Boston Globe slams Scott Brown for anti-climate vote

AS A state senator in Massachusetts, Scott Brown voted for a regional pact to ratchet down power companies’ carbon dioxide emissions. But as a US senator in Washington, Brown last week voted to strip the Environmental Protection Agency of the authority to regulate any greenhouse gases. This is not the first time Brown has done a Jekyll-Hyde switch between Beacon Hill and Capitol Hill “” in 2006 he voted for Mitt Romney’s health care plan, only to oppose the national version of it in 2010. But the turnaround on greenhouse gases is especially disappointing to any Massachusetts voters who thought they saw in Brown a conservative on fiscal issues who was also a conservationist when it comes to protecting the environment.

That’s the opening to a stinging Boston Globe editorial, “For Brown, a sad turnaround on environmental matters.”

Of course, the vote can’t be described as a total surprise, given that just last month, Brown made clear how close he is to conservative pollutocrat David Koch, “Your support during the election, it meant a ton. It made a difference and I can certainly use it again.”

Here’s more from the Globe:

Instead, Brown has marched in lockstep on this issue with fellow Republicans who are against government regulation across the board. Many congressional Republicans do not even acknowledge that greenhouse gases contribute to climate change and need to be curbed. Clearly, Brown did not share that view when he voted in favor of Massachusetts’ participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, which requires utilities to reduce carbon dioxide emissions or face financial penalties.

The bill Brown backed would also prohibit any improvement in auto fuel-efficiency standards after 2016. Advances in car mileage prompted by the fuel-efficiency standards that began in the ’70s have been a rare success in this country’s halting effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Fortunately, the bill Brown supported did not pass. If it had, and survived a likely Obama veto, it would have dealt a blow to the Massachusetts and regional economy. The state is home to a promising clean-energy sector, with many companies working on new-generation batteries, sustainable biofuels, and solar technology. Between 2006 and 2009, the Northeast received more than 20 percent of all venture capital investment in clean energy.

Voting to strip the EPA of its authority to regulate greenhouse gases is a favor to Big Oil and Big Coal and the states where they are dominant, not to Massachusetts clean-energy firms struggling to compete with companies in Europe and Asia. When Brown voted for the regional pact on utility emissions in 2008, he said, “Passing this legislation is an important step . . . towards improving our environment.” He was right then, and wrong now.


Related Post:

Scott Brown

7 Responses to Boston Globe slams Scott Brown for anti-climate vote

  1. catman306 says:

    Those aren’t tea bag tag strings attached to Tea Partiers. They are marionette strings that run clear to wherever the Koch Brothers call home. But you knew that. And they know that in Massachusetts too.

  2. Mike Roddy says:

    Well said, catman, but here’s the scary part: he might get reelected anyway. Even in Massachusetts, they go for the smile and the props- a pickup truck and barn coat in Brown’s case. These days, it’s about the visuals, not the content. People don’t read or do much thinking anymore. Brown is as slimy as they come, but if he’s put up against another waffling geek, he’s home free again.

  3. Scrooge says:

    I can understand how a senator can be conflicted when it comes to what’s best for voters back home or what’s best for the nation. But in this case its clear to see his state, country, and world mean nothing when his puppet master tells him what to do.

  4. Keith says:

    Nut up or Shut up MA voters.
    Nut up and vote out the stealth T’baggers,
    or Shut up and take the abuse like the sheep you are.
    Oh, and for the Shut-uppers, good luck trying to hold the Boston Harbor out of your downtown during the coming decades!

  5. Ben Lieberman says:

    Brown also continues to make inaccurate claims to attempt to justify his opposition to EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. For almost a year now he’s said that he has prevent excessive burdens on businesses like restaurants and small farmers when the EPA rules specifically note that restaurants and small farmers will not be affected. To my knowledge no one with any major public voice has demanded that the Senator retract these false claims.

  6. Leif says:

    Greenpeace is attempting to set a world record by generating 50K comments from a single post in one day on Facebook. We are trying to get Facebook to shun coal and go green for earth day. 50k goal is broken, shooting for 100k. 8 hours left. Google, “Greenpeace, Facebook world record” and follow instructions. You need not even be a FB member. This is how bloodless revolutions are made. 5% has got all the money, 95% has got all the POWER! USE IT!

  7. Chris Winter says:

    Here’s what looks like a book worth reading:

    THE RHETORIC OF REACTION: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy
    Albert O. Hirschman
    Harvard University Press, 1991

    Eli Rabbett writes: “About 20 years ago Albert Hirschman wrote a small, but since well known, book, The Rhetoric of Reaction, about how conservatives think and argue. The bunnies will discover that this perfectly describes how are (sic) blogging compatriots and politicians reject science. Hirschman’s concern was that democracy requires opposing views, but also interchange among those holding those views. ‘How did they get to be that way?’ is a sure sign that an honest dialogue has vanished.”