Oppose Amendment 1782 to the Transportation Bill
March 13, 2012
Dear Senator:
Our groups have diverse missions and different ideas about the role of government. But we join together to urge you to oppose Senate Amendment 1782 to the Transportation bill currently being debated on the floor. This amendment would attach S. 1863, the New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions or NAT GAS Act to the bill. By providing billions in tax subsidies, the NAT GAS Act interferes in the marketplace to favor natural gas over other transportation and energy technologies that may be more cost-effective or sustainable.
The NAT GAS Act provides significant subsidies for natural gas at all levels of production– from manufacturing and infrastructure to consumer tax credits– carrying an estimated $5 billion price tag. It includes a tax credit for up to 80 percent of the marginal cost of buying a natural gas vehicle–up to $64,000 for the heaviest trucks, an infrastructure tax credit for 50 percent of the cost of a fueling station—up to $100,000, and a manufacturing tax credit for the production of natural gas vehicles. While a consumer fee would be used as an offset over the long-term, the fee does not even begin phase in until 2014, sticking taxpayers with the immediate fiscal impacts.
Again we urge you to prevent the siphoning of billions of dollars to the natural gas industry. Oppose S.A. 1782 to the Transportation Bill.
Sincerely,
Taxpayers for Common Sense
Freedom Action
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Americans for Prosperity
Greenpeace
Friends of the Earth
The Heartland Institute
Earthworks
Food and Water Watch
Western Organization of Research Councils
RSS Updates 
RSS E-Mail Updates 
CEI.org
Tell T. Boone to spend his own money:
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/tell-boone-spend-his-own-money
Natural gas for transportaion is needed to displace imported oil. Renewables for transportation are not quite ready yet. Maybe in a few decades. Domestic natural gas is a bridge to when transortation renewables are cost-effectively available to the consumer. Who wants a an electric car with only a 45 mile range. Sounds like a super golf-cart.
how does not using more nat gas not hurt the environment?
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 2 trackbacks }