We like to think that when we send legislators to Topeka, they'll have the wisdom and foresight to draft laws that are written broadly enough to cover a wide range of situations and that are pro-active, not reactive.

That's what we'd like to think.

Gov. Kathleen Sebelius vetoed a bill recently allowing Sunflower Electric to build two coal-fired plants in western Kansas. House and Senate leaders have written another one, this one containing a few more "green" provisions.

We still don't see a good reason to pass this legislation.

The bill is aimed specifically at allowing Sunflower to build both of its power plants. The pollution standards would apply only to Sunflower's plants.

Supporters say:

n Western Kansas needs the power. Maybe, but 86 percent of the electricity will go out of state.

n Western Kansas needs the economic development. Is this the best way to get it? The Journal's Duane Schrag has reported that building wind farms will create more jobs.

n Rod Bremby, secretary of Kansas Department of Health and Environment, overstepped his authority by denying the air quality permit on the grounds of carbon dioxide emissions. The attorney general's office said he could deny the permit on those grounds. The new plants will emit 2.8 million pounds of carbon dioxide an hour. Frankly, we're partial to a KDHE secretary who takes health and environment into consideration when he makes decisions.

n The Chinese are building coal-fired power plants all over their country. Who's the world leader here?

But even if we accepted all these arguments, we'd still be against this bill. This legislation addresses only one specific situation: the Sunflower plant. Drafting bills on a case-by-case basis is not good statecraft.

And for weeks, legislators have been talking about whether Sunflower's supporters would make deals tying the energy bill to other legislation. House Speaker Melvin Neufeld, (R-Ingalls), has said he expects opponents to tell him what they want. Sebelius has accused him of playing 'Let's make a deal.' " Ingalls denies it, but not very convincingly.

It seems indisputable that alternative energy sources will be part of our future power supply and coal will play a lesser role as it becomes more expensive.

We look to our legislators for wisdom and pro-active legislation. Now's their chance to show us we are right.

-- Jean Kozubowski, Copy Editor

and member of the

Journal's Editorial Board

Join the Discussion:

Salina.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here. Read our full online terms of service policy.

Post a comment
Your best chance of getting your comment posted:

• No profanity
• Be civil
• Everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

Comment:

Poster:

Enter text seen above:

Read our full use policy.