OnTheIssuesLogo

Kirsten Gillibrand on Energy & Oil

Democratic Senator (NY); Democratic Candidate for President (withdrawn)

 


Rejoin Paris Climate Agreement, plus price on carbon

Q: As president, would you keep the U.S. in the Paris Agreement and commit to more ambitious targets in 2020?

Gillibrand: "As president, she would rejoin the Paris Agreement. She believes that the United States must lead the international community to set more ambitious targets to achieve net-zero carbon emissions."

Q: Do you support a federal carbon tax?

Ms. Gillibrand's campaign provided an excerpt from her campaign launch speech: "Addressing a global challenge of this urgency will take massive effort and transformative vision, which is exactly why we should do it. Let's invest in our crumbling infrastructure, create sustainable green jobs, and protect clean air and clean water as a universal human right. And I'd go further than others who support this plan. I'd also put a price on carbon to use market forces to steer companies away from fossil fuels and towards clean and renewable energy."

Source: 2019 "Meet the Candidates" (NY Times.com) , Apr 18, 2019

Put a price on carbon: supports Green New Deal

I'm for the Green New Deal and it's also why I'm for putting a price on carbon. The Green New Deal is actually three basic ideas that are already bipartisan. It's infrastructure investments. It's green jobs. And third, clean air and water.

The only idea that's new is net zero carbon emissions within 10 years. When John F. Kennedy said, "I want to put a man on the moon in 10 years," he didn't know if he could do it. Why not do the same here? Why not say, "let's get to net zero carbon emissions in 10 years not because it's easy, but because it's hard, because it will be a measure of our excellence and innovation," and it's a mission we are unwilling to postpone.

Source: CNN Town Hall: 2020 presidential hopefuls , Apr 9, 2019

Perfect score on "350 Action's 2020 Climate Test"

The environmental group 350 Action released a candidate scorecard known as the 2020 Climate Test to assess presidential hopefuls on three major metrics: support for a Green New Deal, opposition to new fossil fuel development and refusal to accept money from energy companies.

Three candidates have made firm climate-forward commitments, issuing their support for the Green New Deal, vowing to keep fossil fuels in the ground and banning donations from Big Oil.

Four candidates have supported two of 350 Action's three benchmarks.Three candidates have failed all three of 350 Action's tests, attacking the Green New Deal or making no firm pledges to work against fossil fuel companies.
Source: Mother Jones, "On Climate," on 2020 Presidential Hopefuls , Mar 27, 2019

Limit then cap-and-trade carbon emissions

Source: PBS News hour on 2020 Presidential hopefuls , Jan 16, 2019

Fracking must avoid chemicals that harm drinking water

The two candidates argued over whether to allow the development of upstate New York's shale gas formations by hydraulic fracturing--or "hydro-fracking"--which is now being considered by the Cuomo administration.

Gillibrand said natural gas exploration could be an economic boon, but first it has to be determined if the chemicals used in the process threaten drinking water.

Long was full-throated in support of development. "All these concerns that you cite are just phony concerns," Long said.

Source: New York Newsday on 2012 N. Y. Senate debate , Oct 17, 2012

Raise CAFE; plus alternative energy R&D

Source: 2006 Senate campaign website, gillibrand2006.com, "Issues" , Nov 7, 2006

Balance fossil fuels and viable renewable energy.

Gillibrand adopted the Blue Dog Coalition press release:

Blue Dogs believe in a balanced energy plan that expands our energy supply by promoting a diverse energy mix. As a country blessed with a diverse energy portfolio of traditional fossil fuels and viable renewable energy sources, we believe it is critical to promote a forward-looking, market-based, and balanced national energy strategy. We must encourage research and development in new energy technologies that promote the greatest level of conservation at home, in business, and in industry. Reducing national energy intensity through energy efficient applications can save consumers and business billions in extra energy costs while also reducing polluting emissions. Pursuing these collective goals will strengthen our energy security, diversify our energy mix, and provide Americans with reliable and affordable energy sources.

Source: Blue Dog Coalition press release 01-BDC1 on Jul 10, 2001

$5 billion in tax credits for alternative energy projects.

Gillibrand signed SEAM Act

Security in Energy and Manufacturing Act of 2011 or the SEAM Act of 2011 - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to expand the qualifying advanced energy project credit by allocating in 2011 $5 billion of grants or tax credit amounts to manufacturers of goods and components (other than for assembly of components) in the US that are used in alternative energy projects.

[Explanatory note from americanprogress.org]:

The SEAM Act provides financial assistance to US manufacturing companies that want to retool their factories for the clean energy economy. By promoting growth of the manufacturing sector, this legislation has the potential to create badly needed jobs that can put Americans back to work.

The SEAM Act goes a step beyond just providing more funding. It amends the existing terms of the funding to increase its effectiveness. The new Manufacturing Tax Credit would prioritize funding for companies that provide supplies over those that assemble goods. Drawing this distinction helps target support for companies that need it most. There`s another benefit to supporting supply companies over assembly companies. Both types of companies promote economic development, but workers in the supply chain, such as tool and die workers, welders, and machinists, are generally paid more than workers in the assembly chain.

In addition to being an effective tool for economic recovery, the SEAM Act provides an example of a well-designed tax expenditure. More than 60% of federal support for the energy industry is now delivered via `tax expenditures`--government spending programs that deliver subsidies through the tax code via special tax credits, deductions, exclusions, exemptions, and preferential rates--and a recent hearing in Congress indicates that this trend is likely to continue. Problem is, many of these tax expenditures are questionable at best.

Source: HR.724&S.591 11-S0591 on Mar 15, 2011

50% clean and carbon free electricity by 2030.

Gillibrand co-sponsored H.Res.637/S.Res.386

Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should establish a national goal of more than 50 percent clean and carbon free electricity by 2030 for the purposes of avoiding the worst impacts of climate change, growing our economy, increasing our shared prosperity, improving public health, and preserving our national security.

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should--
  1. Establish a national goal of more than 50 percent clean and carbon free electricity by 2030; and
  2. Enact legislation to accelerate the transition to clean energy to meet this goal.
Source: Resolution for 50% Carbon-Free Electricity by 2030 16-SRes386 on Mar 3, 2016

Green New Deal: 10-year national mobilization.

Gillibrand signed the Resolution on Green New Deal

This resolution calls for the creation of a Green New Deal with the goals of:

The resolution calls for accomplishment of these goals through a 10-year national mobilization effort. The resolution also enumerates the goals and projects of the mobilization effort, including:
  • building smart power grids (i.e., power grids that enable customers to reduce their power use during peak demand periods);
  • upgrading all existing buildings and constructing new buildings to achieve maximum energy and water efficiency;
  • removing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation and agricultural sectors;
  • cleaning up existing hazardous waste and abandoned sites;
  • ensuring businesspersons are free from unfair competition; and
  • providing higher education, high-quality health care, and affordable, safe, and adequate housing to all.

    Opposing argument from the Cato Institute, 2/24/2019: While reasonable people can disagree on some aspects of the Green New Deal`s proposals, one fact is uncontroversial: the US cannot afford them. The Green New Deal would likely cost upwards of $6.6 trillion per year. The federal government should look for cheaper ways to address problems like climate change. Instead of the Green New Deal, the federal government could adopt a revenue??neutral carbon tax to decrease emissions without exacerbating the fiscal imbalance. Economists from across the political spectrum support carbon taxation as the most cost??effective way to address climate change. And a carbon tax would be most effective if uniformly adopted by other countries, too.

    Source: H.Res.109/S.Res.59 19-HR0109 on Feb 7, 2019

    Other candidates on Energy & Oil: Kirsten Gillibrand on other issues:
    [Title7]

    NY politicians
    NY Archives
    Senate races 2024:
    AZ: Kyrsten Sinema(I,incumbent)
    vs.Ruben Gallego(D)
    vs.Kari Lake(R)
    CA: Laphonza Butler(D,retiring)
    vs.Gail Lightfoot(L)
    vs.Steve Garvey(R)
    vs.Barbara Lee(D)
    vs.Katie Porter(D)
    vs.Adam Schiff(D)
    CT: Chris Murphy(D,incumbent)
    vs.Robert Hyde(R)
    DE: Tom Carper(D,retiring)
    vs.Eric Hansen(R)
    vs.Michael Katz(I)
    vs.Lisa Blunt Rochester(D)
    FL: Rick Scott(R,incumbent)
    vs.Debbie Mucarsel-Powell(D)
    HI: Mazie Hirono(D,incumbent)
    (No opponent yet)
    IN: Mike Braun(R,retiring)
    vs.Marc Carmichael(D)
    vs.Jim Banks(R)
    MA: Elizabeth Warren(D,incumbent)
    vs.Shiva Ayyadurai(R)
    MD: Ben Cardin(D,retiring)
    vs.Larry Hogan(R)
    vs.Robin Ficker(R)
    vs.Angela Alsobrooks(D)
    vs.David Trone(D)
    ME: Angus King(I,incumbent)
    vs.Demi Kouzounas(R)
    vs.David Costello(D)
    MI: Debbie Stabenow(D,retiring)
    vs.Leslie Love(D)
    vs.Peter Meijer(R)
    vs.James Craig(R)
    vs.Mike Rogers(R)
    vs.Elissa Slotkin(D)
    MN: Amy Klobuchar(DFL,incumbent)
    (No opponent yet)
    MO: Josh Hawley(R,incumbent)
    vs.Karla May(D)
    vs.Lucas Kunce(D)
    MS: Roger Wicker(R,incumbent)
    vs.Dan Eubanks(R)
    MT: Jon Tester(D,incumbent)
    vs.Brad Johnson(R)
    vs.Tim Sheehy(R)
    ND: Kevin Cramer(R,incumbent)
    vs.Katrina Christiansen(D)
    vs.Kelly Armstrong(R)
    vs.Katrina Christiansen(D)
    Kevin Cramer(R,incumbent)

    NE: Peter Ricketts(R,incumbent,2-year seat)
    vs.Preston Love(D)
    Deb Fischer(D,incumbent,6-year seat)
    (No opponent yet)
    NJ: Bob Menendez(D,incumbent)
    vs.Tammy Murphy(D)
    vs.Andy Kim(D)
    NM: Martin Heinrich(D,incumbent)
    (No opponent yet)
    NV: Jacky Rosen(D,incumbent)
    vs.Jim Marchant (R)
    vs.Sam Brown(R)
    NY: Kirsten Gillibrand(D,incumbent)
    vs.Josh Eisen(R)
    OH: Sherrod Brown(D,incumbent)
    vs.Frank LaRose(R)
    vs.Bernie Moreno(R)
    PA: Bob Casey(D,incumbent)
    vs.David McCormick(R)
    RI: Sheldon Whitehouse(D,incumbent)
    vs.Patricia Morgan(R)
    TN: Marsha Blackburn(R,incumbent)
    vs.Gloria Johnson(D)
    vs.Marquita Bradshaw(D)
    TX: Ted Cruz(R,incumbent)
    vs.David Costello(D)
    vs.Roland Gutierrez(D)
    vs.Carl Sherman(D)
    vs.Colin Allred(D)
    UT: Mitt Romney(R,retiring)
    vs.John Curtis(R)
    vs.Trent Staggs(R)
    vs.Brad Wilson(R)
    VA: Tim Kaine(D,incumbent)
    vs.Scott Parkinson(R)
    VT: Bernie Sanders(I,incumbent)
    vs.Gerald Malloy(R)
    WA: Maria Cantwell(D,incumbent)
    vs.Raul Garcia(R)
    WI: Tammy Baldwin(D,incumbent)
    vs.Phil Anderson(L)
    vs.Stacey Klein(R)
    WV: Joe Manchin III(D,retiring)
    vs.Don Blankenship(D)
    vs.Jim Justice(R)
    vs.Alex Mooney(R)
    WY: John Barrasso(R,incumbent)
    vs.Reid Rasner(R)
    Abortion
    Budget/Economy
    Civil Rights
    Corporations
    Crime
    Drugs
    Education
    Energy/Oil
    Environment
    Families
    Foreign Policy
    Free Trade
    Govt. Reform
    Gun Control
    Health Care
    Homeland Security
    Immigration
    Jobs
    Principles
    Social Security
    Tax Reform
    Technology
    War/Peace
    Welfare

    Other Senators
    Senate Votes (analysis)
    Bill Sponsorships
    Affiliations
    Policy Reports
    Group Ratings
    [Title9]





    Page last updated: Feb 16, 2024; copyright 1999-2022 Jesse Gordon and OnTheIssues.org