by Christian Wade
Connecticut lawmakers are advancing a climate change bill that critics say would give the state broad authority to raise gasoline taxes and take other aggressive steps to reduce tailpipe emissions.
The proposal, which was recently approved by the Legislature’s Environmental Committee, would empower the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection to implement climate change policies aimed at helping Connecticut reach its goal of reducing greenhouse gases to 80% of 2001 levels by 2050.
But a provision tucked into the bill would authorize the state agency to pursue “market‐based compliance mechanisms” with other states — as well as Canadian provinces — to help meet mandated emission reduction goals.
Critics argue the provision is a backdoor effort to replace the Transportation Climate Initiative, an ambitious plan to create a multi-state pact to reduce transportation pollution that collapsed after Gov. Ned Lamont and other states pulled the plug on it. Critics contended TCI would lead to higher gas prices for consumers.
“Make no mistake about it, this bill is sneaky and not transparent,” Christian Herb, president of the Connecticut Energy Marketers Association, said in a statement. “After losing their bid to add a fourth gasoline tax on the hard-working people of Connecticut, some in Hartford think they’ve come up with a new way to get around it.”
He said the legislation would usurp the state Legislature’s authority by allowing the executive branch to make unilateral decisions about joining regional climate change programs like TCI, not elected lawmakers. He said it would violate federal interstate commerce laws because it would also bypass congressional approval.
“While supporters of the bill claim it’s not a new tax, a simple google search on “market-based compliance mechanisms” will tell you all you need to know,” he said. “Cap and Trade is code for carbon taxes on gasoline and more.”
Modeled on the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, which has reduced emissions from power plants, the transportation pact sought to create a cap-and-invest program to drive down emissions from cars and trucks. It targeted gas and diesel fuel consumption, which account for 40% of regional carbon emissions that scientists say contribute to climate change.
Under the plan, suppliers who deliver fuel across state lines would have been taxed on emissions above limits that still must be set. Those costs were expected to be passed on to consumers. The plan’s supporters say higher gas prices would encourage people to drive less often and turn to public transit, reducing regional emissions.
With TCI’s demise, environmental groups argue Connecticut and other states need to take more aggressive steps to curb tailpipe pollution to meet environmental benchmarks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Nathan Frohling, director external affairs for the Nature Conservancy in Connecticut, said state agencies “must have the authority to promulgate regulations and establish programs to mitigate climate emissions in order to ensure success in meeting our statutorily mandated greenhouse gas reduction obligations.”
“Only with stronger accountability and enforcement mechanisms, can our state’s climate law achieve the GHG reductions essential to our future,” he wrote in testimony.
Other supporters point out that the executive branch wouldn’t have the authority to implement a TCI-like program, which would require negotiations with other states and legislative input.
“The idea that somehow this bill gives Connecticut the authority to unilaterally implement TCI is just not based upon the facts,” said Charles Rothenberg, an attorney with the environmental group Save the Sound, said in testimony. “It’s giving the agency the tools to do what the Legislature has told them to do.”
– – –
Christian Wade is a contributor to The Center Square.
Photo “Connecticut Capitol” by Jimmy Emerson, DVM. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
