TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

I feel if the government funded the scientists that disagree with the "carbon caused climate change" we would have a true explanation of what is going on with the climate, but that will not be done, as it is the government elected and bureaucracy who is pushing this for additional tax revenue, and that is what it really is. This would not change anything, just cost citizens more money. I reviewed some of the responses and this is the best explanation of reality:

First, the economic side: A "carbon tax" or "gas tax" is extremely regressive and hurts low-income individual, small business, and rural communities disproportionately. The relatively MINOR emission reductions gained by this approach will do nothing to curve "climate change" and only place an unnecessary burden on low income, rural Mainers. We do not have the ability in this state not to drive. Taxes without representation is a socialist concept, not one of a free society.

Second, the scientific side. To argue that ANY reductions in emissions from the transportation sector will "reverse" climate change is silly and unscientific. To think that if the world were to stop emitting carbon tomorrow (every living organism on the planet would need to stop breathing) and then believing the climate would return to 1800's levels, is farcical. Think about it. Can humans really control the climate? Ridiculous. The biggest fraud on the American public is when the courts ruled that CO2 was an air pollutant! How can that be, when CO2 is merely part of an organism's life cycle. CO2 is not and never should be considered a pollutant. This is a manufactured crisis. If the climate changes, for whatever reason, we adapt. Has happened over the millennium. Humans adapt to their environment, they cannot control it.

SAY NO to this ill-conceived plan. NO TAXES without representation, and CO2 is NOT a pollutant.

We can cut poverty and pollution at the same time. We urge you to move forward with a regional program that prioritizes the needs of communities overburdened with pollution and underserved in mobility options.

We can cut poverty and pollution at the same time. We urge you to move forward with a regional program that prioritizes the needs of communities overburdened with pollution and underserved in mobility options. This is the kind of help the government should be engaged in because the people who are affected can not do it, and private businesses would be looking to make profits.

We can cut poverty and pollution at the same time. We urge you to move forward with a regional program that prioritizes the needs of communities overburdened with pollution and underserved in mobility options. These communities should not have to bear the bulk of the burden.

We should update our transportation availability to include electric vehicles everywhere including rail transportation that goes to smaller towns which is then linked with electric vehicles to get around those towns. Have transportation hubs in city centers so we can stop our car owning culture by making mass transit more desirable to those who are hesitant to walk. Plow sidewalks so peop Use smaller electric busses that run more routes more often so mass transit is more desirable. Do not have times when fewer busses and trains run so that we can use them all day, every day. Replace lanes with trees. Have covered stops with trash cans so we are comfortable while waiting. Invest in this so we can turn climate change around.

This is a terrible idea. There is no tax more regressive then one on energy and transportation. Burdening the working poor and the middle class without proof it will work or a truly accurate climate model that proves the goals will work is unconscionable. If the political pressure is so strong that you must "do something " then adopt this proposal but use monopoly money until you have a base line. In a few years scientists should have a working climate model that will prove the whole scheme worthless. Or science could prove me wrong. You might be reluctant to shelve this initiative on my theories but probably not as reluctant as I am to support this on your theories.

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.

I used public transportation (regional rail) while I worked in Philadelphia for 30 years. I want to use regional rail now but the train doesn’t run frequently enough for non-rush hour activities. I can drive but WHY? I care about the air and climate I leave for my grandchildren and my fellow Americans and the world. It’s not that hard to do if you have a collective will to be forward thinking.

We can no longer kick the can down the road on this. Human health is not an externality.