GUEST OPINION: No regulation without representation
By Senators John Cooke and Jerry SonnenbergBy Senators John Cooke and Jerry Sonnenberg -
•
Published: April 9, 2015
It's
always wise to be wary when Washington offers to do you a "favor." As
with the money Washington sends our way, there's almost always strings
attached or a trap door hidden somewhere.
And so it is with the "favor" President Barack Obama did for states when he seeks to impose a national "Clean Power Plan "
through an EPA regulatory change, effectively taking control of power
plants in all 50 states, in the name of combatting climate change.
Obama's Environmental Protection Agency imposed the benchmarks, because Washington always knows best, but it did states that "favor" by tossing in our laps the question of how to meet this seemingly impossible mandate under the breakneck timeline allowed.
That leaves Colorado "free" to write a carbon reduction plan for our power plants that complies with EPA's orders, hopefully without ruining our economy or bankrupting utility ratepayers. That plan, whatever it eventually looks like, will have profound implications for Colorado's economy.
That's why Senate Republicans are offering legislation, The Colorado Electric Consumers' Protection Act, SB15-258, which will bring needed transparency and accountability to Colorado's planning process. It requires that any state plan, before it's submitted to the EPA, receives a full public airing and a thumbs-up (or thumbs-down) from our elected state legislators.
It's not that we don't trust the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) to exercise care in how it writes Colorado's plan.
We just think this decision is too big, too critical, too potentially costly to leave in one state agency's hands. Given the collective impacts this plan will have on all Coloradans, a collective, transparent decision is required, in which important details are openly debated and the representatives of the people have a say.
The more than 35 percent cut in power plant emissions Colorado must make under the EPA mandate will come with serious costs and consequences. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimates that Obama's climate mandates will cost the economy an average of 224,000 jobs per year, and lower U.S. gross domestic product by $51 billion per year, through 2030.
One independent study predicted the plan will cost the average Colorado residential ratepayers $613 per year by 2020, while commercial users - meaning businesses - will see a 52 percent increase.
In order to meet the mandates, perfectly functional power plants could be shuttered prematurely, forcing construction of costly replacements. And the concentration of regulatory power required to force statewide compliance may profoundly change the way all Colorado utilities operate, whether public, private, municipal or co-op.
That such changes could be approved without widerreview
and full public debate is unthinkable and, frankly, undemocratic.
Average Coloradans must have a seat at the table they don't have now.
Regulation without representation is as un-American as taxation without
representation.
Specifically, our bill requires that, before the state can approve a plan with the EPA, that plan must be reviewed with full public hearings by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission, in order to report probable impacts on utility rates, reliability and the state's economy.
And finally, the state plan must be approved by both houses of the legislature.
This process adds the transparency, accountability and public debate that's totally lacking now. It puts the elected representatives of the people on the record, yes or no, so Coloradans know who stood where when the costs and consequences of complying with Obama's radical climate crusade come crashing down.
-
Cooke Represents Senate District 13, and Sonnenberg Senate District 1, at the Colorado Statehouse.
Obama's Environmental Protection Agency imposed the benchmarks, because Washington always knows best, but it did states that "favor" by tossing in our laps the question of how to meet this seemingly impossible mandate under the breakneck timeline allowed.
That leaves Colorado "free" to write a carbon reduction plan for our power plants that complies with EPA's orders, hopefully without ruining our economy or bankrupting utility ratepayers. That plan, whatever it eventually looks like, will have profound implications for Colorado's economy.
That's why Senate Republicans are offering legislation, The Colorado Electric Consumers' Protection Act, SB15-258, which will bring needed transparency and accountability to Colorado's planning process. It requires that any state plan, before it's submitted to the EPA, receives a full public airing and a thumbs-up (or thumbs-down) from our elected state legislators.
It's not that we don't trust the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) to exercise care in how it writes Colorado's plan.
We just think this decision is too big, too critical, too potentially costly to leave in one state agency's hands. Given the collective impacts this plan will have on all Coloradans, a collective, transparent decision is required, in which important details are openly debated and the representatives of the people have a say.
The more than 35 percent cut in power plant emissions Colorado must make under the EPA mandate will come with serious costs and consequences. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimates that Obama's climate mandates will cost the economy an average of 224,
One independent study predicted the plan will cost the average Colorado residential ratepayers $613 per year by 2020, while commercial users - meaning businesses - will see a 52 percent increase.
In order to meet the mandates, perfectly functional power plants could be shuttered prematurely, forcing construction of costly replacements. And the concentration of regulatory power required to force statewide compliance may profoundly change the way all Colorado utilities operate, whether public, private, municipal or co-op.
That such changes could be approved without wider
Specifically, our bill requires that, before the state can approve a plan with the EPA, that plan must be reviewed with full public hearings by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission, in order to report probable impacts on utility rates, reliability and the state's economy.
And finally, the state plan must be approved by both houses of the legislature.
This process adds the transparency, accountability and public debate that's totally lacking now. It puts the elected representatives of the people on the record, yes or no, so Coloradans know who stood where when the costs and consequences of complying with Obama's radical climate crusade come crashing down.
-
Cooke Represents Senate District 13, and Sonnenberg Senate District 1, at the Colorado Statehouse.
Read more at http://gazette.com/guest-opinion-no-regulation-without-representation/article/1549378#X0vsbfbJzexvADa9.99
Advertisement
Read more at http://gazette.com/guest-opinion-no-regulation-without-representation/article/1549378#X0vsbfbJzexvADa9.99
No comments:
Post a Comment