It’s no surprise to regular readers of Behind the Lines that the so-called “Green” agenda is really just a wealthfare scam designed to make lower-income, rural folks subsidize the high-ticket item toys of their better off neighbors (and the lucrative employment of a large and politically powerful class of otherwise useless bureaucrats and NGO operatives, but that’s perhaps a different story.)
The Clean Heat Standard will hammer people who live in older housing stock, trailers, or multi-unit buildings that can’t accommodate heat pumps, and/or can’t afford the upfront costs to transition from fossil technology to more expensive electric. In other words, poorer people.
A “cap & invest” surcharge on gasoline and diesel transportation fuels would especially hit folks who have long commutes and require the kinds of vehicles needed to travel on poorly maintained, and mostly dirt roads. In other words, poorer, rural people.
The Renewable Energy Standard that will drive up electric rates… You get the picture.
But it was somewhat refreshing to see at least one member of the Climate Cult call out his fellow travelers for not just sticking it to the poor, but not giving a hoot that this is exactly what they’re doing. Rep. Bram Kleppner (D-Burlington), who is on the Energy & Digital Infrastructure Committee, had to get this off his chest:
I spent three plus years on the Climate Council, and, you know, it was my ongoing experience that the issue of how to protect the people who cannot or choose not to electrify their homes, who are low income, will be ignored…. And, yes, you know, I think we’ve heard some of that here; that the vision of this beautiful future that these people [green agenda advocates] have, the passion they have causes them to lose sight of that segment of what’s happening. They truly, truly believe that a low-income person will be better off once electrified… and I think kind of that’s as far as a lot of them — as much thought as a lot of them give…. But what about the [costs incurred during the] next twenty years of the transition? This is not something that is top of mind or regularly included in their thinking or in their plan.
They don’t think about it because it’s an unsolvable problem. They need money to subsidize their crusade to save the planet, and they want to punish those who heat with oil, propane, etc., or drive around using gasoline or diesel, so that’s what and who they tax – disproportionately poorer people. If they create a social safety net program to hold lower-income fossil fuel users harmless, they have little or no money left to pay for planet-saving. If they tax the wealthier folks installing heat pumps and solar panels, it will not incentivize poor people to get off fossil fuels and it will disincentivize wealthier people from adopting their politically preferred electrification technologies. So, how do you untangle this Gordian knot? Screw the poor! And whistle a happy tune while doing so.
This reality was echoed a few days later by Louis Porter of Washington Electric speaking on WVMT’s Morning Drive:
One of my real frustrations with Vermont is often we are having people of lower incomes subsidizing the good intentions of people with higher incomes. And I don’t just see it in the electrical space, I see it in a lot of programs and a lot of things we do with absolutely the best intentions and the best goals. My office opens right onto our waiting room, and I hear people who are coming in who are struggling to pay their bills. They are counting change out to pay their bills in some cases, and I really worry about this tendency we have to take money from people who are struggling to get by and using it to subsidize the good intentions of people who are better off.
Asked to give an example of this, Porter went on:
Well, net metering is the one that’s always top of mind, so that’s a big one, but I see the same thing in some of the incentive programs…. Current use. People who can’t afford the acreage to be enrolled in it don’t benefit. But going back to the electrical space, some of the incentives, electric vehicle incentives, when we look at our territories where there’s net metering, where there’s electric vehicles, they’re all the wealthier towns in our territories.
Yup. Wealthfare. Good intentions? Porter is being polite. If you want to drive an electric vehicle or put solar panels on your house or install a cold climate heat pump, go for it! But don’t expect your lower income neighbor to help you foot the bill. That’s a special brand of selfish greed. There are no good intentions involved here. And if you’re looking for a more egregious reason why the Democrats have lost the faith and are losing the votes of the working class, I don’t think you’ll find one.
