NRSC - Shaheen's Radical Anti-Energy Stance Far Outside the Mainstream

March 11, 2014

"Talk-a-Thon" Highlights How Out-Of-Touch Jeanne Shaheen is With Granite Staters- Energy Development 
Jeanne Shaheen a Key Senator in Radical Obama/Reid
War on American Energy 

A majority of Democrats planned to take over the Senate floor to protest climate change and advocate for policies that hurt American energy development in a so-called "talk-a-thon" this week.

As USA Today reported, "The Democratic effort is cause for some confusion because these senators are calling for action in a chamber they control but without any specific legislation to offer up for a vote, or any timetable for action this year."

Jeanne Shaheen has had a rough few weeks and now is highlighting another issue where she finds herself defending liberal extremists and opposing American energy development and the job creations and economic benefits that come with it.  Shaheen is one of the most radical members of the United States Senate and an enemy of American energy, and is a staunch advocate for radical cap-and-trade legislation and other policies that would hurt New Hampshire. Shaheen's blind support for this radical agenda would mean harmful red tape regulation, higher taxes, and higher costs that would cripple entire industries and destroy local jobs in New Hampshire.

"Energy development at home is key to creating jobs, helping working families, and growing our economy yet Jeanne Shaheen has constantly put radical liberal special interests ahead of what's best for Granite Staters," said NRSC Press Secretary Brook Hougesen. "Jeanne Shaheen is one of President Obama's most important soldiers in the War on American Energy, voting with him an eye-opening 99% - even when those policies hurt families and workers in New Hampshire. Jeanne Shaheen's extreme views are far outside the mainstream which is why Granite Staters are excited about the possibility of supporting someone new that they can trust and rely on." 

 

BACKGROUND

In March 2013, Shaheen Voted For A Pro-Carbon Tax Amendment

In March 2013, Shaheen For A Pro-Carbon Tax Amendment. “Whitehouse, D-R.I., amendment no. 646 that would establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation that would provide for a fee on carbon pollution and use revenues collected to reduce the deficit.” (S. Con. Res. 8, CQ Vote #58: Rejected 41-58: R 0-45; D 39-13; I 2-0, 3/22/13, Shaheen Voted Yea)

A Carbon Tax Could Cost Up To 10,000 Jobs In New Hampshire. “This tax would deal a blow to employment in New Hampshire, with a loss of worker income equivalent to 7,000 to 10,000 jobs in 2013 and 10,000 by 2023.” (National Association Of Manufacturers, “Adverse Economic Impacts Of A Carbon Tax In New Hampshire,” www.nam.org, Accessed 5/28/13)

A Carbon Tax Could Increase The Price Of Gas In New Hampshire By More Than 20 Cents Per Gallon. “Prices at the pump would jump by more than 20 cents a gallon in 2013.” (National Association Of Manufacturers, “Adverse Economic Impacts Of A Carbon Tax In New Hampshire,” www.nam.org, Accessed 5/28/13)

A Carbon Tax Could Increase The Cost Of Electricity For New Hampshire Families By 18 Percent. “Households in New Hampshire would see a significant increase in their electricity rates, with an average increase of 18 percent in 2013.” (National Association Of Manufacturers, “Adverse Economic Impacts Of A Carbon Tax In New Hampshire,” www.nam.org, Accessed 5/28/13)

A Carbon Tax Could Increase The Cost Of Natural Gas By More Than 40 Percent. “The cost of using natural gas would increase by more than 40 percent in 2013, the first year of the carbon tax study, adding to household energy bills and increasing operation costs for many New Hampshire businesses.” (National Association Of Manufacturers, “Adverse Economic Impacts Of A Carbon Tax In New Hampshire,” www.nam.org, Accessed 5/28/13)

Shaheen Supports Cap-And-Trade

In 2008, Shaheen Supported Legislation To Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions By 80% By 2050. “‘She supports many of the aims of the Warner-Lieberman bill,’ Shaheen spokeswoman Kate Bedingfield said in a statement. ‘She supports the goal of cutting carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050, and in the U.S. Senate will push for a comprehensive plan to achieve that goal that includes economy-wide emissions reductions, aggressive research and development for new energy technologies , work with international partners to achieve global emissions reductions, and incentives for energy efficiency and clean alternative energy sources.’” (John P. Gregg, “N.H. Senators Face Pressure,” [White River Junction, VT] Valley News, 6/6/08)

The Average New Hampshire Household Would Have Spent $405 More For Gasoline Every Year By 2025 As A Result Of Lieberman-Warner. (William W. Beach , David W. Kreutzer, Ben Lieberman and Nicolas Loris, “How New Hampshire Would Be Affected By The Lieberman-Warner Climate Change Legislation,” The Heritage Foundation, Web Memo #1930-NH, 5/20/08)

New Hampshire Would Have Lost 2,996 Jobs By 2025. (William W. Beach , David W. Kreutzer, Ben Lieberman and Nicolas Loris, “How New Hampshire Would Be Affected By The Lieberman-Warner Climate Change Legislation,” The Heritage Foundation, Web Memo #1930-NH, 5/20/08)

New Hampshire Would Have Lost 11,567 Manufacturing Jobs By 2030. (William W. Beach , David W. Kreutzer, Ben Lieberman and Nicolas Loris, “How New Hampshire Would Be Affected By The Lieberman-Warner Climate Change Legislation,” The Heritage Foundation, Web Memo #1930-NH, 5/20/08)

Shaheen Has Supported Allowing The EPA To Regulate Greenhouse Gases

In March 2013, Shaheen Voted Against An Amendment That Would Assume For A Ban On The EPA Regulating Carbon Emissions. “Inhofe, R-Okla., amendment no. 359 that would adjust the resolution to assume for a ban on the EPA regulation of carbon emissions.” (S. Con. Res. 8, CQ Vote #76: Rejected 47-52: R 44-1; D 3-49; I 0-2, 3/23/13, Shaheen Voted Nay)

In April 2011, Shaheen Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have Blocked The EPA From Regulating Carbon Dioxide And Other Greenhouse Gasses. “McConnell, R-Ky., amendment no. 183 that would block the EPA from regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.” (S. 493, CQ Vote #54: Rejected 50-50: R 46-1; D 4-47; I 0-2, 4/6/11, Shaheen Voted Nay)

###