Rubens Statement on Shaheen/Steyer Climate Hypocrisy
Republican candidate for U.S. Senate Jim Rubens today called out Jeanne Shaheen for her career record collecting direct and indirect campaign cash for doing political favors for big energy interests, her latest infusion from hedge fund billionaire and climate hypocrite Tom Steyer.
Steyer, founder and partner of Farallon Capital Management, is highlighted in a July 4 New York Times article for having simultaneously pledged to spend $100 million to defeat candidates opposed to action on climate change and for personally profiting from investments in coal mines and coal-fired power plants in South Asia and Australia.
Rubens issued the following statement:
"Jeanne Shaheen's lifetime political career is built on corporate cronyism with big energy interests. She has used her powers in elected office to enrich and protect the reputations of her corporate benefactors. Case in point being her constant catering to powerful energy interests to the detriment of energy consumers and the people of New Hampshire.
"Now, Jeanne Shaheen has cozied up to hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer in a calculated act of mutual greenwashing. Steyer gets cover for his coal profits. Shaheen gets Super PAC support from coal money. They are both using climate change as a partisan wedge issue to benefit Democrats and have frozen potential political progress on the issue."
Shaheen On Carbon
Both Steyer and Shaheen back President Obama's proposed EPA power plant carbon rule, which protects coal states and punishes New Hampshire. To reach the national goal of a 30 percent reduction in power plant carbon emissions by 2030, coal states West Virginia, Wyoming, and Kentucky are required to cut emissions by only 18-19 percent, with New Hampshire's mandated reductions at 46 percent.
Shaheen was a champion of the Kerry-Boxer cap & trade bill of 2009, a 1,758-page monster, written by industry lobbyists, chock-a-block full with special interest carve-outs and payoffs, and hyper-complex energy market distortions.
For the record, Jim Rubens is the single Republican candidate for U.S. Senate who accepts published climate science. He has proposed ending crony capitalism and Washington rent seeking by energy interests and instead allowing market forces to replace high-cost carbon based energy sources with lower cost, abundant and clean energy sources.
Shaheen on Northern Pass
Jeanne Shaheen has accepted campaign contributions from Northeast Utilities executives (see below), has straddled the Northern Pass transmission line issue and has failed to force a fair and open EIS scoping process so that all electricity supply alternatives are considered. Her failure to lead threatens the economy of the North Country, property values and, most importantly, property rights.
In contrast, Jim Rubens has taken an unambiguous position on Northern Pass. If it is to be built, it must be buried, preferably on state-owed rights of way with the ROW rental revenue benefiting New Hampshire taxpayers, not Northeast Utilities in Connecticut.
Shaheen on the PSNH Stranded Cost Bailout
As Governor, Jeanne Shaheen supported the PSNH stranded cost bailout of 2001, resulting in her electricity tax still being paid by PSNH ratepayers.
In contrast, Jim Rubens led the fight against this bailout while serving in the state senate.
Gregory B. Butler
Senior Vice President and General Counsel
Thomas J. May
Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
Leon J. Olivier
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
Joseph R. Nolan
Senior Vice President of Corporate Relations
Entries in US Senate (826)
Rubens Statement on Shaheen/Steyer Climate Hypocrisy
This past Sunday, the Union Leader wrote a front page feature profiling Jim Rubens, Republican candidate for US Senate. An excerpt is below.
U.S. Senate candidate Rubens: Focus on 3 key issues
By DAVE SOLOMON
New Hampshire Union Leader
In his quest for the Republican nomination to challenge incumbent Democrat Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, former state Sen. Jim Rubens keeps two checklists in mind - the three most important issues driving his campaign and the three reasons he believes he's best suited to address them.
The issues are the economy and jobs, the nation's deficit and debt, and protecting privacy in an age of intrusive government.
Why does he think he's the best person to address all three? "One of the reasons is I can remember them," he said during a visit to the New Hampshire Union Leader.
"I'm a thoughtful person and these problems are really tough problems. We are going to need a thoughtful statesman to deal with this...(The full text of the piece can be read by clicking here.)
Jim Rubens candidacy for U.S. Senate is vital to the future of our country. Please come join Jim and me at my home at 849 Main Street, Contoocook and hear him speak, meet him in person and ask him questions you want answers to.
Here is why I support Jim Rubens in this race:
- NSA powers are far overreaching and Jim is committed to restraining this growing branch of government.
- Jim is a huge supporter of education freedom and has the record to back it up.
- Unconstitutionally declared war must end and Jim is committed to making sure we don't repeat foreign policy missteps.
- Rubens has a strong history of protecting 2nd amendment rights and is the best candidate to take on Scott Brown and Shaheen.
Please join this event, invite others and I hope to see you July 8th. To RSVP please reply to this email or click here.
NHDP - ICYMI: Concord Monitor Editorial Calls Out Scott Brown And Walt Havenstein for "Disingenuous" Rhetoric on Women's Health
Concord Monitor Editorial: Talk is cheap when it comes to women’s health
If you hear the words, “I’m not racist, but . . .” you can be certain you are about to hear something racist.
Likewise, if a Republican candidate in New Hampshire says, “I fully support women’s access to health care, but . . .,” you can bet he or she is about to celebrate a decision that limits a woman’s access to health care.
On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that it is a violation of religious freedom to require a family-owned corporation to provide insurance coverage for contraception under Obamacare.
Not only do the words of Brown and Havenstein appear disingenuous, which the candidates seemingly acknowledge with their hands-up defensive posturing, but they do nothing but add to the noise inside the Republican vortex of unceasing cynicism. If the political schadenfreude directed at the Affordable Care Act doesn’t convince voters that candidates like Brown and Havenstein are more interested in destruction than construction, then nothing will.
Contraceptive services are a fundamental and at times life-saving aspect of women’s health care. By ruling the way it did, the Supreme Court has opened the door for religion and politics to control access to those services. Despite their protestations to the contrary, that is exactly what Brown and Havenstein are championing.