ICYMI: What a Vote for Hillary Clinton Means for Wyoming

Monday, October 24th, 2016

“Without a doubt, a vote for Hillary will be to unemploy a good share of my constituency. The goal of Secretary Clinton is to go to renewables only – that’s her eventual goal. By voting for her, you are basically agreeing that in the future we will be all renewables. That’s 20, 30, 40 years out, but you are basically starting the process today.

– Wyoming State Senator Michael Von Flatern, R-Gillette

Casper Star-Tribune: “Trump, Clinton Would Take Diverging Paths on Wyoming Coal”

In advance of tonight’s congressional candidate forum at the City of Gillette’s Chambers, Liz Cheney released the following statement:

“A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote against Wyoming’s fossil fuel jobs, our second amendment rights, and our way of life. The livelihood of our state, our families and our freedom rests on this election. There is no question that Donald Trump would be far better for Wyoming’s fossil fuel industry, the U.S. Supreme Court and our constitutional rights than Hillary Clinton, and that’s why I voted for him for president.”

Cheney has been endorsed by the Petroleum Association of Wyoming, the Wyoming Mining Association, the Wyoming Stock Growers Association, and the National Rifle Association. Ryan Greene has endorsed Hillary Clinton for President.

Today’s article showed what Greene’s endorsement means for Wyoming.

“Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton has promised to continue many Obama administration policies that seek to reduce emissions and move toward more renewable energy sources in the country’s future. Republican nominee Donald Trump’s energy platform is primarily about deregulation, including a promise to kill the Clean Power Plan, which is under consideration by the courts. Under the Clean Power Plan, production of coal from Western states could fall by 155 million tons between 2015 and 2040, according to the Energy Information Administration. Two-thirds of Western coal comes from the Powder River Basin in northern Wyoming and Montana.”

The effect of deregulation could incentivize the building of power plants that use coal and be a boon in years to come, said Sen. Michael Von Flatern, R-Gillette. The possibility of regulations on coal has made the electricity market think in terms of natural gas in its long-term plans, he said.

“What if for the next eight years the [Environmental Protection Agency’s] regulations were all thrown out the window?” Von Flatern said. “You want to build a coal-fired power plant — the plans that have been shelved, you could say ‘Hey, let’s pull them out. We can get permits now. We can build now. We don’t have to worry about our CO2 emissions.’”

To read the full Casper Star-Tribune article, click here.