Questions for 1st District candidates

As the only candidate in our race with a background on energy issues, I've put out a detailed plan on how to lower our energy prices and make Maine a leader in the new clean energy economy. If we hope to lead the new green economy, I think it's time for us to commit to massive investments in energy research. We need to invest in long-term solutions that bring us the next generation of energy, not just quick fixes. Instead of merely watering down gasoline with options such as corn-based ethanol, we need to develop the next generation of fuels that produce only minimal amounts of air pollution. Wood-based biofuels look like a promising solution and could provide a boost to Maine's economy, so it's a good example of the clean technologies we need to begin investing more heavily in.
--Adam Cote

The current subsidies given to farmers to grow corn for ethanol need to be revisited. Ethanol is not a viable alternative fuel and switching corn crops from food to fuel has already begun to have a negative impact on international food supplies. The increased demand for corn for U.S.-produced ethanol has led to a rise in corn prices, making it harder for families in developing nations to feed their children. While there may be better choices for alternative fuels, such as biodiesels from soybeans, or non-food materials like grasses, we need to ensure against negative impacts on our agricultural production and that we don’t produce a food crisis while looking for an energy solution.
The commodities market can produce huge financial gains and is becoming more and more attractive to investors. But the Enron scandal has shown us this market can be greatly abused and the impact this can have on everyday energy costs. We have to ensure that not only are there adequate federal regulators to police the commodities market but also guard against legislative loopholes, like the one exploited by Enron, that allow manipulation of the energy market.
-- Ethan Strimling

The promises of cellulosic ethanol (ethanol derived from wood) are better than those of corn-based ethanol. Additionally, Maine has a large reserve of wood and could be considered a major producer of ethanol. However, the subsidies provided to corn growers have proved to have unintended consequences. Also, we are now learning that ethanol is neither good for the environment or energy efficient. For example, the price of corn has doubled yet we still provide subsidies to growers of corn.
I am confident that free market forces as opposed to subsidies, tax breaks and regulation are much better suited to achieve our goals. I firmly believe the free market is a much better means to achieve our goals quickly. Finally, according to the May 12 edition of the Wall Street Journal, the Energy Information Administration reports that the taxpayer bill was "$16.6 billion in subsidies, tax breaks and loan guarantees. That's double in real dollars from eight years earlier, as you'd expect given all the money Congress is throwing at renewables.."
Regulation of the commodities market makes sense. Currently, there is no oversight over oil futures. As a result, malicious forces could work to inflate the price of oil by trading futures at the cost of the American taxpayer.
-- Dean Scontras

We are in the middle of an energy crisis. Worldwide demand for oil is increasing, while our oil supply has peaked and is now trending downward. We need to dramatically reduce our dependence on carbon-based fuels.
I support putting more research and development funding into cellulosic bio-fuels, which comes from wood, grass, sawdust, etc. These sources are more efficient than fuels that come from products such as corn and sugar. Additionally, funding for development of these sources could be a boon for Maine’s economy, which is resource-rich.
Additionally, tighter regulation of commodities markets is needed. Just like Big Oil companies should not benefit from higher prices at the pump, Big Agribusiness should not benefit from higher prices at the grocery store.
-- Mark Lawrence

As I mentioned in the question about clean energy research, I think we need more leaders in Congress who actually have experience working on helping people save money by switching to clean energy, and I'm the only candidate in our race with this experience on one of the biggest questions of our generation. I'm also the only candidate to put out a serious, detailed plan on how to lower our energy prices and make Maine a leader in the clean energy economy. In short, I think Congress needs to invest aggressively in discovering cleaner energy, where Maine is positioned to become a leader in new "green-collar" jobs, and we need to make shared sacrifices to lower the amount of energy we use and the amount of pollution we produce. I would also like to find a way to make energy efficient technologies such as hybrid vehicles more affordable for working families.

I hope you'll take a minute to read my position on my website, www.AdamCote.com.

On a personal level, my wife and I are trying to raise our young daughters to understand the importance of recycling and turning off the lights or TV whenever we're not using them.

--Adam Cote

As the United Nations Development Programme Human Development Report 2007/2008 points out, climate change is not just a future worry but one that is already taking place around us. The world is witnessing an increase in extreme weather patterns, droughts, floods, and stronger, more intense storms. Scientific evidence warns that the world is fast approaching the point at which irreversible ecological catastrophe will become unavoidable. The time for action is now. Cutting carbon emissions 80 percent by 2050 is essential and while this will not prevent climate change it will hopefully be enough to avoid the most catastrophic effects.
I would support Sen. Barack Obama’s plan to establish a 25 percent national Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). This plan would mandate that 25 percent of electricity consumed in our country be derived from clean, renewable energy sources, like solar, wind and geothermal by the year 2025.
I look to the future and see a United States with highly efficient cars, fueled by low-carbon alternative fuels, where buildings employ solar heating and cooling, and use extremely efficient appliances and air conditioning, where incandescent light bulbs have been replaced by compact fluorescents. It will not be easy to get to this future, but it can be done and it must be done. This will not be the first time this country has made such a commitment to a new future. We laid the railroad across the nation, we built an interstate highway system, and we sent a man to the moon. It is time now for Americans to take a leadership role in the global energy revolution. Government efforts must be directed towards research and development, consumer subsidies, and business incentives to develop these key environmental and energy technologies. We must utilize these technologies for the future of our environment, but we must also develop and build these technologies for the future of our economy.
In the Maine’s Senate, I fought and won a two-year battle to pass a bill that encouraged the development of community wind power generators through incentive credits. These generators might be a single turbine on a farm or a small cluster of turbines owned by local residents, but they are all a step towards energy independence through a clean, renewable resource.
On a personal level, I drive a hybrid car, use incandescent light bulbs and recycle and reuse as much as possible.
-- Ethan Strimling

The science of climate change should be left to the eco-scientists and not the politicians. We should allow ourselves the right to argue this intellectually without the use of political scare tactics or the censorship of scientists who dissent from the very notion. Many reputable eco-scientists would argue the cause of climate change. While no one will argue the particles per million of CO2 in the atmosphere have risen one might be concerned that some are trying to regulate CO2 as a pollutant. Regardless, all would agree that we are best to reduce are dependence upon foreign oil. Al Gore, the poster child for global warming, chose not a public sector job but a private sector job at a venture capitalist firm that seeks free market solutions.
-- Dean Scontras

The decisions made in Washington in the next two to four years are going to dramatically shape the next 20 to 40 years. This is particularly true on the issue of climate change. Global warming is a real threat, and if we do not act now the effects may become irreversible.
Congress needs to act to support policies that will reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by the year 2050. I took a pledge last November to show my support for this effort. As it stands now, oil companies receive tax credits to search for more oil. Instead, we should use our tax code to create incentives for entrepreneurs to develop alternative sources such as solar, wind, tidal, and cellulosic bio-fuels. Incentives should also be given to homeowners to better insulate their houses, and to builders to construct homes that take advantage of passive solar.
We need to encourage conservation. In our office, we use compact fluorescent light bulbs to save energy, and we winterized the office to reduce our heating oil consumption. Imagine the savings if this occurred in every home. We just need to provide people with the means to afford it.
-- Mark Lawrence

I definitely support public funding and have signed the "Voters First Pledge" to create a system for Congressional campaigns similar to Maine's Clean Election law. While I've tried to spend as much time as possible meeting people and developing specific policy plans, the deck is stacked against someone from a town like Sanford who hasn't spent his career running for office. I don't believe there is a single reform that would have a bigger impact on our country than finding a way to make campaigns about ideas instead of spending a majority of time raising money.
--Adam Cote

There is absolutely no question that we need campaign finance reform. We need to get big money out of politics. Estimates suggest that when all is said and done the presidential candidates for 2008 will have raised a combined total of over $1 billion. Nationwide, candidates for the House will raise and spend, on average, over $1 million each, while candidates for the Senate will raise an average of $8 million each. Clearly the commingling of money and politics has gone too far.
Maine has wonderful system of campaign financing in our Clean Election financing laws. Clean Elections have gone a long way to not only negate the influence of wealthy individuals and special interests but to also open opportunities to more candidates.
I would definitely support a system of public financing for congressional and presidential campaigns. As part of this reform we need to remind broadcasters that the airwaves belong to the people and as such broadcasters have an obligation to serve community needs. Broadcasters make millions of dollars in profits from political ads. This has to change.
We also need to take a serious look at the role of lobbyists and how this combines with political donations. The pharmaceutical industry has spent over a billion dollars on federal lobbying and campaign contributions over the past decade. The industry also has more lobbyists in D.C. than any other industry, over half of whom came directly from the U.S. government. This unparalleled influence has helped them win such things as the Medicare prescription drug benefit that bars negotiating drug prices with the industry and large tax credits and corporate tax relief. Now we see the hedge fund industry spending millions and millions on lobbyists and campaign donations in order to influence upcoming bills designed to overhaul the financial regulations of hedge funds and bills designed to curtail the gathering of non-public legislative information that is used to boost the investment profits of hedge funds. We should not be a supporting a system that lets a member of Congress resign his seat one day and turn up as the president of the hedge fund industry’s main lobbying group the next day. But this is exactly what Richard Baker, congressman from Louisiana, just did. Baker has even stated that given the recent efforts to overhaul hedge funds “it would practically be a dereliction of hedge funds’ duty not to write big check to their congressmen.” We must break the ties between big money and Congress.
That is why I am the only candidate in this race who has pledged not to take any federal PAC money or any federal lobbyist money.
-- Ethan Strimling

As a political outsider and one who has never run before, I am shocked about the amount of money in politics. Time spent raising money should be time spent with voters. However, money buys staff and media cycles.
Career politicians hold a distinct advantage in the fundraising element of public office. The inertia of many years in office results in larger donor lists and files. Additionally, the star power of incumbency equates to increased political purchasing power. Also, as campaign cycles have increased it deters the average citizen from becoming involved. This is the largest travesty.
Public financing of campaigns is not the solution. Ultimately, an informed and involved electorate should require more from their elected officials than that which money buys.
-- Dean Scontras

There are two things in particular that need to be done to change Washington:
1)Significant reform to end the revolving door between congressional employees and the lobby.
2)Public financing of elections similar to the Clean Elections system we have in Maine.
-- Mark Lawrence

I deeply oppose the current system of campaign finance and would fully support a public financing model in Washington.

Although I recognize that I do still have to work within the system that exists as a candidate now, I have made a real effort to conscientious about who I am willing and am not willing to take money from. I am doing everything I can to make sure the voters know that when I go to Washington, I will not be beholden to corporate interests or any other interests except for the people of the district.

-Michael Brennan