Top Senate Republicans unveiled what they said was a comprehensive strategy to promote U.S. energy independence and innovation while maintaining the nation’s competitive edge.
The proposal would ultimately create jobs across the energy sector and wouldn’t favor renewable jobs over those in the oil and gas industry, according to an outline of the plan obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
The proposals are a stark contrast to the energy and climate policies that have been forwarded by the Biden administration which experts say make the U.S. less energy independent and hurt American consumers.
Subcommittee on Climate Change Ranking Member Dan Sullivan of Alaska, Wyoming Sen. Cynthia Lummis — the top Republican on the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Water and Wildlife — and North Dakota Sen. Kevin Cramer led the effort to lay out a conservative vision for “innovative clean energy and climate strategy.”
They were joined by Sens. Ted Cruz, John Kennedy, and Rob Portman during a press conference Wednesday unveiling the plan.
“America stands at a strategic crossroads,” Sullivan, Lummis, and Cramer said in a joint statement. “We can empower American ingenuity and workers to unleash our nation’s abundant energy resources and innovative technology, expand good-paying jobs for hard-working Americans, maintain reliable and affordable energy for consumers, boost our economic and national security, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions at home and abroad.”
“Or, we can pursue policies that will shut down whole industries, provide pink slips to millions of American workers with no alternatives in the near term, drastically raise prices on American families, undermine economic growth, decrease energy reliability, diminish U.S. national security, and do little or nothing to reduce global emissions,” the statement continued.
The U.S. should continue to produce fossil fuels with high environmental standards since the world will continue to rely on oil and natural gas for energy for decades, according to the plan. The senators noted that the U.S. has led the world in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The plan called for a complete overhaul of the current federal permitting process for all energy projects, including oil and gas, wind, solar, hydropower, nuclear, and rare earth mineral mining.
Sullivan, Lummis, and Cramer said their plan wouldn’t include “mandates, regulations, and taxes,” but would be worker-oriented and achieve emissions reductions through “innovation, domestic resources, and the free market.”
They said it would reduce emissions 40% by 2050 and have 3.5 times more reductions than the multi-trillion-dollar Green New Deal would achieve.
“This framework isn’t just responsive to the Green New Deal, it is better than the Green New Deal,” Lummis told reporters Wednesday.
President Joe Biden, whose administration refers to climate change as a “crisis,” has set goals of achieving a carbon-free electric grid by 2035 and net-zero emissions by 2050.
The White House has vigorously opposed fossil fuel projects while asking Middle Eastern and Russian energy producers to amp up their oil and gas supplies.
Read rest at Daily Caller
I’m sure that the Republican plan is much better than the one from Biden’s handlers. But any plan endorsed by Ted Cruz and John Kennedy can not be that good. This plan promises good paying jobs. Would it be any different than environmentalists’ plans that have made such promises and failed to deliver? The most disappointing aspect of this plan is that the Republicans have bought into the fraud of climate change being a problem. An article posted on this web site today noted that the warming has been at 0.14 degrees per decade. That is 1.4 degrees over a hundred years, and is lower than the UN goal of 1.5 degrees.
agreee completely- – -the R’s have just conceded the warmists main point- -that CO2 is the problem and the answer is to curtail it. This at the very time all the data shows CO2 is NOT a problem- -the correlation is lacking- -and even the IPCC concedes that none of the supposed results of too much CO2 has produced any of the effects claimed. Relying on computer projections vs observed is the height of stupidity- –
READ AGAIN direct quotes from article:
(R’s) They said it would reduce emissions 40% by 2050 and have 3.5 times more reductions than the multi-trillion-dollar Green New Deal would achieve.
“This framework isn’t just responsive to the Green New Deal, it is better than the Green New Deal,” Lummis told reporters Wednesday.
President Joe Biden, whose administration refers to climate change as a “crisis,” has set goals of achieving a carbon-free electric grid by 2035 and net-zero emissions by 2050.
R’s: 40% emissions lowered by 2050 AND 3.5 times reductions … uh, OF WHAT?
D’s (Biden’s): 100% carbon free grid by 2035 and Net 0 emissions by 2050.
My comments here: 1. I can tell by the snarky remarks of the author that this is some “Republican”/”climate denier” sparked article.
However, I can easily remember when those same types of people completely denied that global warming/climate change even existed (unlike the rest of the world!). Well, I guess that reality must eventually break through the propaganda.
Consider this aspect of converting from using millions of gallons of fossil fuels every day THAT ARE LIMITED IN SUPPLY, Middle East countries given hundreds of billions, ?trillions? of American Dollars every year to buy from their controlled supplies. We would no longer need to send those many billions of American dollars to other countries (some terrorist countries that we still pay big bucks to) and instead keep those annual billions of $$ right here in this country.
Hope that helps a bit.