|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Tim Page
Last week The Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) indicated their intent to sue the state of Vermont under a provision in the Global Warming Solutions Act.
Attorney General Charity Clark has not commented on the case on her website or social media. VTGOP Chairman Paul Dame issued the following response:
“In the past week since the Conservation Law Foundation indicated their intent to sue Vermont, the one person who is expected to be there to defend our taxpayers has been mysteriously silent: Attorney General Charity Clark.
CLF is a Montpelier-based advocacy group with a 50-year-track record of filing suit on environmental issues. The announcement led opponents of the carbon emissions mandates to call for the repeal of the 2020 law that created them, the Global Warming Solutions Act.
In a letter sent July 23 to Agency of Natural Resources Secretary Julie Moore, CLF says ANR failed to meet the July 1 2024 deadline to review whether the State is on track to meet 2025 greenhouse gas emissions, adopt rules to ensure the emissions are met, and hold hearings “in areas and communities that have the most significant exposure to the impacts of climate change, including disadvantaged, low-income, and rural communities and areas.”
The 2020 Global Warming Solutions Act (see pg. 4) sets three carbon emission reduction goals: 25% by 1/1/2025, 40%, by 1/1/2030, and 80% by 1/1/2050. The GWSA specifically grants the right of lawsuit for failure to adopt the necessary rules (pg. 20): Any person may commence an action based upon the failure of the Secretary of Natural Resources to adopt or update rules pursuant to the deadlines in section 593 of this chapter.”
Dame’s demand continues:
It’s hard for Vermonters to know if we have an Attorney General who is willing to fight to protect our taxpayers from what could be an expensive lawsuit, and whether we are free to pass the legislation our elected representatives believe is fitting. If Attorney General Clark is unwilling to protect taxpayers and our legislative process from lobbyists looking to rake in a massive payday, then Vermonters need to consider a new attorney general.
While it’s too late to protect us from this lawsuit, Vermont voters need to also reject the foolish or cowardly legislators who invited this lawsuit. The Democrats who passed this were either foolish legislating an invitation to sue, or they were cowardly because they wanted the court to impose policy for them, so they didn’t have to vote to turn over Vermont’s legislative process to a lobbyist.
But for the troubles facing us today, Vermonters deserve a response from Attorney General Clark on whether she intends to vigorously defend the state from this legal attack, or whether we can expect her to waive the white flag and let a lobbyist group go essentially unopposed. So far not even a simple press release has been issued from the Attorney General’s website.”
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Court, Energy, Environment, Legislation, State Government
This is why Phil Scott is the most popular governor in the country. It’s because he stands for nothing. No leadership on this issue or any other. Phil Scott’s complete absence from controversial issues is exactly why the leader of the opposition party needs to step in where his candidate won’t. Of course Charity Clark is not going to vigorously defend the state against this lawsuit. The GWSA was designed by Clark’s party to force the government to take unpopular actions. She might nominally oppose the court action but she will only give the appearance of a fight. That’s because she wants a future. Don’t expect the governor to intervene on behalf of the states citizens. He knows the lobbyists and media would turn on him and there goes his favorability rating. If the GOP leader doesn’t like the position he’s been put in he can just look in the mirror. This is a direct result of his big tent strategy.
Gov. Scott won his election and vetoed this bill. He’s put in more effort than many of the keyboard warriors that never seem to make it out of the comments section.
Remember when we were told that solar power was going to give us free energy?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I knew the joke was on us when Cramer pumped the solar companies in the 2000’s and a bunch of us lost a crapload of money.
I’m watching them now blatantly steal the funds needed to not even get a fraction of what’s required off the ground to a slow limp, never mind up and running.
If the tax payers are required to pay for a judgment that goes against the state, then I would suggest that the way to pay for it is to reduce the budget in each state agency by the amount to cover the cost of the lawsuit. This would result in no additional cost to tax payers while reducing the size of government.
Except it would mean the same exorbitant taxation with even fewer benefits from it. It would just make it so that we got even less of our money’s worth. Make the politicians who set the policy pay. Then again, saddling Vermont constituents with the bill for their stupidity is one of the quickest ways to get them removed from office and the bill overturned.
Great idea Jim
calamity clark//// now what could go wrong with this dog and pony show//// more taxpayer funded lawyers///// you have to stop feeding this beast with your money////
Chalk up one instance of legislative malpractice by our Dem-Prog Groupthink Legislature! URGENTLY NEEDED CHANGE.
to suppose that ms. clark will defend these lawsuits is to further pretend the entire
ClimateChange™ actions forced upon Vermont are valid and factual- and not a emotional driven con game playing out before us. The inside players have already divided the spoils, you can bet ms. clark has a share in the grift.
There are hundreds of billions at stake here in Vermont-
We’ve just learned the opening ante in the ‘clean heat standard’ is 17 Billion.
Thing is: I’m betting that over 90% of ALL VT residents have NO clue about the inane passage of this bill, the consequences, the punishment about to be imposed for just owning an auto in VT beginning in just over one year, etc.
Virtually no one. What will occur when the B.S. as it is hits the fan?
How much can even anarchists and Communists and extremists and radicals even take & pay out??
There are many VT “keyboard warriors” who have done plenty of research, more so than most career politicians and main stream news media. Many VT “keyboard warriors” have Not had a voice, have had No representation in their own state government or even the GOP for a very long time. This Climate Game is well oiled (ha, oiled) and everyone playing their part in it has their script from the Marxist Globalist, Cabal, Blob, whatever you want to call it. A lot of “keyboard warriors” have done their research and know full-well the facts and appearances of those who are playing the game. The CLF wants their money too, and there are a lot of them, here’s a link to the their Members Page. https://www.clf.org/about/our-team/
Can someone write up a “What This Means to You” outlining the financial burden in taxes and fees to drivers, homeowners, etc., if Vermont loses the suit?
“Can someone write up a ‘What This Means to You’ outlining the financial burden in taxes and fees to drivers, homeowners, etc., if Vermont loses the suit?”
I’m glad someone Liked my post, but does anyone actually know? I’m going to guess that to pay off a settlement, if any, there will suddenly be large taxes or user fees on recreational vehicles: ATVs, motorcycles, snowmobiles, boats, small planes, etc., as well as second homes. To start with.
“…and hold hearings ‘in areas and communities that have the most significant exposure to the impacts of climate change, including disadvantaged, low-income, and rural communities and areas.’”
LOL, to tell folks in person that Big Brother might take their toys away, or at least make them unaffordable. That should be interesting.