No more years for Governor Patrick
To The Editor,
Some have called for a referendum on the subject of wind factories planned in federal and state waters to surround the Vineyard. Well, we're having just such a referendum in November — it is called an election.
We will be asked to give Deval Patrick four more years, or to strike out in a different direction by electing another.
Governor Patrick is unyielding on his insistence on surrounding our Island with skyscrapers called wind turbines — at least 300. We who ask questions are called names (NIMBY) by him and by his Secretary of Energy and the Environment.
The concerns of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife service, which pointed out the total lack of information on which to base such decisions, remain as unanswered today as when they were made in November 2009.
A brief comparison with the studies conducted by Rhode Island before the promulgation of their plan is clear evidence of the slipshod lack of planning that preceded the issuance of Gov. Patrick's Ocean Plan.
His specious, even demagogic, arguments in favor wind factories — lowering dependence on foreign oil, reducing CO2 etc. are easily dismissed. Less than one percent of New England power is generated by oil; the U.S. is a net exporter of oil; wind is intermittent, can't be stored and, therefore, requires backup generation facilities powered by conventional sources.
Further, the governor's insistence on requiring captive energy distributors to get credits only for the purchase of renewable energy generated in the state — notwithstanding the abundance of much less costly renewable energy from elsewhere — is contrary to the public good and would benefit only wind developers and politicians. The effect of this would soak Massachusetts taxpayers and ratepayers without doing anything constructive for the environment.
I voted for Governor Patrick last time with great optimism. Since then, Governor Patrick's administration has overturned the centuries old public-trust doctrine, repealed the ocean sanctuaries act, and systematically weakened and undermined our tradition of local control — all without any public benefit whatsoever. And now that the true costs and burden to Massachusetts ratepayers of the expensive Cape Wind project are finally known, Governor Patrick continues to support this fiscally irresponsible project.
The governor and his administration won't even engage in dialogue about their decision to locate the state's only commercial-scale wind factory in our waters, most recently failing even to send a representative to the candidates forum on offshore wind energy in Chilmark this past August. Consequently, we are left with no other remedy but regime change to effect a public policy change.
I reach this conclusion reluctantly and with a sad feeling, a lifelong "yellow dog" Democrat forced to follow the lead of our great President John F. Kennedy when he said, "Sometimes party loyalty asks too much." I am 75 years old and will be voting for my first Republican gubernatorial candidate, Charlie Baker.
Because protecting the Vineyard's values and our way of life from being destroyed in the name of global warming — without actually doing anything to reduce global warming — is my overriding concern, I am required to vote for someone other than Governor Patrick.
While all the other candidates take a better position on these matters than Governor Patrick, I believe that Charlie Baker has the best chance to prevail, and that he will halt the wind tsunami that threatens to engulf our Islands, and on all levels will serve us well and be an excellent governor.