6.2. ERMUSR 07-11-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

potential economic development boon for farmers and the rural economy. This sets up an interesting opinion battle among Republicans between wind advocates and traditional business interests like the state Chamber of Commerce, which generally opposes mandates that will increase costs. A similar dichotomy exists on the DFL side between Metro area legislators, who generally favor wind development, and more moderate DFLers from Greater Minnesota who are usually more cautious about new mandates. A theme that Republicans seem to have picked up, taking their cue from President Bush, is that energy independence is a national security issue. We heard this very clearly from Senator Coleman during our visit with him at the APPA rally. This theme could play out in the national campaign this fall, which would tend to bolster Republican support for alternative energy programs generally. So going into next year's legislative session, we can assume that the 20% by 2020 proposal, or something quite like it, will be back. Legislators will be aware that public support for action on climate change is growing. Rural legislators will want to work with their municipals and co-ops, but they will also feel heat to do more on renewables from agricultural interests and the general public. How should we respond? • We could attack the science and contest the validity of climate change theory. Personally, I don't think this argument gets us very far in this political climate. • We could concentrate on presenting straightforward information on potential costs, to demonstrate the financial impact of increased reliance on wind. • We could pursue a "half a loaf' strategy, arguing for a compromise such as a 15% renewable portfolio standard by 2020. • We could develop a priority list of what we want in a 20% by 2020 bill and presumably sign off on the bill if we get what we want included. The Government Relations Steering Committee is planning to meet later this summer to begin the process of developing our wish list. What provisions should we hold out for? Rail Competition The issue of rail competition (or the lack of competition) is beginning to gain some traction. The railroads are very powerful in Congress, but there are also some powerful players among the rail shippers who are tired of getting marginal service at exorbitant rates. It's an issue that impacts virtually all of our members, since they all rely in one way or another on coal shipped via rail for generating power. A number of our members, including the members of MRES and SMMPA, Hibbing and Virginia, and Willmar, have pretty compelling stories to tell about the problems they have getting coal shipped at a reasonable rate. Minnesota Congressman Jim Oberstar, as the ranking minority member of the House Transportation Committee, is a key player on the issue and a strong proponent of captive rail legislation. With a strong champion in our delegation, we should probably take 4