November, 19 2012, 03:21pm EDT
New Report Ranks States by their Dependence on Oil
Smart Growth, Transportation Options, Help Residents Beat High Gas Prices
WASHINGTON
With the busy Thanksgiving travel weekend ahead, a new study highlights a picture of two Americas when it comes to dependence on oil, with drivers in some more rural states paying twice as much as a percentage of their incomes for gas compared to drivers in other more urban states.
The study, the sixth annual "Fighting Oil Addiction: Ranking States' Gasoline Price Vulnerability and Solutions for Change," by NRDC and David Gardiner & Associates, also found a wide gulf between states that help travelers by promoting public transit (bus, shuttles, trains or light rail), smart growth and fuel efficiency, compared to states that do little or nothing to expand less oil dependent forms of transportation.
The report shows the leaders and laggards in efforts to reduce America's dependence on oil, a key source of air pollution and carbon pollution causing global climate change and extreme weather such as Hurricane Sandy.
"The truth is, we must continue fighting to reduce our dependence on oil," said Deron Lovaas, NRDC's federal transportation policy director. "Whether it's by states advancing public transit, clean fuels and smart growth, or by the government supporting development of advanced vehicles and actions that save oil, more steps must be taken to end an addiction that harms our wallets, economy and environment.
"With forecasts that more than 43 million Americans will be on the road this Thanksgiving, let's give thanks for policies underway that are starting to curb our oil use, and hope for more help for travelers in the near future," Lovaas said.
The NRDC report finds that oil dependence affects drivers in all states, but it hits some harder than others. Drivers in every state paid a higher percentage of their income for gas in 2011 than in 2010. Drivers in 42 states were affected more in 2011 by gas costs than during the previous peak of vulnerability in 2008. And on the state level, some states are pioneers in reducing oil dependence, but many states are taking few meaningful steps. Click here for the report.
With respect to leaders, the report shows that the 10 best states for promoting policies that reduce dependence on oil are: #1 California, #2 Oregon, #3 Washington, #4 Massachusetts, #5 New York, #6 Connecticut, #7 Maine, #8 Maryland, #9 Rhode Island and #10 Vermont.
In comparison, the 10 states that do the least to curb oil dependence are: #50 Nebraska, # 49 Alaska, #48 Mississippi, #47 Idaho, #46 North Dakota, #45 Arkansas, #44 Indiana, #43 South Dakota, #42 Wyoming, #41 Kansas and #40 Utah.
Examining oil dependence on a personal level, the report ranks the states by how vulnerable drivers are to high gasoline prices by analyzing 2011 gasoline price data, incomes and gas usage in each state.
For the sixth year in a row, Connecticut ranked first as the state where drivers spend the lowest percentage of their income--about 3.5 percent--on gasoline. At the other end of the spectrum, again for the sixth year, drivers in Mississippi are the most vulnerable to high gas prices. They pay more than two-and-a-half times as much of their income -almost 9 percent--on gasoline.
The 10 states where people pay the lowest percentage of their income on gasoline are: #50 Connecticut, #49 New York, #48 New Jersey, #47 Rhode Island, #46 Massachusetts, #45 Washington, #44 Colorado, #43 Hawaii, #42 Maryland, #41 Pennsylvania.
The 10 states where people are the most vulnerable because they pay the highest share of their income on gasoline are: #1 Mississippi, #2 West Virginia, #3 South Carolina, #4 Kentucky, #5 Oklahoma, #6 Texas, #7 Georgia, #8 Iowa, #9 New Mexico and #10 Arkansas.
"Drivers in the most vulnerable states are really feeling the painful pinch of gasoline prices much more than those in other states," said Dave Grossman, Senior Consultant at David Gardiner & Associates. "At the same time, a number of responsible states are promoting clean fuels, low carbon fuel standards, efficient vehicles, smart growth, and public transit in order to reduce their oil dependence. Other states should follow their lead."
A recent poll by NRDC showed Americans strongly support additional government investment to improve public transportation - buses, trains and light rail - instead of new highways as the best way to solve America's traffic woes.
On the federal level, the oil addiction report calls on the Obama Administration to complement state initiatives. It credits the administration's steps to set dramatically higher fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks as the biggest step ever taken to cut oil dependence and pollution causing climate change. But it says efforts shouldn't end there. The federal government should lower barriers to new adopters of advanced vehicles and alternative fuels, and implement a two-year transportation bill Congress passed last summer in ways that save oil.
Find the report here: https://www.nrdc.org/energy/states/
NRDC works to safeguard the earth--its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. We combine the power of more than three million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and policy advocates across the globe to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water, and the wild.
(212) 727-2700LATEST NEWS
Listen Live: US Supreme Court Hears Outrageous Argument That Trump Is Above the Law
"The American people deserve a Supreme Court that does not hesitate to declare that no one is above the law, including a former president," said one campaigner.
Apr 25, 2024
After months of delay, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday will hear oral arguments in a closely watched case on whether former President Donald Trump should be immune from criminal charges stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss—an argument that legal experts say is both absurd and dangerous.
Listen live to the oral arguments, which are set to begin at 10:00 am ET:
Thursday's proceedings mark the high court's final argument of its current term, and pro-democracy campaigners are calling on the justices to quickly reject the former president's sweeping immunity claim so he can face trial on federal election subversion charges before his November rematch with President Joe Biden.
As Bloomberg's Greg Stohr noted earlier this week, Thursday's oral arguments give "Special Counsel Jack Smith only a narrow window to put the former president in front of a Washington jury before voters go to the polls on November 5."
"With the trial on hold until the high court rules," Stohr added, "Smith needs a clear-cut victory, and he needs it quickly."
Sean Eldridge, founder and president of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, said in a statement Thursday that "the Supreme Court's right-wing majority has already handed Trump a temporary victory by stalling this case for months, allowing him to delay accountability for his criminal attempts to cling to power."
"With so much at stake for our democracy, the Supreme Court should rule swiftly and decisively in this case," said Eldridge. "Accountability delayed could mean accountability denied."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Grand Jury Indicts Top Trump Aides, 11 Arizona Republicans Over 'Fake Electors' Scheme
Had it succeeded, said the state's attorney general, the scheme would have "deprived Arizona's voters of their right to have their votes counted for their chosen president."
Apr 25, 2024
A grand jury in Arizona on Wednesday charged seven aides to Donald Trump and nearly a dozen Republican officials over a "fake electors" scheme in the state that aimed to keep the former president in power after his 2020 loss to President Joe Biden.
Trump, who is currently facing nearly 90 charges across four criminal cases as he runs for another White House term, was described as "unindicted co-conspirator 1" in the 58-page indictment, which was announced by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes.
"The people of Arizona elected President Biden," Mayes, a Democrat, said Wednesday. "Unwilling to accept this fact, the defendants charged by the state grand jury allegedly schemed to prevent the lawful transfer of the presidency. Whatever their reasoning was, the plot to violate the law must be answered for."
The indictment names former Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward, sitting state Republican Sens. Jake Hoffman and Anthony Kern, former U.S. Senate candidate Jim Lamon, and seven others as the "fake electors" who sought to declare Trump the rightful winner of the state's presidential contest.
The names of other individuals indicted by the state grand jury are redacted, but the document's descriptions make clear that former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, and top Trump legal strategist Boris Epshteyn are among those facing felony charges—including fraud, forgery, and conspiracy.
"In Arizona, defendants, unindicted coconspirators, and others pressured the three groups of election officials responsible for certifying election results to encourage them to change the election results," the document reads. "Discussions about using the Republican electors to change the outcome of the election began as early as November 4, 2020. Those plans evolved during November based on memos drafted by [an attorney for the Trump campaign, Kenneth Chesebro]."
Mayes said Wednesday that had the fake elector scheme succeeded, it would have "deprived Arizona's voters of their right to have their votes counted for their chosen president."
"It effectively would have made their right to vote meaningless," said Mayes.
A state grand jury, made up of everyday, regular Arizonans, has handed down felony indictments in the ongoing investigation into the fake elector scheme in Arizona. pic.twitter.com/Nu8GcD4ZqJ
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) April 24, 2024
Alex Gulotta, state director of All Voting Is Local Action Arizona, said Wednesday that "the indictment of the eleven fake electors is one of the first steps required in holding these election deniers accountable for their alleged attempts to take power away from voters by disrupting our free and fair elections."
"Arizonans deserve to trust the election officials responsible for administering our elections and preserving our democracy," said Gulotta, "and this is a positive step forward as we continue to strengthen the foundations of our democracy and restore faith in our elections."
The Arizona Republicreported Wednesday that "several of the Arizona electors have previously claimed they were merely offering Congress a backup plan, though nothing in the documents they sent to Congress and the National Archives backs up that assertion."
"The indictment includes several statements the false electors made on social media that contradict those claims," the newspaper observed.
Jenny Guzman, director of Common Cause's Arizona program, said the indictment "marks the start of a new chapter for the fake elector scheme that has plagued Arizona."
"Arizonans are still dealing with the fallout from the false electors and the Big Lie about the 2020 elections," said Guzman. "We are relieved that the investigation by Attorney General Mayes has concluded and Arizonans can now know that what comes next is accountability. These efforts by these fake electors to undermine the will of Arizona’s voters have had implications far beyond their failed attempt to overthrow the 2020 election."
"This indictment can reassure all Arizonans that if anyone, regardless of their political affiliation, attempts to undermine their vote, consequences will follow," Guzman added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdog Urges FEC to Investigate Trump Campaign Over Scheme for Legal Fees
"By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much."
Apr 24, 2024
A campaign finance watchdog on Wednesday filed a Federal Election Commission complaint accusing former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign, affiliated political groups, and an accounting firm of violating U.S. law in a scheme "seemingly designed to obscure the true recipients of a noteworthy portion of Trump's legal bills."
The Washington, D.C.-based Campaign Legal Center (CLC) said that "evidence appears to show an illegal arrangement between several Trump-affiliated committees and a compliance firm named Red Curve Solutions that is designed to obscure the identities of those providing legal services and how much they are being paid."
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money."
CLC alleges that the Trump campaign, Trump's political action committee (PAC) Save America, and three affiliated organizations "violated federal reporting requirements based on a scheme in which the committees reportedly paid over $7.2 million—described as 'reimbursement for legal' costs or expenses"—to Red Curve.
The watchdog also said that Red Curve appears to be "making or facilitating illegal contributions that violate either federal contribution limits or the prohibition on corporate contributions."
According to CLC:
Red Curve is a domestic limited liability company that offers compliance and FEC reporting services but does not appear to offer any legal services. It is managed by Bradley Crate, who also serves as the treasurer for each of the five Trump-affiliated committees concerned in this complaint, as well as over 200 other federal committees.
According to filings with the FEC, Red Curve appears to have been fronting legal costs for Trump since at least December 2022, with Trump-affiliated committees repaying the company later. This arrangement appears to violate FEC rules that require campaigns to disclose not only the entity being reimbursed (here, Red Curve) but also the underlying vendor. By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much they are being paid—through this arrangement.
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money," CLC senior director of campaign finance Erin Chlopak said in a statement. "When campaigns and committees obscure that information from the public, not only do they make it difficult to determine if the law has been violated, but they deny voters the ability to make an informed choice when casting a ballot."
"The steps taken by the Trump campaign, its affiliated committees, and Red Curve Solutions concealed information about how campaign funds were used to pay former President Trump's legal expenditures, including the amounts and ultimate recipients of these expenditures—and the FEC must investigate immediately," Chlopak added.
Trump—who is the presumptive 2024 GOP presidential nominee—faces 88 federal and state felony charges related to his role in the January 6 insurrection and his organization's business practices. He is currently on trial in New York for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 election cycle. The twice-impeached former president has been open about his use of campaign donations to pay his legal costs.
The new CLC filing comes a day after the watchdog filed separate FEC complaints urging investigations into a pair of Trump-affiliated "scam PACs," which "pretend to fundraise for major candidates or issues while secretly diverting almost all of their donors' money back into fundraising or the fraudsters' own pockets."
Correction: This article originally said Trump faces 91 federal and state felony charges. The correct number is 88.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular