initiative will drive more businesses and people out of Vermont.
II. Even with the incentive that Governor Scott has added to his budget to enable Vermonters to purchase an electric or hybrid vehicle, most Vermonters will not be able to afford to get out of their current car payment (usually a car with 150K miles on it that they are working another job to pay for) and purchase a new, electric vehicle. Also, there are no used electric or hybrid vehicles on the market now.
III. There is not an adequate mass transportation system available to enable people to get to Rutland to work an off shift. Even if there were, if someone was required to work an additional shift to provide additional funding support for their family, the current system doesn’t operate after 8:00 PM.
IV. Now that NH has dropped out of the regional initiative and NY has not committed to it, when the price of gasoline and diesel goes up because of TCI, Vermonters will simply go to those states to buy their fuels. You are naive to think that you will be able to force people to comply with your initiative. You probably haven’t noticed that fuel stations in the states along the Vermont border have been adding more gasoline pumps in anticipation of this CARBON TAX!
V. I understand that there is a plan for Vermont to sell carbon credits for businesses who don’t comply with this initiative. I also understand that the forests of our state which sequester the carbon will be used to calculate this carbon off-set. 89% of Vermont forest land is privately owned. You can’t sell carbon credits from trees that you don’t own. I own 250 acres of timber land. I asked the question last night; “Will the state pay me for my trees and the carbon they sequester” and was told that I didn’t own enough to be considered. I was also told that maybe if I joined with adjacent property owners to combine our acreage, that maybe the initiative would provide some offset to me. This seizure of property rights in unconstitutional and will not be allowed.

In 35 years we will run out of fossil fuel and we will have developed the technology to be mobile and competitive in a new world economy. Why do we have to comply with an unreasonable, futuristic standard now? We have already cut emissions and found alternative methods of going to meeting through advances of the internet. Workers are now able to telecommute to work and stay at home, work and care for their young children in the process.
Why don’t we develop a plan for phasing out the internal combustion engine over the next 10 years and let technology advance along the way so that when we get to the point of no fossil fuel, we can have everyone on board with the new plan? We can do this for the next 10 years as technology advance and our forests continue to sequester carbon from the other pollution sources in the world.

She's trying to turn Maine into California and us Republicans won't let her!

We can't survive without clean water, land and air. We must protect our resources at all costs.

We need to stop cap these emissions for the sake of our children and planet We can cut poverty and pollution at the same time. I urge you to move forward with a regional program that prioritizes the needs of communities overburdened with pollution and underserved in mobility options

The Pennsylvania Petroleum Association represents over 400 companies who operate in the petroleum industry throughout the state. Our association opposes the Transportation Climate Initiative which would create an upstream tax for Pennsylvania motorists who already pay the highest gasoline taxes in the country. Independent motor fuel marketers who employee tens of thousands of jobs in Pennsylvania will be forced to operate in a marketplace that is purposely designed to put them out of business.

The Transportation Climate Initiative does not appear to benefit all Pennsylvanians the same way. Fixed and low-income residents will be forced to pay higher prices at the pump. They are also less likely afford an electric vehicle regardless of the potential subsidies that could be available to them. The large number of residents who live in the rural communicates across the state will not be able to benefit from public transportation efficiencies in the same way as those who live in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and other populated areas.

Our membership and industry support a cleaner environment. We welcome the opportunity to work with the Georgetown Climate Center, policy makers, and other stakeholders to achieve this goal. We however do not support the current version of the Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal. We ask that more consideration is taken before potentially introducing a policy that is unfair and has massive ramifications for our membership, citizens, and economy.