Good on ya, Barney! Rep. Frank now says he’s all good with Cape Wind:
“I think wind power is a good idea. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to have it south of Massachusetts,” Frank said. He added, “I am for these principles subject to the navigation being worked out,” referring to concerns over the project’s potential effect on maritime traffic in the area.
Frank said that “heightened interest in the energy crisis” had led to his support for the project, adding that he was struck by the number of his constituents who considered the project “of transcendent importance.” [my emphasis]
Very cool news, and it just goes to show how leaning on your elected representatives gets results.
I’ve called Frank’s office — I’d love to just post the whole letter.
UPDATE: Wind Farmer’s Almanac had the scoop.
The very anti-Cape Wind (and suddenly anti-Barney Frank) Cape Cod Living ran what they say is the whole thing. I’ll tuck it below.
<
p>
Meanwhile, Barney rarely disappoints. He’s willing to put what we say we want into reality. Yes, good on him.
<
p>
———-
I’m writing this response to the people who have been in touch with me about the issue of wind power, and most particularly, the proposal for the installation of wind turbines in Nantucket Sound.
<
p>
My initial response, as you know, was to support my Congressional colleague Bill Delahunt, in whose district this installation would be, and also Senator Kennedy, who has a strong interest in the Cape, in their effort to put a gubernatorial veto over this project into the Coast Guard bill. I did it, as I have noted, not because of any opposition of my own, but because I was following the general principle of deferring to my colleagues on matters of particular geographic interest to them — particularly Congressman Delahunt in whose district this is — in part because I have sought to maximize their help in matters critical to my own district, such as the Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) plant in Fall River.
<
p>
I now believe that this was a mistake, because while the general principle of following the lead of my colleagues on matters that affect their particular districts physically is an important one, it should not be allowed to override fundamental policy questions. This is one of those instances where a series of forceful and thoughtful arguments against my position from people in my own district and elsewhere did lead me to reconsider. In addition, to their credit, Senator Kennedy and Congressman Delahunt took into account the arguments that were made, and while both of them are still convinced that there are sound reasons for opposing this project, they have agreed to dropping the proposal for a gubernatorial veto. This means that no Congressional obstacle will be posed to this project.
<
p>
I know that there are some who are concerned because Senator Kennedy has said that he would like to see a specific Coast Guard role protected in the Coast Guard Authorization bill. I believe based on my own experience with the Coast Guard regarding LNG that this is a debate about very little, in substantive terms. That is, it has been my experience that in these matters the Coast Guard, whether it is given the particular responsibility or not, follows the administration position. It is inconceivable to me that whatever the Coast Guard’s formal legal position, it would veto any project in contradiction of the administration’s policy and the way they have proceeded with regard to the LNG plant reaffirms that in my mind.
<
p>
In the absence of any pending Congressional action to block the Nantucket Sound wind proposal, I want to give my own position both on this proposal and on the subsequent one that was put forward for wind power in Buzzards Bay. I am in favor in principle of wind power and I believe that putting facilities off the southern coast of Massachusetts makes a great deal of sense. I now believe there is no significant basis for the argument that these entities will do undue damage to birds, nor do I think they will interfere with fishing, if done correctly. There is of course also the aesthetic argument from some who find them unsightly, but I do not think that this rises to the level of significance that should be allowed to interfere with a very important non-polluting source of energy, especially given all of the reasons for us to cutback on fossil fuel energy.
<
p>
This leaves only one concern in my mind — navigation. That appears to be less of a potential problem in Nantucket Sound because that is in much more open water. In Buzzards Bay, we are dealing with a more congested and constricted area, and while I believe that wind power is desirable there, I do believe that care will have to be taken to make sure that the placement of the turbines does not interfere with navigation.
<
p>
My position, in summary, is that I am in favor of wind power off our southern coast, both in those waters adjacent to my own district and to others, and that I do not believe there are any environmental or aesthetic objections that should get in the way. But I do believe that care must be taken to make sure that there is not interference with navigation. That is a matter for the experts in this area and I think we should now agree to leave the specific siting decisions to these navigational experts.
<
p>
I should note that with regard to the Buzzards Bay installations, the state has jurisdiction because these are state waters. The Nantucket installation is in federal waters. But the Coast Guard obviously has to play an important role in both places, and while, as I said, I do not believe that they would be allowed by this administration to veto anything that the administration was committed to ideologically, I will do everything I can to make sure that the integrity of their decision regarding navigation is protected.
<
p>
BARNEY FRANK
Which is a first for Bugsy. It was nice to get to read something intelligent there (which was Frank’s letter, in full).
It doesn’t matter (much), but the Wind Farmer’s Almanac scooped you by about a day.
<
p>
http://polnotes.typepad.com/windfarmblog/
<
p>
He doesn’t include much commentary/analysis, but I figured this was a nice chance for me to link to his blog for you nice people here.
nt
“Please join us for our annual meeting Saturday June 17th, 2006 at the Radisson Hotel in Hyannis. Jack Clarke, Director of Policy and Government Relations with the Massachusetts Audubon Society will be the keynote speaker discussing the Audubon’s challenge to Cape Wind and their conditional support for the project. A Cape Wind spokesperson will be on hand to discuss how they have been addressing Mass Audubon’s challenge. Light Hors D’Oeuvres will be served.
<
p>
Location: Radisson Hotel, 287 Iyanough Road, Hyannis MA
<
p>
Contact Information: Chelsea Harnish, 508-775-7796 or chelsea@cleanpowernow.org“
<
p>
Yeah, THAT’S why you need to go to the Cape now that it’s finally stopped raining! It’s EDUCATIONAL! A BUSINESS trip!
<
p>
Yeah, THAT’S the ticket!