Search for...
Follow @ontheissuesorg
OnTheIssuesLogo

Scott Brown on Energy & Oil

Republican Jr Senator


Ease up on big oil companies to avoid high price of gasoline

Warren pointed to a series of Brown votes in the Senate that she said show he sided with big oil companies and held tax cuts for the middle class hostage to give tax cuts to millionaires. "Sen. Brown is out there protecting every loophole," she said.

Brown responded that Warren supports higher taxes, and also said putting more financial pressure on oil companies could raise prices at the pump. "I am on the taxpayer's side," he said, noting that it's now costing him $70 to fill up his pick-up truck.

Source: North Adams Transcript on 2012 Mass. Senate debate , Sep 21, 2012

I'm no friend of big oil; I'm a friend of the motorist

Warren sought to depict Brown as a friend of billionaires and big oil companies, asking "whose side do you stand on?" Responding to Warren's criticism of him for a vote she described as cutting oil subsidies, Brown noted that gas prices are $4 a gallon, and said, "I'm no friend of big oil. I'm a friend of the motorist." Warren retorted that what she called the "big five" oil companies made $137 billion in profits last year.
Source: FutureOfCapitalism.com on 2012 Mass. Senate Debate , Sep 21, 2012

Energy efficiency yes; energy tax no

Above all, Senator Brown is a supporter of energy efficiency efforts which can help us reduce costs and our environmental impact. Senator Brown does not support an energy tax, especially during these difficult economic times.
Source: AmericansElect email questionnaire with Scott Brown's staff , Nov 22, 2011

"All of the above" approach to energy independence

On the AmericansElect.org energy question, Sen. Brown chose 'D' from the list below:Staff comment: Senator Brown supports an "all of the above" approach to energy independence. He supports renewable energy, solar, wind, and nuclear energy, as well as increasing domestic energy production to reduce our dependence on unstable foreign countries for our energy needs.
Source: AmericansElect email questionnaire with Scott Brown's staff , Nov 22, 2011

Cap-and-trade is a national energy tax

At their last debate, Scott Brown blasted his Democratic opponent, Attorney General Martha Coakley, for supporting cap-and-trade: "You're in favor of cap and trade, which is a national energy tax," Brown said to Coakley.

"It's not a tax," Coakley replied.

"It's a tax," Brown insisted.

Senate Democrats support cap and trade. I asked Brown about his opposition to it last month, at a campaign stop in Medfield. "If we don't use cap and trade, how do we reduce emissions?" I wondered.

"You can reduce by conservation, wind, solar, hydroelectric, nuclear," Brown told me. "You can provide a total package and let people have different avenues and different ways to heat and light their businesses. How does government enforce that? They have their hands in pretty much everything. I'm sure there'll be a role for government--and at some point, government needs to get out of the way, as well."

Source: WBUR article on 2010 MA Senate debate , Jan 18, 2010

Opposes cap-and-trade system, but renewables OK

Does not believe climate change is entirely man-made. Opposes a cap-and-trade program, feeling it would create higher costs for families and businesses, but backs what he calls "reasonable and appropriate" development of wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal energy.
Source: Nancy Reardon, Quincy Patriot-Ledger: 2010 MA Senate debate , Jan 14, 2010

Promote increased use of alternative fuel technology

Rep. Brown indicated he supports the following principles regarding the environment and energy.
  • Promote increased use of alternative fuel technology.
  • Use state funds to clean up former industrial and commercial sites that are contaminated, unused or abandoned.
  • Q: Do you support state funding for open space preservation?
    A: Yes.
  • Q: Should state environmental regulations be stricter than federal law?
    A: No.
    Source: 2002 MA Gubernatorial National Political Awareness Test , Nov 1, 2002

    Voted YES on barring EPA from regulating greenhouse gases.

    Congressional Summary:To prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change. The Clean Air Act is amended by adding a section entitled, "No Regulation of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases". In this section, the term 'greenhouse gas' means any of the following:
    1. Water vapor
    2. Carbon dioxide
    3. Methane
    4. Nitrous oxide
    5. Sulfur hexafluoride
    6. Hydrofluorocarbons
    7. Perfluorocarbons
    8. Any other substance subject to, or proposed to be subject to regulation to address climate change.
    The definition of the term 'air pollutant' does not include a greenhouse gas, except for purposes of addressing concerns other than climate change.

    Proponent's Argument for voting Yes:
    [Sen. McConnell, R-KY]: The White House is trying to impose a backdoor national energy tax through the EPA. It is a strange way to respond to rising gas prices. But it is perfectly consistent with the current Energy Secretary's previously stated desire to get gas prices in the US up to where they are in Europe.

    Opponent's Argument for voting No:
    [Sen. Lautenberg, D-NJ]:We hear the message that has been going around: Let's get rid of the EPA's ability to regulate. Who are they to tell us what businesses can do? Thank goodness that in this democratic society in which we live, there are rules and regulations to keep us as a civilized nation. The Supreme Court and scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency agreed that the Clean Air Act is a tool we must use to stop dangerous pollution. This amendment, it is very clear, favors one group--the business community. The Republican tea party politicians say: "Just ignore the Supreme Court. Ignore the scientists. We know better." They want to reward the polluters by crippling EPA's ability to enforce the Clean Air Act.
    Status: Failed 50-50 (3/5

    Reference: Energy Tax Prevention Act; Bill Am183 to S.49 ; vote number 11-SV054 on Apr 6, 2011

    Other candidates on Energy & Oil: Scott Brown on other issues:
    MA Gubernatorial:
    Bill Weld
    Charlie Baker
    Dan Wolf
    Deval Patrick
    Don Berwick
    Martha Coakley
    Marty Walsh
    Steve Grossman
    Tom Menino
    MA Senatorial:
    Brian Herr
    Bruce Skarin
    Ed Markey
    Elizabeth Warren
    Gabriel Gomez
    John Kerry
    Martha Coakley
    Mo Cowan

    MA politicians
    MA Archives

    Retiring in 2014 election:
    GA:Chambliss(R)
    IA:Harkin(D)
    MI:Levin(D)
    MT:Baucus(D)
    NE:Johanns(R)
    SD:Johnson(D)
    WV:Rockefeller(D)

    Retired as of Jan. 2013:
    AZ:Kyl(R)
    CT:Lieberman(D)
    HI:Akaka(D)
    ME:Snowe(R)
    ND:Conrad(D)
    NE:Nelson(D)
    NM:Bingaman(D)
    TX:Hutchison(R)
    VA:Webb(D)
    WI:Kohl(D)
    Senate Retirements 2014:
    GA:Chambliss(R)
    IA:Harkin(D)
    MI:Levin(D)
    MT:Baucus(D)
    MT:Walsh(D)
    NE:Johanns(R)
    OK:Coburn(R)
    SD:Johnson(D)
    WV:Rockefeller(D)

    Senate races Nov. 2014:
    AK: Begich(D) vs.Miller(R) vs.Treadwell(R) vs.Sullivan(R)
    AL: Sessions(R,unopposed)
    AR: Pryor(D) vs.Cotton(R)
    CO: Udall(D) vs.Gardner(R) vs.Baumgardner(R) vs.Buck(R) vs.Hill(R) vs.Stephens(R)
    DE: Coons(D) vs.Wade(R)
    GA: Nunn(D) vs.Perdue(R) vs.Kingston(R) vs.Gingrey(R) vs.Handel(R) vs.Broun(R)
    HI: Schatz(D) vs.Hanabusa(D) vs.Cavasso(R) vs.Pirkowski(R)
    IA: Braley(D) vs.Ernst(R) vs.Whitaker(R) vs.Clovis(R)
    ID: Risch(R) vs.Mitchell(D)
    IL: Durbin(D) vs.Oberweis(R) vs.Hansen(L) vs.Truax(R)
    KS: Roberts(R) vs.Tiahrt(R) vs.Wolf(R) vs.Taylor(D) vs.Orman(I)
    KY: McConnell(R) vs.Bevin(R) vs.Grimes(D)
    LA: Landrieu(D) vs.Cassidy(R) vs.Maness(R)
    MA: Markey(D) vs.Herr(R) vs.Skarin(I) vs.Gomez(R)
    ME: Collins(R) vs.D`Amboise(R) vs.Bellows(D)
    MI: Land(R) vs.Peters(D) vs.Wiedenhoeft(R)
    MN: Franken(D) vs.McFadden(R) vs.Abeler(R) vs.Ortman(R)
    MS: Cochran(R) vs.Childers(D) vs.McDaniel(R)
    MT: Walsh(D) vs.Daines(R) vs.Rankin(I) vs.Edmunds(R) vs.Bohlinger(D)
    NC: Hagan(D) vs.Tillis(R) vs.Haugh(L)
    NE: Sasse(R) vs.Domina(D) vs.Haugh(L) vs.Osborn(R)
    NH: Shaheen(D) vs.Brown(R) vs.Smith(R) vs.Rubens(R) vs.Testerman(R) vs.Martin(R)
    NJ: Booker(D) vs.Bell(R) vs.Sabrin(R)
    NM: Udall(D) vs.Weh(R) vs.Clements(R)
    OK-2: Lankford(R) vs.Johnson(D) vs.Shannon(R)
    OK-6: Inhofe(R) vs.Silverstein(D)
    OR: Merkley(D) vs.Wehby(R) vs.Conger(R)
    RI: Reed(D) vs.Zaccaria(R)
    SC-2: Scott(R) vs.Dickerson(D) vs.Wade(D)
    SC-6: Graham(R) vs.Hutto(D) vs.Ravenel(I) vs.Stamper(D) vs.Mace(R) vs.Bright(R)
    SD: Rounds(R) vs.Weiland(D) vs.Pressler(I)
    TN: Alexander(R) vs.Ball(D) vs.Carr(R) vs.Adams(D)
    TX: Cornyn(R) vs.Alameel(D) vs.Roland(L) vs.Stockman(R)
    VA: Warner(D) vs.Gillespie(R) vs.Sarvis(L)
    WV: Capito(R) vs.Tennant(D) vs.Lawhorn(I) vs.Raese(R) vs.McGeehan(R)
    WY: Enzi(R) vs.Cheney(R) vs.Hardy(D)
    Abortion
    Budget/Economy
    Civil Rights
    Corporations
    Crime
    Drugs
    Education
    Energy/Oil
    Environment
    Families
    Foreign Policy
    Free Trade
    Govt. Reform
    Gun Control
    Health Care
    Homeland Security
    Immigration
    Jobs
    Principles
    Social Security
    Tax Reform
    Technology
    War/Peace
    Welfare

    Other Senators
    Senate Votes (analysis)
    Bill Sponsorships
    Affiliations
    Policy Reports
    Group Ratings

    Contact info:
    Email Contact Form
    Mailing Address:
    Senate Office SR-317, Washington, DC 20510

    Page last updated: Aug 12, 2014