I recently read Rep. Tipton’s response to the Green New Deal, a proposed package to address issues related to climate change. He stated his concern about it, “The federal government should not be in the business of picking energy winners and losers.”
I am in agreement. That is why I am surprised that a closer look at his actions are inconsistent with his words.
Tipton has voted to keep fossil fuel subsidies strong throughout his time as a representative. A report from Oil Change International found that in 2015-2016, the federal and state governments provided a combined $35 billion in fossil fuel subsidies.
Why are fossil fuel subsidies overlooked in the discussion of picking winners and losers?
What about picking the extraction polluting economy of today (temporary winners) and the crushing environmental debt we are saddling young Americans with (the losers) – meaning an unhealthy planet where life is less viable?
Current federal government policy and subsidies favors fossil fuel energy over all other energy forms. It would be like giving a monetary subsidy to tobacco companies for damaging our health from cigarette manufacturing. Why are we giving money to coal, oil and gas, encouraging them to emit more greenhouse gases?
In the end, Rep. Tipton, aren’t we all losers from increased climate-related extreme weather events, wildfires, drought and heat waves?
Jo Ann Kopke
Bayfield
