Comments on: Do Voters Overwhelmingly Support Clean Energy Candidates?

By: Brian McGraw

Brian McGraw — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 20:48:47 +0000

I didn’t cite the poll as a preferred result, I was pointing out that the phrasing of a poll has an enormous effect on the outcome. Look at the changes when jobs are introduced, when $10 is increased to $25, its enormous.

The phrasing of the poll suggests that only companies will bear the burden: “Opponents say the bill will cost companies money and is like an energy tax that would actually reduce jobs.” This implies that this tax will fall on the companies. I’m not aware of any reasonable interpretation of legislation which attempts to reduce GHG emissions that won’t cost consumers money.

By: LindsayNRDC

LindsayNRDC — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 20:09:56 +0000

We said the opponents of the bill thought it was an energy tax that would reduce jobs, which we think is more than fair given that we disagree; but the poll you cite in preference actually shows that a majority of American people support action on climate change and would even be willing to pay more per month than EPA says the bill would cost (while we think it would actually save money through efficiency) so thanks for using other polling to prove our point.

By: gofer

gofer — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 21:28:08 +0000

“What if a cap and trade program raised your monthly electrical bill by 25 dollars a month but also created a significant number of ‘GREEN’ jobs in the United States? In that case would you support or oppose it?”

And thus the rhetoric changed to “job creation” rather than CO2.