Cross posted from Scaling Green; this is what I was up to yesterday. Thanks to Kathy in Blacksburg for ably covering Blue Virginia while I was focused on clean energy.

I had the pleasure yesterday of attending the National Renewable Energy Forum, sponsored by the American Council On Renewable Energy (ACORE), in the Cannon House Office Building in Washington, DC. I “live tweeted” the event at the Scaling Green Twitter feed, and also recommend that you take a look at the Twitter feeds of Greentechmedia reporter Stephen Lacey, Clean Tech Nation author Clint Wilder, and ACORE Vice President Tom Weirich. Finally, I recommend Stephen Lacey’s report on how conservative Congressman Steve King strongly supports federal assistance to renewable energy.

Now, here are a few highlights from my notes and tweets of the conference.

• ACORE President and CEO Dennis McGinn, who ran a smooth and information-packed forum yesterday, repeatedly emphasized that point that renewable energy is the answer on several important fronts: national security, the economy and jobs, health and the environment. Vice Admiral McGinn also stressed the need for “federal and state policies that unlock new sources of capital from the private sector and create market certainty.”
• Forum co-chair Roger Ballentine of Green Strategies noted that there has been “more than $500 billion in private sector investment in renewable energy technology in the past two years,” and that “the cost of solar, wind and other renewable energy sources continues to decline.”

• Kathleen McGinty of Weston Solutions argued that “America has an opportunity to capture significant portions of the clean energy marketplace, not only domestically, but throughout the world,” that “[c]reating a clean energy economy is vital to boosting our economy,” and that “[m]ore renewable energy leverages investment, creates jobs, and helps the environment…a win-win for everyone.”
• Interior Department Secretary Ken Salazar noted the importance of pushing ahead aggressively on clean energy, so that we’re not hostage to foreign oil or the realities of climate change. Salazar pointed to the enormous potential of both onshore and offshore renewable energy in the United States, as well as great progress made the past 4 years, and stressed the need to upgrade our country’s transmission grid, because it’s “stranded energy” unless we can get that wind and solar power from where it’s produced to where it’s demanded. Salazar stressed the importance for the clean energy industry of turning “skeptics” into “believers” by showing the success of actual projects “on the ground.” Finally, Salazar argued that a stable policy environment is crucial to realizing clean energy’s full potential as rapidly as possible.
• Ethan Zindler of Bloomberg New Energy Finance gave a detailed presentation about the current state of the renewable energy industry, as well as where we’re headed. Zindler explained that with U.S. coal-fired power in rapid decline, opportunities are opening up for both renewables and also for natural gas.  Regarding natural gas, Zindler believes the current low price is not sustainable for producers and will have to rise.  At the same time, Zindler sees the levelized cost of energy for renewable power as starting to become competitive without subsidies, which means that the long-term outlook is highly bullish, despite a possibly rocky next couple years. As Zindler told me after his presentation, he agrees with BloombergNew Energy Finance CEO Michael Liebreich, who recently declared that clean energy is “going to win” in the medium- to long-term.



• There was a great deal of discussion yesterday, particularly on Stanford Law Professor Dan Reicher’s panel (“Finance Meets Policy: Beyond Tax Credits”), that energy “policies must move beyond traditional tax credits and enable the sector to tap into much larger sources of private capital.” Patrick Eilers of Madison Dearborn Partners, among others (e.g., Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy David Danielson), pointed specifically to expandingMaster Limited Partnerships (MLPs) and Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) for clean energy, to standardization of contracts, to financial innovation in general, and to a focus on reducing “soft costs.”
• A common theme yesterday, best expressed by Neil Auerbach of Hudson Clean Energy Partners, was the need for renewable energy to be “at the table” or “on the menu.”
• Federal Energy Regulatory Commissioner John Norris stressed the need for upgrading the power grid, noting that it’s a “challenge,” and also currently “an impedance to bringing some renewable energy online.” Norris also argued that the lack of a coherent national energy policy means that we’re developing our renewable energy potential, and bringing it to market, “much less efficiently, slowly than we could.”
• Joseph Desmond of BrightSource Energy commented on policies to facilitate market access for renewable energy storage technology and transmission.



• Nancy Pfund of DBL Investors made a number of interesting points in her presentation, such as that fossil fuels have been federally subsidized to a far greater degree than renewable energy over the years, including tax preferences for oil and gas, which she called “the gift that keeps on giving.” Pfund added that renewable energy has actually been undersubsidized to a great degree relative to fossil fuels. Despite this skewed playing field, Pfund argued that renewable energy has been experiencing a great degree of success in recent years. She further noted that this success has led fossil fuel “incumbents” to become increasingly worried and to launch challenges to policies (e.g., net metering, the Production Tax Credit) that are favorable to clean energy.

In sum, I’d say that yesterday’s conference provided an excellent snapshot of the clean energy industry following one of its best years in history, with a highly promising future ahead of it, yet with challenges still to be addressed and overcome. No doubt, though, if the sentiment at the ACORE conference yesterday was any indication, it’s an exciting time to be involved in clean energy!

Good job by Mike Signer demanding that Ken Cuccinelli provide records that would support Cuccinelli's repeated claim that his gubernatorial campaign is not detracting from the time or resources he devotes to doing the work of his office.

February 7, 2013

Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli

Office of the Attorney General

900 E. Broad St.

Richmond, VA 23219

Dear General Cuccinelli:

For nearly three decades, Attorneys General of both political parties in Virginia have stepped down from the office to run for Governor.  The reason for this tradition is simple: Virginians elect their Attorneys General to serve the public, not to run for Governor.  In fact, you stated last month: “I ran to be Attorney General, not to run for Governor.” Yet, in recent months, you have been directing the Office of Attorney General while running for Governor.   

This has naturally created a question in the public mind about whether the resources of the Office of the Attorney General are being invested in the public interest or in a political campaign.  This concern can be readily dispelled with open information about your office.

Specifically, records about your schedule will reassure the public that you are not performing campaign functions during your work hours. Information about your reimbursements will assure us that travel arranged through the Attorney General's office is official and not campaign-related. Finally, your office's emails to political organizations will demonstrate that no campaign work has been performed using the Office of the Attorney General's resources. Virginia's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) follows Virginia's traditions of sunlight and accountability in government, befitting the Commonwealth that gave constitutional democracy to the world. As per §2.2.3700(B) of the Code of Virginia:

“The affairs of government are not intended to be conducted in an atmosphere of secrecy since at all times the public is to be the beneficiary of any action taken at any level of government. Unless a public body or its officers or employees specifically elect to exercise an exemption provided by this chapter or any other statute, every meeting shall be open to the public and all public records shall be available for inspection and copying upon request. All public records and meetings shall be presumed open, unless an exemption is properly invoked.”

§2.2.3700(B) further states:

“The provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed to promote an increased awareness by all persons of governmental activities and afford every opportunity to citizens to witness the operations of government.”

As these sections make clear, the Code expressly intends to ensure that Virginia's taxpayers know how every elected official, including the Attorney General, is spending our tax dollars.   

Pursuant to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, §2.2.3704(G) et seq., and as a Virginia resident, I therefore request copies of records of the following items: 

1.     Records of your schedule from Microsoft Outlook and/or any other electronic scheduling software for the months of December 2012 and January 2013.

2.     Records of your schedule from Microsoft Outlook and/or any other electronic scheduling software for the days of February 1, 2, and 3, 2013.

3.     Records of your schedule from Microsoft Outlook and/or any other electronic scheduling software for the day of February 4, 2013.

4.     Any reimbursements, allowances, or travel charges that you have personally received for the months of December 2012 and January 2013.

5.     For the months of December 2012 and January 2013, any email correspondence between you and any other staff of the Attorney General's office and any staff or associates of the following parties:

–       The Republican Party of Virginia

–       The Republican Governor's Association

–       The Cuccinelli for Governor campaign

These records will be readily accessible by your staff in electronic format and so should be sent quickly and without additional fees.  Indeed, §2.2.3704(F) of the Virginia Code prohibits the imposition of “any extraneous, intermediary or surplus fees or expenses to recoup the general costs associated with creating or maintaining records.”  Further, “Any duplicating fee charged by a public body shall not exceed the actual cost of duplication.”

Per §2.2.3704(G) of the Virginia Code, please send the requested records to me electronically at msigner@madisonpllc.com.  If only paper copies of the records are available, please mail them to me at the following address:

Michael Signer

[ADDRESS]

Arlington, VA 22201

Additionally, per §2.2.3704(A) of the Virginia Code, I request that, I, or any Virginia resident I designate, be provided access to review these records, where possible, over the Internet and/or by physical access to relevant paper documents during business hours. 

Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter.  I can be reached with any questions at (703) 870-3782. 

Sincerely,

Michael Signer, Esq.  

( – promoted by lowkell)

by Paul Goldman

Is the contest between Bolling, Cuccinelli, and McAuliffe just beginning? Or, is it about to be over by the time the General Assembly adjourns in a few weeks?

As predicted right here, Governor McDonnell’s historic transportation plan, based on changing the financial equation at the heart of Virginia’s road policy for roughly a century, is now the definer of the 2013 election. When first suggesting this, I got plenty of email all saying I was crazy. That being the case, then surely it will not surprise when I do the following:

Double down on the prediction. By the end of this month, certainly by the end of the General Assembly Session, one of four 2013 gubernatorial scenarios is going to be set in motion.  

1. Lt. Governor Bill Bolling will be the first legitimate third-party candidate for governor in the state’s modern history, running as the pro-McDonnell transportation guy against anti-McConnell plan Republican Ken Cuccinelli and anti-McDonnell plan Terry McAuliffe. The latter two will have their own plans, and everyone but the media will know they helped kill the McDonnell plan and that their plans have no chance of being enacted in 2014.

Under this scenario, Mr. Bolling actually has a real reason to run. His top guy, Boyd Marcus, knows how to shape a winning strategy. Assuming Boyd is still up to the task, his man Bolling will get a lot more votes than anyone thinks at this point. If Bolling has $30 million, he might actually have a chance of winning if a few other dominoes fall into place. But since these things will not happen, in the end, his presence in the race will elect Terry McAuliffe, and the entire Democratic ticket, the first D-sweep since Wilder led the party to such a win roughly 25 years ago.

But Bolling will not be seen as a spoiler. Why? Because under this scenario, the GOP will surely nominate an anti-McDonnell plan ticket. How crazy is that in an election year, the GOP nominating a ticket that is recommending itself to the people in part because they fought the transportation plan of their own incumbent governor? About as crazy as it gets. [Lowell’s note: how about “Cuccinelli Crazy?”]

 

2. A Bolling candidacy is 50-50, given that Democrat Terry McAuliffe will run as a pro-McDonnell transportation plan advocate against anti-McDonnell plan Ken Cuccinelli. In this three-way race, assuming T-Mac doesn’t make a big mistake or something happen out of the blue, Bolling would risk getting a very small percentage of the vote, as the moderate swing voters lined up in the end behind the Democrats for a big D-sweep. Bolling could claim Terry was “too liberal” on the other smaller issues, but this is just another yada, yada, yada, from Republicans who find every Democrat “too liberal” or “too pro-Obama.” Whatever. In this scenario, Bolling probably takes more from Cuccinelli than from McAuliffe. But it doesn’t matter, as the Democrats won’t need any help. T-Mac gets a big mandate and the McDonnell/McAuliffe transportation plan gets passed in 2014. But Governor T-Mac gets all the credit.

3. Bolling has no legit reason to run, since Cuccinelli will run as a pro-McDonnell transportation plan guy, leading his party into the fall election on the same transportation wavelength, given the governor’s stance and the vote of the House folks up for re-election. McAuliffe runs as the anti-McDonnell transportation guy in this scenario. In this case, Cuccinelli will win unless the AG is determined to convince every swing voter that he will be the most socially conservative activist governor in the state’s history. Cuccinelli may be hard-wired to do this politically; surely, that is becoming my analysis. But assuming Cuccinelli figures that maybe he isn’t the only moral guy to ever run for statewide office, and maybe other governors had a real smart reason for being practical, not ideological on everything (like Ronald Reagan when he was governor and president), then a pro-McDonnell Cuccinelli will prove too much for an anti-McDonnell T-Mac.

4. Bolling has no legit reason to run here either, as it will feature a pro-McDonnell Cuccinelli and pro-McDonnell McAuliffe in this final hypothetical on transportation. This would be one of the most fascinating races for governor in the history of Virginia. T-Mac should start with a clear lead. Again, if Cuccinelli insists on convincing people that for him, social ideology is JOB #1, then Terry wins and there is a good chance the Democrats could sweep, depending on the respective party nominees. If Cuccinelli can focus on the kind of budget/education/restoration of rights/mental health issues typical of VA gov. elections, he would have a decent shot at an upset if he had McDonnell’s full support to help smooth the image. But T-Mac is still the favorite.

Plus, the stances of the running mates will figure here too, especially if one party or the other lines up three straight in the same pro, or anti, direction.

EXPLANATION: The 54-46 surprise vote in the House of Delegates on the governor’s transportation plan will prove, in my judgment, the first step in passing it. Why? A Republican governor, a Republican Speaker of the House and an amazing number of conservative Republican delegates supported a bill considered a “tax increase” by anti-tax guru Grover Norquist. Do you think Eric Cantor would have voted for this if he were still in the VA House of Delegates?

Yes, the Democrats in the House and Senate make great policy points. But as I’ve said repeatedly, THAT SHIP HAS SAILED.

The Washington Post editorial today should be the canary in the coal mine on the 200-proof politics. It is what it is; the governor outflanked the Democrats on this one, and the GOP conservatives in the State Senate. That is the 200-proof political bottom line. Democrats were warned; they just didn’t believe Speaker Howell could deliver the votes in the House. It was amazing.

MEANING: Dick Saslaw and Don McEachin, and their Senate posse can, indeed will and should, do the best they can to shape the final product. The House Dems can help too. But in the end, unless something totally unpredictable happens, Senate Democrats will have to provide the votes to pass it.

Which means as follows: The chances are 100% that Terry will endorse the final legislation if Senate Dems back it. 100%, Bolling is going to endorse the final transportation deal if McDonnell backs it. Meaning: Scenario 1 above isn’t going to happen. It will be either Scenario 2, 3 or 4.

Leaving: What will Cuccinelli do? To me, this is the big mystery right now. There is right now a good chance the GOP will nominate a ticket led by Cuccinelli and having as candidates for LG and AG persons who will all be against the final transportation bill.

Which would mean: The Democrats would be backing Republican Governor McDonnell on his biggest accomplishment, and his own party would be running an anti-McDonnell ticket. Maybe you get Bolling in the mix, maybe not.

What are the Republicans going to do, call McDonnell and the Democrats “liberals big tax guys”, yada, yada, yada? If Democrats can’t win under these conditions, then either the voting machines are rigged, or something so unpredictable will have happened as to defy state history.

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Thursday, February 7. Also, check out the video of Vice President Joe Biden swearing in John Kerry as Secretary of State.

*4th Annual TV News Trust Poll (“We find once again this year that Democrats trust everything except Fox, and Republicans don’t trust anything other than Fox.” In other words, Republicans only trust the network that blatantly lies, makes up its own “facts,” denies climate science, etc. That explains a great deal…)

*Obama will let lawmakers see targeted-killings memo

*A truly new GOP? (“Changing their ideas or repackaging old ones?”)

*GOP rebranding, Day 2: Cantor cares ‘very deeply about women’ (Yeah, while you wage war against women’s reproductive freedom, health, etc. Riiiiiiiiiight.)

*House Democrats unimpressed by Cantor’s support of DREAM Act

*Missing the joke in Va.’s statehouse (“Some Republicans in Virginia’s House of Delegates showed this week they’re unwilling to let a threat to liberty, even imaginary ones, go unchallenged. Members of the majority party backed resolution after resolution aimed at conquering some of their most fantastic foes.”)

*The setback in the Senate

*Virginia transportation bill: Compromise likely, Saslaw says

*Governor’s Transportation Plan Hits Roadblock

*Cuccinelli visits politics lecture, describes political successes, opponent’s failures

*House speaker’s ruling kills Senate redistricting plan

*Bolling says major announcement set for March 14

*Jeff’s Notes: Highway funding follies

*Possible independent Bill Bolling not so mavericky on Senate votes

*Va. transportation funding deserves bipartisan support (Not a thoughtful editorial at all.)

*Even after bill is spiked, uranium mining efforts persist below surface

*House District #37 (The latest in NLS’ continuing series on Virginia House of Delegates’ districts…)

*Sailors, families react to abruptly canceled Truman deployment

*Supervisors call on Dumler to quit

*D.C. area forecast: Clouds today, possible wintry mix tonight, rain Friday

*Time to take a stand on ‘Redskins’ logo (Just substitute the word “white,” “black,” “brown” or “yellow” for “red” and see how that sounds…)

From Rep. Jim Moran's office; a reaction to the non-starter proposal by House Republicans to slash the federal workforce.

Washington, DC – Congressman Jim Moran, Northern Virginia Democrat, today released the following statement on a Republican proposal to replace deeply damaging sequestration cuts for one year with a 10 percent cut to the federal workforce. 

“Sequestration is a self-imposed punishment following the failure of Congress to arrive at a balanced compromise for deficit reduction. The legislation offered today is just one more example of congressional Republicans attempting to place the brunt of deficit reduction on the backs of our federal workforce. Federal employees did not create the national debt – they should not be required to shoulder the burden of reducing it alone.                                                                 

“Since 2011, federal employees have sacrificed $103 billion in the name of deficit reduction, more than $50,000 per employee. It is time for Congress to find a comprehensive deficit plan that asks others to pay their fair share. 

“Our hardworking federal employees provide important services to the country. Slashing the size of the workforce is not only wrong; it will impact the ability of the Federal Government to function efficiently.” 

The 8th District of Virginia is home to more than 65,000 federal employees and where 114,000 federal employees show up to work.

The Congressional Budget Office has spoken. Starvation politics and policies hurt the economy. But the starve-the-beast partisans (and Blue Dogs) are still at it trying to carve out greater austerity, which will be costly and hurtful to most Americans.

Slow growth reflects a combination of ongoing improvement in underlying economic factors and fiscal tightening that has already begun or is scheduled to occur — including the expiration of a 2 percentage-point cut in the Social Security payroll tax, an increase in tax rates on income above certain thresholds, and scheduled automatic reductions in federal spending. That subdued economic growth will limit businesses’ need to hire additional workers, thereby causing the unemployment rate to stay near 8 percent this year, CBO projects.

Economists such as Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman, and Robert Reich have been warning that this was the case. So too have 350 others last fall.

Few argue that the debt is unimportant or that deficits don’t matter at all. But waiting till the economy includes more jobs would solve part of the deficit by itself, thus reducing some of the need for cuts in the first place. Why not wait to put first things first?  Heck, not even the king of austerity Peter Peterson apparently believes that austerity timed during a recovery is a good idea. So why are all his minions out in force chanting budget cuts when we still need jobs?  

Might we not also point out that the President has also shrunk the deficit, but at a great cost (see the link in the first paragraph). Building the job sector would enable people to recover from the misdeeds of the enabling politicians, the financial sector and the corporate sector, which crashed the economy in the first place.  And it would also provide a context in which surpluses could finally be grown and the debt paid down. What’s the chance of the GOP or our beleaguered and bullied president waiting for a more auspicious time? Zero.  

Yesterday the President put Social Security and medicare back on the table in a misguided effort at “compromise,” now redefined to mean the American people get trashed again. Today’s seniors on average were hammered by the recession with no or little time to recover. Near-zero interest rates punish seniors, many of whom who cannot entrust what little they have in the stock market. This assures that most cannot keep up with inflation. Medical care soars and costs more than Medicare will pay. Property taxes strain the average senior’s ability to afford his or her home. The current COLA underestimates inflation. Yet the President thinks cutting COLAs (or worse) is a good thing?  

US Rep Eric Cantor was everywhere yesterday trying to put a new face on the obstructionist, 99%-hating, xenophobic, “let-them-eat-cake” wrecking crew (aka the US Majority House Leadership). All it cared about in the past four years was thwarting Obama at every turn and making sure the economy didn’t heal too well to enable the President’s re-election. Guess what?

He (and his fellow members of the GOP leadership) may have gerrymandered their way into continued presence in the nation’s capitol for now, but the electoral handwriting is own the wall for the future. The GOP will have to either cheat their way into continued domination of one House of Congress, change or fool Americans into thinking it has changed.  Unwilling to actually change, Can’t-or will try to put a pretty face on himself and itself. But messaging won’t solve what is systemically wrong with today’s Republican Party.

Cantor and the GOP leadership don’t actually listen to the American people anymore, only the Tea Party. They doesn’t even listen to those who used to be masters of packaging the nasty GOP and turning it into “sunshine.”  Yep, even Karl Rove is in exile. Instead the re-packager of vermin, Frank Luntz keeps keeping on. And he’s fed Can’t-or a mouth full.

The media response was often hilarious. John Stewart trounced both Cantor and Luntz. Ed Shultz, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell had a field day with Cantor.  And the rest of the media pretended re-branding would help.

If only the US could see how very caring Erick Can’t-or and his followers “are.” But Can’t-or evidently trained at the Wooden School of Mitt-Romney-Fake-Caring, where the 99%, not to mention the 47%, are seen as just so very undeserving. Did I mention his rich bailed-out banker wife?  And he claimed yesterday to understand the difficulty of saving for college. Not quite. The rest of us are just so very bourgeois.

Before the American Enterprise Institute yesterday, Can’t-or used the words “health, happiness and prosperity” to define the future (fictitious) GOP agenda. Since when has the GOP cared about such things?  A pretense now is too late. He’s given too much effort trying to sabotage the economy, sacrifice job growth, public education, health care, Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, and jobless benefits.

Still, Cantor thinks he’s ID’d the Republican version of dream. And he hopes Americans forget his Ayn Rand policies betraying his radical and extreme version of “everyone for himself and God help us all.” Underneath it all, it’s just more Peter Peterson-inspired engineered austerity to advantage hedge fund investors, Wall Street, and the Fortune 500 CEOs.

HINT: Eric, you give yourself away with the lip curl. Looking down on Americans isn’t a very good idea, especially when it is written all over your face and in the tone of your voice. And it makes you wonder how many other “Virginia Gentlemen” pols are waiting in the wings with their dripping insincerity and vicious contempt for the American people. No wordsmith and re-branding will do it. Nor will pretending to care about immigrants now that electoral handwriting is on the wall.It would have helped if your party hadn’t engaged in multi-tiered vote suppression. But, too late. The Can’t-or is out of the bag. Your GOP is not interested in “advancement the happiness of man.” Not even close.