Clean-energy agenda |

Clean-energy agenda

President Obama has conceded that he and his party took a “shellacking” in the midterm elections. Congress is going to look a lot different, but the challenges in front of us have not changed one bit.

The question is: Where can both parties work together• The incoming House leadership, for example, has mentioned economic issues, and the president has mentioned energy.

Most everyone acknowledges we are far too addicted to oil; in fact, several presidents, both Republican and Democrat, have said as much going back to the early 1970s.

Americans overwhelmingly want the next Congress to invest in clean energy sources and end subsidies for Big Oil companies. That would help put both our economic and fiscal houses in order.

Here are two things we can do. First, let’s transition to a clean-energy economy that would rein in global-warming pollution while creating hundreds of thousands of homegrown jobs.

Second, it’s time to stop subsidizing polluters with billions in tax breaks. The Big Oil companies already rake in profits each and every quarter, recession or not. They don’t need handouts in a time of record deficits when taxpayers are struggling to pay their bills.

While we can’t expect our lawmakers to agree on everything in a time of divided government, we do expect them to govern. Our nation has a history of making progress on the environment during such times and we owe it to future generations to make progress now.

Tim Kelly


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.