Join Our Campaign


LCV Statement on Gov. Bush's Energy Plan

Contact: Seth Stein, (202) 454-4573 or

September 29, 2015  

Washington, DC – In response to the release of Gov. Jeb Bush’s energy plan, LCV Senior Vice President of Campaigns Daniel J. Weiss issued the following statement:

“Governor Bush’s energy plan is a carbon bomb. It ignores sound science and undoes any meaningful progress we have made combatting climate change. To please big oil and the other polluters that fund his campaign, Bush is ignoring the majority of Republican voters who believe the climate is changing. This plan threatens public health and economic growth by dumping millions of tons of carbon pollution into the atmosphere. Bush assumes that pollution is free, but that only applies to companies and not the public who will pay its costs.”




Oil & Gas Industry Has Donated More Than $125,000 To Gov. Bush This Year. Thus far into the 2016 election cycle, Gov. Bush has received $126,200 from the oil & gas industry.  [Center for Responsive Politics, accessed 9/30/15]


Gov. Bush: “Irresponsible And Ineffective” Clean Power Plan Was A “Disaster” Which “Oversteps State Authority,” Increases Energy Costs, Kills Jobs, And Stunts Economic Growth; “We Should Fight It.” In a July 2015 interview with Bloomberg News, Gov. Bush said, “Obama’s carbon rule is irresponsible and ineffective. First, it does virtually nothing to address the risk of climate change. Second, it oversteps state authority. Third, EPA has gone far beyond its statutory authority, regulating how people consume energy. Fourth, it threatens the reliability of the electricity grid. Finally, as proposed, it will unnecessarily increase energy costs on hard-working families and will cause job losses in many states.” A few days later, while discussing the Clean Power Plan at the Freedom Partners Policy Leaders Forum, Gov. Bush said, “I think it’s a disaster. It’s typical of the Obama administration – taking executive power he doesn’t have. Up until now, the last 45 years, the Clean Air Act has been about inside-the-fence pollution. Now, for the first time, they’ve extended this to require states, in a very coercive way, in a very confusing, convoluted way, to deal with this issue. I believe it’s unconstitutional, and I believe in a relatively short period of time, the courts will determine that as well. But in the interim, this has now been fast-forwarded … I think it’s going to be a disaster for high-sustained economic growth where people have a chance at earned success. This is going to be a job killer. It’s particularly hard for lower-income Americans that are already suffering mightily with higher costs and lower income, lower wages. Now we’re going to place on them, higher utility costs. It doesn’t solve the carbon issue that President Obama’s so preoccupied with, but it hollows out our industrial core. We should be doing something different … This is going to be a disaster, and we should fight it.”  [Bloomberg News, 7/30/15; Jeb Bush YouTube Page, 8/2/15]

Clean Power Plan Reduces “Significant Amounts Of Power Plant Carbon Pollution.” The Clean Power Plan sets the “first-ever national standards that address carbon pollution from power plants” by cutting “significant amounts of power plant carbon pollution and the pollutants that cause the soot and smog that harm health, while advancing clean energy innovation, development and deployment, and laying the foundation for the long-term strategy needed to tackle the threat of climate change.”  [EPA Fact Sheet, 8/3/15]

Clean Power Plan Empowers States To Devise And Implement A Carbon Pollution Reduction Plan Which Best Fits Its Needs, Thereby Reducing Costs To Consumers. The Clean Power Plan “provides guidelines for the development, submittal and implementation of state plans that establish standards of performance or other measures for affected EGUs in order to implement the interim and final CO2 emission performance rates … In developing its plan, each state will have the flexibility to select the measures it prefers in order to achieve the CO2 emission performance rates for its affected plants or meet the equivalent statewide rate- or mass-based CO2 goal … The final rule also gives states the option to work with other states on multi-state approaches, including emissions trading, that allow their power plants to integrate their interconnected operations within their operating systems and their opportunities to address carbon pollution. The flexibility of the rule allows states to reduce costs to consumers, minimize stranded assets and spur private investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies and businesses. States can tailor their plans to meet their respective energy, environmental and economic needs and goals, and those of their local communities.”  [EPA Fact Sheet, 8/3/15]


Gov. Bush: Science On Climate Change Is Incomplete, And Whether Human Activity Makes It Worse Is “Kind Of Irrelevant”; Issue Of Climate Change “Has Been Co-Opted By The Hard-Core Left And If You Don’t March To Their Beat Perfectly Then You’re A Denier.” At a June 2015 town hall in Derry, NH, Gov. Bush said, “I don’t think the science is complete. The whole idea that people have already made up their minds about this, they use this argument, it’s all over and anybody that disagrees is a caveman or something. I don’t think that. But I do think we need to create long-term policies of adaptation. Because the climate is changing, whether men are doing it or not — in the case of the sea level rising in Miami — is kind of irrelevant. So that’s where I think the focus ought to be, is to depoliticize this issue and create policies of adaptation.” In May 2015, he said, “The problem is climate change has been co-opted by the hard-core left and if you don’t march to their beat perfectly then you’re a denier.” And just a few days ago, during, he added, “I oppose the president’s policies as it relates to climate change, because it will destroy the ability to reindustrialize the country to allow for people to get higher wage jobs, for people to rise up.”  [Daily Signal, 5/21/15; Huffington Post, 9/24/15; Concord Monitor, 6/17/15]

97 Percent Of Scientists Agree That “Climate-Warming Trends Over The Past Century Are Very Likely Due To Human Activities.” According to NASA, “Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.”  [NASA Global Climate Change, Vital Signs of the Planet]

Pentagon: Climate Change Is A Threat To National Security; U.S. Must “Grapple Now With The Implications Of A Warming Planet,” Free Of “Politics Or Ideology.” In October the Defense Dept. released a report on the impact of climate change which said that “drastic weather, rising seas and changing storm patterns could become ‘threat multipliers’ for the United States, vastly complicating security challenges faced by American forces … The report, described as a ‘climate change adaptation roadmap,’ included a foreword from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel in which he urged the nation’s military’s planners to grapple now with the implications of a warming planet, even as scientists are ‘converging toward consensus on future climate projections.’ ‘Politics or ideology must not get in the way of sound planning,’ Hagel said. ‘Our armed forces must prepare for a future with a wide spectrum of possible threats, weighing risks and probabilities to ensure that we will continue to keep our country secure.’”  [Washington Post, 10/13/14]


Gov. Bush: Keystone XL Pipeline Is A “No Brainer.” In a February 2015 Facebook post, Gov. Bush stated, “The Keystone pipeline is a no brainer. Moves us toward energy independence & creates jobs. President Obama must stop playing politics & sign the bill.”  [Jeb Bush Facebook, 2/24/15]

Keystone XL Pipeline Would Exacerbate The Negative Effects Of Climate Change. According to a September 2015 Vox article, “In order to avoid a drastic rise in temperatures, humanity needs to shift away from fossil-fuels very soon. That means leaving the vast majority of our current reserves of oil, gas, and coal in the ground. If we burn every last bit of oil and coal we can, we'll do severe damage to the planet and ourselves. Canada's oil sands get special attention here. Because it takes a lot of energy to extract usable oil from this gooey sand-clay mixture, oil sands are worse for the climate than regular oil. When considered across the entire life-cycle — from mining to use in your car — a barrel of oil-sands crude creates 17 percent more greenhouse-gas emissions than the average barrel of oil used in the United States.”  [Vox, 9/22/15]

Keystone XL Pipeline Is Unsafe; An Oil Spill Would “Threaten The Land And Water Supply Of 110,00 [American] Ranches And Farms,” As Well As “More Than 3,000 Wells That Provide Drinking And Irrigation Water.” According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, “Studies show that tar sands pipelines are more vulnerable to leaks than those carrying traditional crude because of the oil's corrosive nature and the chemicals necessary to make it run through the pipes. Despite the industry's grand safety claims, we also know from recent spills and subsequent government investigations that its leak-detection systems are subpar and its spill containment and clean-up methods inadequate … A pipeline spill would threaten the land and water supply of some 110,000 ranches and farms in Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska that produced more than $40 billion worth of food in 2012. In those three states alone, the pipeline would cross 1,073 rivers, lakes, and streams, including the Yellowstone River in Montana and the Platte River in Nebraska, along with tens of thousands of acres of wetlands. It would also run within a mile of more than 3,000 wells that provide drinking and irrigation water in those states.”  [NRDC, accessed 9/30/15]

Keystone XL Pipeline Is Bad For The Economy. The Natural Resources Defense Council reported, “The reality is, Keystone XL would likely kill more jobs than it would add. According the State Department, it would create 1,950 construction jobs for two years. Once complete? Thirty-five new permanent American jobs, according to pipeline builder TransCanada. But won't refined tar sands oil help fuel the United States and reduce gas prices? Think again. Tar sands miners want Keystone XL because it will help them ship oil overseas to an international market, where their product will fetch more money and add billions of dollars in annual profits. That's a losing deal for everyone -- except Big Oil.”  [NRDC, accessed 9/30/15]

Powered by Blackbaud
nonprofit software