Letters for Oct. 14: The private sector alone will not solve climate ... - The Virginian-Pilot

Letters for Oct. 14: The private sector alone will not solve climate change - The Virginian-Pilot

RGGI

Re “ Leaving RGGI helps achieve Va’s energy goals” (Other Views, Sept. 26): Glenn Davis’ op-ed supporting Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s effort to withdraw Virginia from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative demands a response. The gist of Davis’ argument is that RGGI is an unnecessary tax on households, Virginia alone can mitigate the damage from extreme weather events, and the private sector by itself will develop clean energy technology.

But Davis’ Republican Party does not openly acknowledge the link between fossil fuels and a warming planet, probably because the party has benefited for decades from that industry’s campaign contributions. This summer’s drought, extreme heat, severe storms, flooding and wildfires are only going to increase in intensity. We can’t afford to wait on Davis’ vague claim that the marketplace will eventually do its magic. This is not a “tomorrow” problem; it is a “two weeks ago yesterday” problem.

Just 49% of Republican voters in an AP-NORC poll believe climate change is happening. Republican presidential candidate Ron DeSantis has said, “I don’t politicize the weather.” Alpha dog former President Donald Trump just told Michigan autoworkers that investments in electric cars are a bad idea. And by rejecting RGGI, Youngkin positions himself within his party as an alternative presidential nominee if Trump’s legal difficulties cause him to falter.

Fortunately, 66% of Virginians in a recent survey want Virginia to stay in RGGI. Clearly, it’s only a small part of an overall strategy. It should also be clear that the Republicans’ lack of a coherent plan is not in the public interest.

David Meyerholz, Virginia Beach

___

There’s pros

Re “ Poquoson” (Your Views, Sept. 1): Santiago Benites Jr. rails against the development of the Big Woods (formerly a bunch of trees) into mixed housing, and predicts certain doom for our fair city.

Years ago a similar development project (Whitehouse Cove) was derailed by a group I call “CANE” or “Citizens Against Nearly Everything.” They claimed that more children would strain our schools (in fact new students means more revenue for schools) and place a financial burden on the city (in fact these upscale units would have been a tax windfall for Poquoson government).

Their success in toppling this project resulted in replacing a mobile home community with another mobile home community, with tax revenues only a fraction of what the more ambitious development would have brought.

So I ask, why does a new, affordable and attractive housing development spell doom? Is it because the new tax revenues might help fix up our “meager little roads”? Is it because new children will help fill seats in our school system and employ more teachers? Or is it, “I got mine”? I suppose Benites has applied for membership in “CANE.”

Joseph H. Discenza, Poquoson

___

Abortion

Re “Abortion imperils global AIDS fight” (Sept. 11): Anti-abortion proponents show that they’re willing to sacrifice the lives of millions of living human beings — including babies and children — because there’s a faint possibility that a U.S. program could be used to fund abortions. Never mind that under federal law, the program’s affiliates can’t use its money for abortions and that the head of the program says none of its funds are used to terminate pregnancies.

Are hundreds of thousands of children to be orphaned because The Heritage Foundation is promoting its latest delusions about reproductive rights and AIDS?

Rabbi Ellen Jaffe-Gill, Virginia Beach