|
Energy Secretary Chu's Vision of
Weatherization's Future /Our Challenges
The Latest Challenge: It seems clear the Administration would prefer NOT to fund the regular WAP from the FY 2011 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy appropriation agreed to, which is 80% of the Request. DOE would opt instead for funding a few more competitive "innovation" grants to "non-traditional" local agencies.
If WAP takes its share of the 20% cut in the entire 'EERE' budget, our funding would be $168 M. States that are finishing ARRA by fall and planning to shift to 'regular' funds will lose a lot more jobs than expected.
In an effort to prevent this cut, Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) today sent a letter to the Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee asking for instructions to DOE that it spend WAP and State Energy Program dollars in the regular program.
Tuesday morning we will be helping Bingaman's effort by asking more Senators to write Appropriators. By Wednesday, we will be seeking letters to Secretary Chu from Senators whose states will demonstrably lose jobs under this 'policy'. A strong show of support for regular WAP now may also buffer the future program against the policy shift Chu suggested in press remarks ten days ago- which we describe more below.
You can help: We need the following information and projections about WAP jobs with and without the 2011 funding. Jobs are the most persuasive results for the Democrats whose enthusiasm we must recapture. Please share the following with your Associations to forward to us by Wednesday COB.
- When will your WAP ARRA funding run out ?
- At that time, what is your plan for funding any WAP work ? Regular funds ? New Utility funds?
- If you do not get the regular 2011 funds at last year's level, how many MORE jobs lost than if you do get them? [only list jobs lost in your PY 2011 year.]
Celebrate your successes publicly. Prepare to issue reports and to highlight your successful workers using your ARRA quarterly data . The week after Easter is the right timing to connect with the White House jobs reports on the 30th. A move to cancel funding in favor of long-term research may seem even more unthinkable.
What IS The Administration's Long-term View ?
This video of Secretary Chu's remarks at a press breakfast on April 1 makes it clear: interest in a new policy, one that changes the Weatherization program to an initiative that requires matching funds, including client and landlord funds, comes from a very high level.
As he was answering a question about LIHEAP cuts, Secretary began explaining why investing federal funds for the cost of improvements to low-income homes is no longer appropriate in tough fiscal times. He outlined his alternative to weatherizing 750,000 homes for $5 billion, the level expected from ARRA: "For $2 billion (in federal funds) you can weatherize 10 billion homes." (He perhaps meant 10 million.) Chu also restated the goal that we already know to be most important to the Administration- incentivizing energy efficiency purchases by middle class homeowners and businesses.
There are three unpleasant surprises in the Secretary's remarks:
- That is not the Administration position expressed in the 2012 Budget Request for $320 million. Nevertheless, it certainly raises questions about whether the Chu team is defending the President's WAP request to Congress vigorously.
- His apparent certainty that a small incentive, such as a rebate or cheaper credit, will "leverage" funds from building owners to finance the program regardless of their income ; and
- The fact that he sounds so convinced that the current Weatherization Program model - paying for the work in homes of those who have no funds for such investments - has no real future.
A few more disappointments that Community Action and our friends on the Hill are already seeking to overcome...
Thank you again for your hard work and perseverance.
David Bradley
Executive Director
National Community Action Foundation
| 
