Dear Glenn Youngkin,

I do not believe it would be in Virgian citizens' best interest to withdraw from the RGGI program. The program allows us to mitigate the human-caused enviromental and economic effects of climate change through capping CO2 emissions and market allowances. This program is one of the necessary steps Virginia must take to ensure the future our planet and its inhabitants. We are currently seeing the results of poor action against climate change across the country such as the tropical storm California, wildfires in Hawaii, and even the wild fire smoke that affected Virginian citizens this summer.

Additionally, Code of Virginia Title 10.1, Chapter 13 requires Virginia participation in the RGGI program. An underhanded scheme to undermine the authority and decision making of our legislative branch by providing a cheap, ignorant interpretation of the legislation is not what United States or more importantly, Jeffersonian democracy is based upon. Alternatively, the Youngkin administration should focus their efforts to stop big businesses from ruining our planet. As a young person and devout follower of Christ, I do not believe you're acting under the authority of God. "The land must not be sold permanently because the land is mine, and you are but aliens and my tenets" - Leviticus 25:23. You're actions are directly against God's will and you must repent. Instead of trying to bring an end to the RGGI program in the false name of the people, why do you not make efforts to force companies to cover the cost of allowances vs standing idle as they continue to profit off the labor Virginian citizens?

Sincerely,

A concerned citizen

Code of Virginia Title 10.1, Chapter 13, § 10.1-1330 Part B

B. The Director is hereby authorized to establish, implement, and manage an auction program to sell allowances into a market-based trading program consistent with the RGGI program and this article. The Director shall seek to sell 100 percent of all allowances issued each year through the allowance auction, unless the Department finds that doing so will have a negative impact on the value of allowances and result in a net loss of consumer benefit or is otherwise inconsistent with the RGGI progrom.