Blue Mass Group

As I’ve said in a variety of places, the worst thing I can say about Joe Kennedy III is that he’s running against a climate hero, a guy who we’re going to need to create a future for our kids. That would be Ed Markey.

You could say it rubs me the wrong way. And I am not alone, as the Globe’s Victoria McGrane reports. It’s essentially quote after devastating quote from local climate folks. Can he ever recover from this?

“It just confounds explanation to me, if he actually cares about the future of this planet, that he feels like it would be a good idea to launch a primary challenge against the guy who’s leading on this issue,” said Craig S. Altemose, executive director of 350 Mass Action, a statewide climate-focused group that has endorsed Markey. “Seems like it’s just a move that is primarily driven by ego and ambition instead of a thirst for justice.”

… [Climate leader Bill McKibben] called Kennedy’s primary bid “a gut punch to those of us in the environmental movement.”

It … goes on. And on. Not good, Joe! [Read the whole article — and subscribe to the Globe, by the way.]

But let me share another devastating quote, a totally sick burn … from JKIII’s own spokeswoman.

“He is also very proud of his own record and looks forward to engaging with voters on this and many other issues in the months to come,” Kaufman said.

“And many other issues”! This confirms — with some other substantiating evidence — that JKIII sees climate as just another issue, another box to check. He doesn’t quite get the threat to civilization, nor does he view climate as a framework that touches on literally everything, from energy to labor to racial inequality to agriculture to infrastructure, and on and on.

And one of those other pieces of evidence is Ed Markey’s challenge of a stand-alone debate on climate change among the Dem Senate candidates. Markey made the challenge right after Kennedy declared, on Saturday 9/21. The Environmental League of Massachusetts has offered to host; a date has been set for November 11; and candidates Steve Pemberton and Shannon Liss-Riordan have quickly agreed.

Where’s Joe? Still thinkin’ about it. How does that Barenaked Ladies song go? It’s been one week since you looked at me/Cocked your head to the side/and said I’m angry …

Anyway here’s the timer — I’ll put it in a prominent place on the blog so you can’t miss it.

We will hear this often throughout this primary: “Markey and Kennedy don’t differ much on the issues.” We’ll even hear that Joe endorsed the Green New Deal — without giving credit to its author, one Ed Markey.

But this kind of talk obscures some very real differences between the two. It’s how one acts on a set of facts, and in reaction to the needs of constituents. Markey has time and again proven himself to be exceptionally well-informed on public-, consumer-, and environmental safety issues, to the point where by the time a constituent realizes there’s a problem in the backyard … they find that Ed Markey’s been fighting the good fight already for years.

Back in 2016, I participated in the People Over Pipelines March. We walked (!) from Sharon MA to Beacon Hill, tracing the route of a proposed gas pipeline. Natural gas, as readers of this site know, is eighty-six times as powerful a greenhouse gas as CO₂, and yet our very-popular policy-master governor recommended approval and even an extra fee to ratepayers to help defray the pipeline company’s expenses.

This was just one chapter in a long line of natural gas fights that have brought together climate activists and local folks concerned with their air quality and physical safety — the most dramatic example being the Merrimac Valley gas explosions of 2018. This stuff ain’t safe — not in the near term (explosions) nor the long term (air quality, climate change).

Where does Ed Markey stand on gas? I’ll give a few examples:

• In 2013, Markey released a report on the dangers and expense ($1.5 BILLION over 12 years) of leaky gas lines. In Massachusetts, the leaks are prodigious, and bringing attention to them (among other things) is the work of the fine organization Mothers Out Front.And again, as you may have heard here:
  

  Natural gas has been touted as a cleaner alternative to coal for producing electricity, but its environmental benefits cannot be fully realized so long as distribution pipelines are leaking such enormous quantities of gas, which is primarily comprised of methane, a greenhouse gas that is at least 21 times more potent than carbon dioxide. [The multiple depends on the time frame;  methane degrades over time. I use the higher number because a short time frame is most relevant for the purpose of this discussion — ed.] Americans also remain at risk from gas explosions and other safety hazards caused by leaky natural gas pipelines.

  Risk of gas explosions … you don’t say.

• In March 2016, Congress passed the SAFE PIPES act, a pipeline safety and updating law, including two amendments by Markey
• In April 2016, Markey poured one out for the Kinder Morgan NED, a pipeline that welp, just couldn’t get contracts to sell the gas. Good riddance.
• In July 2016, Markey and Elizabeth Warren sent a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission expressing concern (outrage, really) at a conflict of interest in the environmental assessment for the Algonquin pipeline. (FERC is known to be heavily captured by fossil fuel interests, a rubber stamp.)
• In early 2017, Markey and Warren called for outright rescinding the permit for the Spectra Atlantic Bridge pipeline.
• In November of last year, in the wake of the Merrimack explosions, Markey convened a Congressional hearing — in a middle school gymnasium in Lawrence — to hear the impact of the explosions on local residents — including the family of the deceased Leonard Rondon — and hold Columbia Gas execs accountable.
  

• In April of this year, Markey and Lori Trahan introduced legislation that would provide stricter regulation for pipeline work — including a huge increase in fines for violations.
  

  For instance, the bill would mandate that professional engineers, who have a higher level of certification, be required to sign off on significant construction projects. An inspector would have to be on site during construction. Utility companies would have to develop response plans for even unlikely events such as the level of over-pressurization that occurred in September, and would have to share those plans with local emergency responders.

  And, potential fines for violations would increase, from $200,000 to $20 million for each violation; a maximum limit for fines would be raised, from $2 million to $200 million.

   

Do you get the idea? This is Ed Markey’s lane. He’s a professional who does this stuff, you know, for a living. He has a long background on this critical, very tangible, at-home, and yet far-reaching issue. It’s classic Markey – where policy rubber hits the road of real lives.

---

Now … Joe Kennedy? Well, he’s a lot slower on the uptake, slower to take the pulse and the side of his constituents. And in fact, like many politicians not named Ed Markey, he’s been pretty neutral/friendly to gas interests: As of late 2015 he was “undecided” on the Spectra pipeline — long after this had become a political hot potato.

in June 2016 he mouthed gas-industry talking points back at constituents concerned about that very Algonquin pipeline.

Natural gas is undoubtedly cheaper, cleaner, and more efficient than comparable fuels …

I believe natural gas has a role to play in the diverse energy portfolio our region needs, but that it should be only one piece of our energy puzzle.

(Yes, I’m selectively quoting — go ahead and read the letter for context. It’s … vague at best.)

And in November 2016, Kennedy attended Rehoboth meeting about the proposed gas compressor there, part of the Spectra Algonquin pipeline. He “seemed genuinely disturbed” hearing from constituents. Perhaps he furrowed his brow. In December he wrote a letter to Spectra, asking a few questions:

Kennedy asks if the project is absolutely necessary, and whether the gas being piped is for local use or export.

He also wants to know about the environmental and public safety impact that the project would have, what the company’s future plans for development are and what impact the project will have on property values.

Residents, he said, have raised questions about how the company will deal with them, how transparent it will be about the project, what cleanup plans it has to respond to leaks, how much noise the compressor will create and what kind of security will be in place if it’s built.

What was the follow-through? I’m happy to learn — anyone who knows can fill me in.

And after the Merrimack explosions, Kennedy called for congressional hearings; and he says he’s fighting for new safety requirements:

Over and over again, consumers are asked to trust gas companies and overwhelmed regulators. A year after ‘noncompliance’ left one teenager dead & multiple homes destroyed, this is unacceptable and it’s why I’m fighting for additional pipeline safety protections in Congress. https://t.co/LFJIZ4xjOD

— Rep. Joe Kennedy III (@RepJoeKennedy) September 13, 2019

Glad to have him along. Does he have any depth, any passion for this issue, which is pretty damned fundamental to the well-being of his constituents?

With Ed Markey, I don’t have to wonder. His record is easy to find, consistent, and (you’ll hear me use this word a lot with him) prescient. He is a consistent critic of gas companies and their dangerous practices; of our dependency on gas; of gas’s danger to a livable climate. He has been living this, as a legislator and public servant. He knows the details; he writes the laws.

For a crisis where time is of the essence, it sure sounds like Kennedy was willing to let gas be that transition fuel, the bridge to the future or whatever they call it. We don’t have time for that. Greta Thunberg has called out a so-called “moderate” approach to climate change; and she is talking right to you, Joe.

“How dare you pretend that this can be solved with just ‘business as usual’ and some technical solutions? With today’s emissions levels, that remaining CO2 budget will be entirely gone within less than 8 1/2 years.

“There will not be any solutions or plans presented in line with these figures here today, because these numbers are too uncomfortable. And you are still not mature enough to tell it like it is.

There is a real choice. We should not accept the facile notion that these two guys are basically going to be the same in Congress, because “they’ll vote the same way.” That’s a flattening of what happens in Congress; it’s just not how it works. Passion matters; expertise matters; persistence matters. One guy really loves to the do the work, and that’s Ed Markey. Accept no substitutes.