Our initiative, which we call “Friendly 57”, simply restores the very same right of utility customers to “opt out” of the so-called “renewable energy standard” as voters approved with Amendment 37.

One reason voters narrowly approved Amendment 37 in 2005 was its “opt out” provision for Colorado’s REA’s (Rural Electric Associations). However, almost immediately after Amendment 37 passed, that right was stripped out legislatively due to lobbying by speculators, “Big Wind” industry lobbyists, and Greenpeace-type extremists now fighting to keep you from restoring energy choice.

Since the radical eco-lobby has repeatedly killed legislation that would allow the cleanest, most “carbon-neutral”, and ironically cheapest power – hydroelectric - to count as “renewable”, "Friendly 57" concerns only wind and solar sources. These sources are outrageously more costly to ratepayers and taxpayers (due to tax breaks and subsidies) with per-BTU prices at many times that of natural gas, coal, and hydro.

The opponents of this measure realize that citizens are smart enough to see through the scam of so-called “renewables”. They want to force everyone to buy product from the “Big Green” lobby. Opponents are therefore anti-consumer, anti-ratepayer, and anti-taxpayer.

The Amendment 37 measure was sold in 2004 to voters with the mantra, “Cheaper power, cleaner environment”. Both of these snake-oil claims were sold very effectively to well-intended Coloradans, but have been proven false in the laboratory of implementation.¹

Since consumers weren’t buying experimental energy because of its high cost, low efficiency, and limited life cycle², Amendment 37 originally required Colorado utilities to purchase a small percentage of their energy from experimental energy speculators (who have since made millions off wind and solar contracts).³ Consumers were assured their bills would not skyrocket because: 1) there was a “cap” on increases⁴; 2) the mandate was “only” 10 percent of power sources statewide; and 3) REA’s could “opt out”.

Once 37 passed by a mere 6% with those promises⁵, under pressure from the “green” lobby, legislators almost immediately stripped out the “opt out” right, and have since raised the “buy from me” government mandate to 30 percent.⁶ Moreover, the “cap” has simply been ignored.

The conclusions: voters were misled from the outset, then 37 was almost unrecognizably modified. This is the opposite of honest government.

No. In fact, it will reduce pollution.⁷ A recent multi-state study of the effects of the government mandates forcing wind energy onto the electric grid revealed something not even the biggest opponents of experimental energy imagined: unreliable, intermittent wind power forces base load coal generation plants to “cycle”, which is spiking pollution, including areas in (but not limited to) the so-called “non-attainment area” in the Denver Metro/Front Range area.⁸

Shocking but true: wind power mandates are exacerbating Denver’s air quality problems and could bring harsh action from the EPA, which the environmental activists who are pushing wind claim they want to avoid. This finding fits with other studies proving so-called “pro-environment” mandates increase pollution and cause rates to skyrocket.⁹

So opponents of "Friendly 57" not only want your money, but are willing to pollute the environment to keep the money flowing in to the likes of Al Gore and radical environmentalists at Greenpeace and the Sierra Club.

CALL OUT BOX: It’s just like a diesel pickup truck: under steady load and at steady speed, today’s diesel engines are extremely clean and efficient. But step on the throttle hard, and, well, you know what happens!

Finally, even if wind power mandates weren’t damaging our environment, the fact is traditional energy sources and development thereof are becoming cleaner and cleaner every day.

Technology has progressed to the point where the Audubon Society even drills for oil in its own bird sanctuaries. Colorado’s newest coal plant, Comanche, is extremely clean and efficient compared with older plants. And the other “dirty secret” of solar and wind is the heavy amount of mining they must engage in – not to mention the massive amount of coal, gas, and hydro-generated electricity it takes - to obtain and forge the minerals and materials they need to construct their facilities. Their so-called “carbon footprint” is massive.

Energy produced from experimental sources (solar and wind, in particular) is significantly more expensive and less efficient to produce than energy from proven sources. Moreover, it is simply “non-scalable” – meaning it is so unreliable and intermittent that for the foreseeable future, the electric grid (and consumers as end users) can only accept tiny amounts of this type of power. That’s why speculators who invested in it – and lobbyists for “big wind” companies like GE and Iberdola must force people to buy energy generated using their product. But when ratepayers are given a choice, they simply aren’t that gullible.

In Los Angeles, officials now admit their experimental energy standards will increase the average utility bill by 37 percent, a figure also backed up by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Information Administration. They find so-called “renewable energy standards” send utility bills skyrocketing by almost 40 percent, not including hefty taxpayer-funded subsidies and tax breaks.

Not at all.

Amendment 37 was sold to voters as “consumer-friendly” because it mandated utility bills could only rise by 50 cents per month.¹⁰ Once experimental energy speculators got Amendment 37 narrowly approved, their allies in the state legislature almost immediately began raising that “cap”.

Anti-consumer forces in the experimental energy community now want the “cap” removed altogether, which would gut the last remaining vestige of consumer-friendliness originally written into Amendment 37.

Given the sky-high costs and basement-low efficiency of experimental energy, the cap will soon have either to be drastically raised or removed completely. The U.S. Department of Energy’s Information Administration finds that in states that force consumers against their will to buy experimental energy, utility bills are an average of 40 percent higher.

According to scientific research by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Information Administration, wind generated electricity costs more than natural gas, coal, and hydro-generated power, while photovoltaic solar is about 400% more expensive than coal, and that figure may not even factor taxpayer-funded subsidies.

Finally, there is “the dirty little secret” about solar and wind power: taxpayers are fronting billions in subsidies in tax breaks and subsidies to support the entire “renewable” industry. While working families struggle to make ends meet, politicians are astronomically increasing the burden on taxpayers for a narrow political agenda, while pushing for economy-killing legislation like Cap and Trade.

Click here to Sign Western Tradition Partnership’s NoCapandTax.com petition.

After “Friendly 57” passes, if five percent of a Utility Provider’s customers sign a petition requesting an election to opt-out of the experimental energy standard, the utility would then conduct an election through a mail-in ballot. If a majority if customers voting then chose to opt out, their Utility Provider would no longer be forced to buy expensive experimental energy– as the language of Amendment 37 originally provided.

Western Tradition Partnership will partner with utility customers to make the election process inexpensive, efficient, and best of all, honest. After all, you pay the bills!

Absolutely. But much in the same way that the earliest computers (remember the TRS-80 and the Commodore 64?) were underpowered and impractical for mainstream use, unreliable experimental energy can’t meet more than a few percent of energy needs right now. We’re sure it may have broader application someday, but right now wind and solar power are simply feel-good boondoggles that don’t pay off.

In fact, subsidies and mandates are actually hurting innovation in experimental energy. Forcing ratepayers to buy something against their will won’t make it work - much like how giving people a paycheck regardless of whether they show up for work won’t make them more productive.¹¹ Without a competitive market, wind and solar speculators have no need or use for improving their product, when they can simply stick you and me with unreliable power and higher bills.

If you want to see wind and solar power succeed, we must allow it to compete and allow people to choose the energy source at the price they feel best meets their needs. Besides, that’s the world-leading American way of innovation and a competitive market!

A: They are a cynical ploy by radical environmentalists to “poison” the November ballot with a deceptively-titled anti-energy choice initiative, and three more designed to send utility bills skyrocketing. The hope is voters:

• Will be confused by the intentionally similar title of one, and the price effects of the other three, and vote against every energy initiative.
• Will be confused by the intentionally similar title of one, and the price effects of the other three, and end up voting to eliminate consumer choice and send their utility bills skyrocketing.

A: Initiative 96 is an attempt by radical environmentalists to confuse voters by sponsoring an anti-consumer choice initiative but giving it a pro-consumer choice title. It’s a common tactic employed by liberal activist groups around the country.

The intentionally misnamed “Consumer Choice in Clean Energy” initiative actually ELIMINATES consumer choices. If utility customers vote to opt out of experimental energy standards, 96 nullifies the people’s vote by simply re-imposing them through the city or county.

The “fake choice” initiative is intended to confuse voters, in the hopes they will vote against our Initiative 57. The right choice to restore consumer choice and lower bills is to vote YES on 57 and NO on 96.

A: YES on “FRENDLY 57”. NO on “THE NASTY NINETIES” 95, 96, 97 and 98.

WTP staff and members are all folks who enjoy the outdoors and know first-hand the need for clean, well-stewarded lands, water and air. WTP’s goal is to protect the economy and ecology of America by promoting the three things most proven to give us a clean environment:

• Our market economy, which provides the massive capital and charitable giving for stewardship and funding for conservation;
• Technological innovation to help reclaim and restore areas where our environment was harmed by poor stewardship or archaic management and development practices;
• Private property rights, without which Americans’ lives and livelihoods will be controlled by political elites - to the detriment of our economy, environmental quality, and to the Constitutional freedoms which we hold dear.

WTP also fights against misguided activities of radical environmentalists and business entities alike that harm the humans and environment; for example MTBE’s and the ban on DDT.¹²

YOU. We are a “people-powered” spokesman for consumers. We get the majority of our funding from people like you, grassroots citizens and small- to medium size business owners who make individual contributions because they want to restore jobs, affordable energy, and property rights.

Polls show that the grassroots is on our side:

• People recognize that from automobiles to computers to energy and resource extraction, advancements in technology have made America’s environment the cleanest it has been in decades. This, all while supporting more people and more freedom of choice.
• Jobs and the economy trump environmental concerns by 6%¹³
• Support for domestic energy production is near 80%¹⁴
• Generally, Americans are solidly opposed to government limits on property rights
• Much, much more!

Our members recognize that America’s greatness relies on a free market, and that property rights and responsible development of land and natural resources are the best path to a healthy environment and economy for our nation’s future. Any industry funding we may receive comes from executives who realize that it’s important to support the grassroots, and the benefits of good corporate stewardship.

Just click here.