So when you think about the pros and cons of this, what do you think about that argument that, hey, maybe we are adding to the overall cost in a way that other states aren't, and other states might also be getting environmental benefits just from energy and efficiency projects and other green initiatives that they might be championing on their own that don't come with this type of price tag.

Well, all of those benefits that you're referring to also come from RGGI.

So energy efficiency savings, investments in renewable energy, those things are actually funded by the RGGI program.

So that price that you're referring to is coming from the polluters.

The polluters and the power plants that are emitting carbon dioxide, greenhouse gas pollutant, they're the ones that are paying this price that you're referring to, which is then being utilized to reinvest into the system.

And that is what actually creates those benefits to save households money.

And so I think that's really what we should be focused on is the benefits that the program is providing, not to mention the fact that the cost of the program in terms of the cost of allowances is not even close to what the actual cost of these greenhouse gas emissions are in terms of their impact on the climate.

Where does that come into play and is that something that's been part of the equation in the past or is there something unique about the energy landscape now that warrants that type of potential for relief?