Sen. Bernie Sanders and the head of the Environmental Protection Agency say the Vermont National Guard is a national model for what other military bases can do to cut their reliance on fossil fuels and become less dependent on foreign oil.

Sanders and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson toured a solar power installation Thursday at the Air Guard Base in South Burlington.

The project was completed in October of last year after Sanders, as chair of the Senate Green Jobs Subcommittee, helped to secure $8.5 million to build it. Today, the 1.45-megawatt project is one of the largest solar installations at any Guard base in the country.

Sanders says that, although the U.S. Defense Department is the leading consumer of energy in the world, Vermont’s National Guard has taken the lead in embracing new, locally-produced technology.

“This project supported jobs for Vermont solar businesses and installers and used panels made in the United States of America,” Sanders said, standing in front of panels that use solar trackers. “The Vermont National Guard deserves national recognition as a model of what we can accomplish at military bases in this country in terms of sustainable energy.”

Read the whole article >> 

Joseph Choquette III of the Vermont Petroleum Association was on the hot seat Monday afternoon as Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., pressed him to explain high gas prices in the Burlington area at a Senate field hearing at City Hall.

Noting that retail prices for gas in the Burlington area were down — even though wholesale prices were up — since he began drawing attention to gas prices in northwest Vermont in July, Sanders asked Choquette whether he thought this “public discussion” was responsible for the drop in prices.

“We can neither prove or disprove that theory, but you have the right to say that,” Choquette replied.

In his opening remarks at the hearing, Choquette pointed out that Vermont’s annual gasoline sales of 329 million gallons is the lowest in the lower 48 United States, and second only to Alaska among all of the states.

“This is a small market served by as many as five terminals located in four states and two counties,” Choquette said. “It is a complex market with many challenges: the distance to refineries, high real estate costs, strict environmental regulations and high taxes.”

Read the whole article >>

Dear Friend,

Thank you very much for the political and financial support you have given my campaign for re-election to the United States Senate from Vermont. It is very much appreciated.

As the longest serving Independent in U.S. congressional history I want to take this opportunity to share with you my views about what I consider to be the most serious crisis we face: the need to defeat the effort of the wealthiest people in our country to convert our American democracy into an oligarchic form of government where virtually all economic and political power rests in the hands of a small number of enormously rich families.

The history of this country has been the drive towards a more and more inclusive democracy — a democracy that would fulfill Abraham Lincoln’s beautiful phraseology at Gettysburg in which he described America as a nation “of the people by the people for the people.”

We all know American democracy has not always lived up to this ideal. When this country was founded, only white male property owners over age 21 could vote. But people fought to change that and we became a more inclusive democracy. After the Civil War we amended the Constitution to allow non-white men to vote. We became a more inclusive democracy. In 1920, after years of struggle and against enormous opposition, we finally ratified the Nineteenth Amendment, guaranteeing women the right to vote. We became a more inclusive democracy.

In 1965, under the leadership of Martin Luther King, Jr. and others, the great civil rights movement finally succeeded in outlawing racism at the ballot box and L.B.J. signed the Voting Rights Act. African Americans could not be denied the right to vote. We became a more inclusive democracy. One year after that, the Supreme Court ruled that the poll tax was unconstitutional, that people could not be denied the right to vote because they were low-income. We became a more inclusive democracy. In 1971, young people throughout the country said; “we are being drafted to go to Vietnam and get killed, but we don’t even have the right to vote.” The voting age was lowered to 18. We became a more inclusive democracy.

Today, after centuries of seeing this country move toward a more democratic and inclusive society, we are now witnessing the most severe attack on our democratic foundations, both economically and politically, that has been seen in the modern history of our country. In terms of the distribution of wealth and income, in terms of concentration of economic ownership and in terms of political power, fewer and fewer Americans are determining the future of our country. This is a trend we must reverse.

Economically, the United States today has, by far, the most unequal distribution of wealth and income of any major country on earth and that inequality is worse today in America than at any time since the late 1920s. Today, the wealthiest 400 individuals own more wealth than the bottom half of America — 150 million people. Today, one family, the Walton family of Wal-Mart fame, with $89 billion, owns more wealth than the bottom 40 percent of America. Today, the top one percent own 40 percent of all wealth, while the bottom 60 percent owns less than two percent. Incredibly, the bottom 40 percent of all Americans own just three-tenths of one percent of the wealth of the country.

In terms of income distribution, the top one percent earns more income than the bottom 50 percent. Between 1980 and 2005, 80 percent of all new income created in this country went to the top one percent. In 2010 alone, 93 percent of all new income went to the top one percent.

In terms of economic power and concentration of ownership, the six largest financial institutions in the country (JP MorganChase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Metlife) own assets equivalent to two-thirds of the GDP of this country — more than nine trillion dollars. These giant Wall Street institutions produce half the mortgages in this country and two-thirds of the credit cards. Three of the top four are larger today than they were when we bailed them out four years ago because they were “too big to fail.”

That is what is going on economically in this country. A handful of billionaires own a significant part of the wealth of America and have enormous control over our economy.

In my view the Citizens United Supreme Court decision was one of the worst and most anti-democratic decisions in the history of our country. What the Supreme Court did in Citizens United was to give enormous new political power to the wealthiest people in our country, in addition to all of the economic power they have. That decision allowed corporations and the super-rich, without disclosure, to spend as much money as they want to buy candidates and elections. In essence, the Supreme Court said to America’s billionaires: “You own and control the economy, you own Wall Street, you own the coal companies, you own the oil companies. Now, for a very small percentage of your wealth, we’re going to give you the opportunity to own the United States government.” That is what Citizens United is all about.

Why should we be surprised that one family, worth $50 billion, is prepared to spend $400 million in this election to protect their interests? That’s a small investment for them and a good investment. But it is not only the Koch brothers or Sheldon Adelson. There are at least twenty-three billionaire families who have contributed $250,000 or more into the political process up to now. My guess is that number is really much greater because many of these contributions are made in secret.

From one end of this country to the other, hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent by the very wealthy to defeat candidates who represent the needs of working people. Not content with controlling the economy, they also want to dominate our political system as well.

Please support my re-election campaign today to counter the unlimited resources of the right-wing and to bring our progressive message to all corners of the country.

There is only one antidote to the plans of Big Money. We must fight back. We must educate and organize the working families of our country around a progressive agenda. We must build a strong grass-roots movement which demands that government work for all the people, and not just the wealthy and corporate interests. We must demand that the President and Democrats end their timidity, forcefully stand with struggling families and take on the greed of Wall Street and the top one percent.

As part of our progressive agenda not only must we resist cuts in Social Security, we must lift the cap on high income earners so that Social Security will be strong for the next 75 years.

Not only must we oppose cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, we must see health care as a right of all and continue the struggle for a Medicare for All Single Payer health care system.

Not only must we oppose placing the burden of deficit reduction on the backs of working families, we must demand a progressive tax system in which the wealthy and large corporations start paying their fair share of taxes.

Not only must we oppose those who deny the reality of global warming, we must demand the transformation of our energy system away from fossil fuels into energy efficiency and such sustainable energies as wind, solar, geo-thermal and bio-mass.

Not only must we oppose cuts in unemployment compensation, we must fight for a jobs program that creates the many millions of jobs our country desperately needs.

These are pivotal times in the history of our country. I have been extremely proud to have represented Vermont in the Senate for the last five years and to have worked with many of you in the fight to protect and expand our progressive vision.

Today, as the political situation heats up in Vermont, I am writing to request your support. As, perhaps, the most progressive member of the U.S. Senate, there is no one that the Big Money interests in Washington would prefer to see defeated. Whether it is Wall Street, the oil companies, the insurance and drug companies, the coal and nuclear industries or the military-industrial-complex, I’ve helped lead the opposition against all of them and their never-ending greed. Now, with the absurd Citizens United Supreme Court decision allowing billionaires and corporations to spend unlimited sums of money on campaigns, this could be payback time for them. Please help me be prepared to withstand the type of attacks that could well be coming.

I would very much appreciate your support in my re-election effort. Please contribute today.

Sincerely,

Senator Bernie Sanders

Sen. Bernie Sanders took on the Senate’s biggest global-warming skeptic on Monday in a speech aimed at prodding Congress to stop ignoring the issue.

Sanders, I-Vt., called on Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., and other conservatives to rethink their views on global warming. Inhofe, the senior Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and its former chairman, is famous for dismissing global warming as “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.”

“Sen. Inhofe has some very radical views regarding global warming, and I believe he is dead wrong and dangerously wrong on this issue,” Sanders said in a speech from the Senate floor. “Because many Republicans follow Sen. Inhofe’s lead, it means we are making very little progress here in Congress in combating what most of the scientific community sees as a global environmental crisis.”

Sanders, who is up for re-election this year, noted that Inhofe is in line to head the environment committee again if Republicans retake control of the Senate. Sanders serves with Inhofe on the panel, which is led by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.

The committee will hold a hearing Wednesday on the latest science supporting the existence of global warming and the role humans play by burning fossil fuels. Congress, bitterly divided along partisan lines, has reached a stalemate on the issue and is not expected to agree on any legislation in this session.

Read the whole article >>

Vermont gas prices, particularly in the Burlington area, remain higher than anywhere else in New England, and that has Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., calling for a federal investigation to find out why.

“Gas prices are going down all over the state, but they’re going down less in Vermont than in other states,” Sanders said in an interview with the Burlington Free Press.

The difference in prices between Vermont and other New England states was even greater for consumers in Chittenden, Franklin and Grand Isle counties, Sanders said. The gas-pricing disparity was detailed in a story in Saturday’s Burlington Free Press.

“I request that the Oil and Gas Price Fraud Working Group and the Federal Trade Commission conduct a formal investigation to explore the cause of these unusually high prices in Chittenden, Grand Isle and Franklin counties,” Sanders wrote in a letter Monday to Attorney General Eric Holder and Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz.

Late Monday, Sanders’ aide Dan McLean said Leibowitz had spoken to the senator by telephone and had promised to let Sanders know soon how the investigation would proceed.

Read the whole article >>

State of Play: The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will hold a high-profile hearing Wednesday to vet President Obama’s choice to lead the troubled Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The committee will hear from Allison Macfarlane, Obama’s nominee to replace outgoing Democrat Greg Jaczko atop the NRC.

Jaczko’s tenure has been marked by controversy over his management style and battles over his steps to end plans to store nuclear waste at Nevada’s Yucca Mountain.

Macfarlane has been critical of Yucca Mountain as a waste site, so look for some back-and-forth there with Republicans who support long-delayed plans to store waste at Yucca.

The panel will also hear from Kristine Svinicki, the Republican NRC member nominated for a second term by the president.

Read the whole article >>

Unless Congress acts soon, the wind industry will have to trim its sails–and its workforce.

An essential federal tax break for the fledgling industry, scheduled to expire at the end of the year, has become a victim of Washington gridlock. President Obama was in Newton, Iowa, yesterday at TPI Composites, a leading wind blade manufacturer, to again ask Congress to extend the production tax credit, which provides a credit of 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour of electricity produced by wind turbines–as well as geothermal, biomass and underwater turbines–for the first 10 years of production.

The president also urged Congress to expand a 30 percent tax credit instituted in 2009 for investments in companies manufacturing renewable energy components. The package, called the Advanced Energy Manufacturing Tax Credit, provided $2.3 billion in credits for solar panel parts, “smart” electric meters, fuel cell components and wind turbines.

Over the last decade, wind power has become one of the fastest growing energy sources around the world. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, in the United States alone wind generated 120 billion kilowatt hours last year, 20 times more than in 2000 and enough to light up more than 20 million households. That 32 percent average annual growth rate is due to a number of factors, mainly improved technology, state standards requiring utilities to ramp up their reliance on renewables–and the federal production tax credit.

The production tax credit, which debuted in 1992, helps level the playing field between wind and coal and natural gas and is critical for financing new projects. Although most wind power developers don’t pay taxes because they’re not yet turning a profit, they can raise capital by selling the credits to companies that do.

Read the whole article >>

Sanders reacted Monday to news of Gregory Jaczko’s departure by saying he has appreciated and will miss the chairman’s recognition that the NRC’s job is not to promote nuclear power, but to be a strong safety regulator.

Jaczko called for reforms in the industry, especially following last year’s Fukushima disaster in Japan. He’s also come under fire from Republicans in Congress.

Read the whole article >>

On several key votes over the past few years, Nuclear Regulatory Commission chair Gregory Jaczko was the lone voice for tougher industry standards—and now he has resigned, following an intense character assassination campaign.

Jaczko put out a generous and neutral statement this morning: “After an incredibly productive three years as Chairman, I have decided this is the appropriate time to continue my efforts to ensure public safety in a different forum,” he said. “This is the right time to pass along the public safety torch to a new chairman who will keep a strong focus on carrying out the vital mission of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.”

But that belies a much uglier history. You may recall that late last year, Republicans hauled Jaczko before Congress to answer questions about his supposed brutish behavior as chairman: intimidating and bullying staff, particularly female members, and keeping the other commissioners out of the loop.

But Representative Ed Markey, for whom Jaczko used to work, put together a report on the turmoil that painted a different picture. Instead of uncovering abusive behavior—which still hasn’t been documented—Markey’s staff detailed how in the wake of the Fukushima disaster in Japan, the four other NRC commissioners teamed up to slow down safety responses being designed by Jaczko. It also found “high levels of suspicion and hostility directed at the chairman” from the other four commissioners.

The charge was led by commissioner William Magwood, who spent many years in the nuclear industry—including for the same company that ran the Fukushima Daiichi plant in Japan, as Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim reported at the time. Magwood’s point person, Grim notes, was a then-GOP Senate staffer who is now the top nuclear industry lobbyist.

Read the whole article >>

WASHINGTON — Under a withering assault from the industry, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Gregory Jaczko is stepping down, effective upon the confirmation of his successor, according to a statement from Jaczko.

The resignation follows months of bureaucratic knife-wielding by the four industry-backed members of the five-person panel. Like something out of Dumas, the passionate infighting stretched back decades. The industry effort was spearheaded by Democratic Commissioner Bill Magwood. Magwood, it turned out, had led a strikingly similar coup against his boss at the Department of Energy before taking his spot, a saga first reported by HuffPost late last year as the coup was unfolding.

Magwood’s ally at the time was Alex Flint, then a GOP Senate staffer who took the lead on nuclear policy. He’s now the top lobbyist for the nuclear industry — whose criticism of Jaczko coincided with Magwood’s dramatic assault.

Jaczko and the pro-industry commissioners clashed over his opposition to using Nevada’s Yucca Mountain as a depository for nuclear waste. The commissioners further accused him of heavy-handed leadership when he put the NRC on emergency footing following the Fukushima disaster in 2011. They argued that he was pushing forward too fast with costly new safety regulations.

Read the whole article >>