President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
August 07, 2012 05:39 PM UTC

Pay No Attention To Our Glaring Contradiction

  • 40 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Some bang-up reporting from FOX 31’s Eli Stokols yesterday:

In Denver Monday, the Romney campaign held a “Strengthening our Middle Class” event at the Rio Grande Company that featured Colorado Congressman Cory Gardner, R-Yuma, and Sen. John Thune, R-South Dakota, whose name had been mentioned as a potential running mate…

Gardner and Thune agree on Romney, who they argued would be able to fix the country’s still sputtering economy.

But they also agree on something else – the need to extend the wind energy Production Tax Credit, which Romney said last week he opposes…

“I think Gov. Romney is right to say that the government should not be in the position of picking winners and losers,” Thune told FOX31 Denver. “We need to look at what we can do to phase out federal support.”

When reminded that the CEO of Vestas has stated that Congress’s failure to extend the wind PTC would likely force him to lay off roughly 1,000 Colorado employees, Thune acknowledged that the tax credit has supported jobs here and in his home state.

“Colorado benefits from wind, South Dakota benefits from wind,” Thune said. [Pols emphasis] “I’ve supported the wind energy tax credit because it’s been good in terms of my state’s economy and some of the jobs that come with it.”

Stokols points to a letter signed by Sen. John Thune this past February with other Senators strongly in favor of renewal of the wind production tax credit. As we’ve discussed, renewal of this tax credit enjoys near-unanimous bipartisan support from Colorado’s congressional delegation. The reason is simple: thousands of real, high-paying Colorado jobs, and all of the secondary and tertiary economic growth that comes along with them, are directly on the line.

“The future of the American wind industry requires a stable tax environment in which to operate,” the letter began.

But in the end, this weak, contradictory, and above all inconclusive nonanswer is all you’ll get from Sen. Thune or Colorado Republicans who support both Romney and the wind power tax credit. GOP CD-7 candidate Joe Coors isn’t foolish enough to come out against this as a candidate in the district which includes the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), but he still appeared with Romney at his rally at Jefferson County Fairgrounds.

In all of these cases, including Reps. Scott Tipton, Mike Coffman, and Cory Gardner, they’ll say they support Romney’s “principle” on some hypothetical level, just not where it would kill thousands of jobs in their home states. And they would like change the subject.

To, you know, jobs!

If it looks to you like they’ve got a major political problem here, folks, it’s because they do.

Tweet
Share

Comments

40 thoughts on “Pay No Attention To Our Glaring Contradiction”

  2. The abolition of wind subsidy may cost 1000 jobs however that same subsidy money will automatically be used to hire 1000 private sector employees.

    There will be NO net job loss.

    3. Doug Lamborn for once was right.

      Government should not pick winners or losers in technology.  If wind power is so great than it would not have to be subsidized.  

      How many jobs were promised with Vestas and how many actually created in Colorado?

      1. its not government’s role to invest in shit like the internet.  Oh wait, we’re on the internet !

        Often times the research the government invests in is not economically viable at the time, but then it is later.

        Or maybe we could just let the Chinese do all the serious public investing in technology (like they did with solar) and kick our asses again.

        Sounds like a real formula for success you have stumbled upon there.

      2. all breaks and subsidies for gas and oil (and all other corporations) so we can really have a level playing field and may the best technologies win. Glad to hear it. Too bad there isn’t an Olympic Hypocrisy event because righties would really pile up the gold. Oh wait. They already do that for their masters in the oligarchy.  

        1. BP and Exxon Mobil are drowning in money.  Let them build private navies to protect the straits of Hormuz from Iranian attack/blockade.  Those nuclear powered carrier fleets are expensive; think of the savings!

          1. During the heyday of the Iraq War, someone figured out that is what our fuel really costs us once you factor in subsidies and the military protection.

            Moving air, sunlight: No military needed.

              1. So do we ask the Chinese to stop subsidizing their strategic alternative energy industries BEFORE or AFTER they force all our Solar, Wind companies into bankruptcy?

                    2. So mismanagement, a product that was not that good and leadership that was great at buying influence but not running a business were not the causes?  Fidel is right you do learn something every day.  

                    3. I got out when it became apparent that the Chinese govt was bankrolling excess capacity and that panel prices were going to tumble.  

                    4. I made money on them but then got lucky and got out in time.  World oversupply of panel prices that began with the EU not renewing solar subsidies.

                      And Gadfly, yes those things you list were factors, but not the biggest one.  If your product is half of what it was worth a few weeks ago going out the door that will have a huge impact on your revenue stream and future viability.

                    5. I have read nowhere else the theory that Solyndra failed due to Chinese activity which I assume you to mean price fixing.  If true your claim about Chinese intervention in US energy markets should be investigated.

                    6. That’s pretty much the gist of every story I’ve read about Solyndra’s failure, though there’s disagreement whether feds should’ve pulled the plug sooner or management could have reacted differently.

                    7. My guess is that Solyndra failed because a group of Masters of the Universe knew how to buy off politicians but not run a company.

                      However, please include a link to an article the gist of which attributes their failure to the Chinese be it by price fixing or something else.  I am not saying you are wrong I just have not seen the stories you reference.

                    8. It’s called a newspaper.  They have articles, with facts even:

                      Solar-panel imports from China are on pace to more than triple this year from 2010, Wyden said. The senator is seeking administration support after three solar-panel manufacturers failed, citing competition from overseas competitors. Solyndra LLC, which won a $535 million federal loan guarantee in 2009, sought bankruptcy protection Sept. 6, six days after closing a factory and firing 1,100 employees. Solyndra’s Fremont, California, headquarters were raided today by federal agents. Solyndra said it failed after it was unable to compete with foreign companies backed by their governments.

                      When using Google, I would suggest not leading off your query with “FOX News sez”

                    13. Here we are, a couple of unwashed liberals (me and Fidel, anyway) investing in the capitalist stock market and, lo-and-behold, we find the game is rigged and scram (after taking our profits, mind you).

                      Meanwhile, the conservative, who places his faith in free enterprise and free markets, has no clue what’s actually going on in those markets.

                    14. I love it when conservatives tell me how the market works.  Oh, do tell !

          2. But getting subsidies is as old as America itself.  Probably as old as civilization.  

            But would capitalism ever have brought electricity and phones to rural America?  Built Hoover and Bonneville dams?  Initiated space exploration?

            Not bloody likely.  

    4. that ending those Bush tax cuts for millionaires should immediately add hundreds of thousands of new jobs to our economy — when are the Republicans ever gonna’ get serious about job creation? — I assume you’ll be writing to Mssrs Romney, Gardner, Coffman, Lamborn and Tipton post-haste?

  3. They are agreeing to disagree on this one issue, because the issues that unite us as conservatives against Obama are much more important. Wind power will do better under Romney because all of America will be doing better.

    Your obtuse attempts to ignore this are just that.

    1. Wind power will do better under Romney because all of America will be doing better

      .

      Maybe we could replace the term “wind power” and then throw just about anything in its place !  Genius !

      maybe throw in some rainbows too.  

    2. Are you talking about the different versions of Mitt Romney?

      Mitt agrees to disagree about almost every single position Mitt’s ever taken — because the issues that unite him as a conservative against Obama are much more important.

      That or getting elected president, for Pete’s sake! One of those reasons!

    3. personally fall into the “agree with Willard,” or “disagree with Willard” camp on this issue at this time? — answering is not such a difficult task, really; not like producing tax returns or e-mails from your time as governor.

      And, if you can, please be sure to explain your reasoning.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

73 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!