#ncga: Solar. Mike Hager was AGAINST IT (before he started lobbying FOR IT)

For those of you sold on the concept of former state Rep. Mike Hager as some kind of principled, rock-ribbed conservative — think again.  

Hager established quite a record in the House of opposing various scams of the solar goons.  He even opposed the notorious SB554, which would have allowed private developers to build solar-powered schools and lease them back to local governments.  The solar goons in the GOP even tried to primary him.    My how things change.

Now, Hager is out of the House and trading on his Jones Street experience as a lobbyist.  Here he is on Facebook celebrating his “first” lobbying “win”:

Yep.  He’s lobbying for basically the same build-solar-schools-with-government-money bill that he supposedly fought last session.  It’s a new year.  New bill number.  Same monkey business.  

I think the dance Hager is doing is called “The Jones Street Twist.”  All you have to do is throw some cash at your partner and watch them get all contorted while trying to scoop it all up.  


10 comments for “#ncga: Solar. Mike Hager was AGAINST IT (before he started lobbying FOR IT)

  1. ALGore
    April 30, 2017 at 9:12 pm

    Many of your Republicans are for sale to the highest bidder. We found that out when our hard core environmental movement bought those two progressive Republican consultants, Shumaker and Stewart, and that has paid off for us with their clients. These progressive Republicans will sell out their principles for cash any day. People like Saine and Bell have long sold out to President Obama’s agenda.

    Hager was a tough one as a legislator, as he was one of those nasty conservatives who kept their principles. However once he became a lobbyist, he also became a prostitute who would turn a trick for whatever john was paying him. That is just the nature of the beast. It is much easier to buy a lobbyist than buy a legislator, although we have found quite a few progressive Republican legislators who will turn tricks for whoever is paying them, too.

  2. Mike Hager
    May 1, 2017 at 8:25 am

    In the past I have had respect for your efforts to hold Republicans accountable, but I must respectfully disagree with you on H600. This bill does not contain any mention of inclusion of solar energy or any other form of renewable energy, nor does it allow the use of state dollars. Please read the bill and let me know where there are any “goodies” for the solar crowd. H600 is much different than the idea put forth last session and gives Tier 1 counties another option, which they do not have to take, I agree with what you attempted to do here but please read the bill.


    Mike Hager

    • Brant Clifton
      May 1, 2017 at 9:58 am

      Mr. Hager,

      THIS story here ==> http://robesonian.com/news/88041/schools-plan-stuck from Robeson County features the developers (the guys paying your salary) talking about powering these new schools with solar energy..

      • Mike Hager
        May 1, 2017 at 10:40 am

        H600, does not put a preference on the type of energy used , nor does it use state dollars. This process is open to any developer that follows the state procurement process. How the schools they build are powered is completely up to the developer and the county folks. Please read the bill.

        • Brant Clifton
          May 1, 2017 at 12:31 pm

          Again, the developer is making no bones about building “solar-powered” schools. THAT involves a lot of state money (REPS, anyone?). By the way, WHO exactly is your client on this lobbying gig?

          • Mike Hager
            May 1, 2017 at 1:10 pm

            Mr. Clifton,
            This is the last comment I will have on this subject. First, you have apparently decided a year old news story about a bill last session is more factual than what actual in H600. I cannot fix your unwilliness to recognize facts. Second, you have ignored the contents of H600 and decided what you would like it to be. I cannot fix you reading into a bill things that most folks can see aren’t there. Third, H600 aids poorer counties to help in school construction, replacing 50+ year old schools. I cannot fix the fact that you are focusing on those you do not like instead of focusing on helping children in terrible buildings get a better environment to learn. Fourth, I do not have a client who is interested in solar energy, the records are public in the Secretary of State’s website. I cannot fix your rushing to judgement before you check the facts. Fifth, recognizing the blatant disregard for the facts on this issue has made me as well as others question the other stories you have posted. I cannot fix the lack of integrity that has been highlighted by your misrepresentation of this issue. Sixth, for you, just read the bill why don’t you? If you print this comment, I want to encourage others to read the bill and make your mind up for yourself. You can send questions and comments by message to my Facebook.

          • Brant Clifton
            May 1, 2017 at 1:30 pm

            The secretary of state web site says you lobby this year for TA Loving. TA Loving is in a partnership with the very same developer who is telling everybody he plans to build and lease solar powered schools. So, you are doing the bidding of Big Solar.

        • john steed
          May 1, 2017 at 9:49 pm

          You may have been smart enough, Mike, to not spill the beans in the language of the bill, but it looks like a developer tied to this scheme DID spill the beans on the solar connection in a newspaper interview. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck.

  3. MikeHager
    May 1, 2017 at 9:15 am

    You guys are so easily suckered….

  4. Esmerelda
    May 1, 2017 at 1:23 pm

    Well, that was interesting. Yes, we are easily suckered. Those of us who voted for and trust anyone who ran as a conservative, are the biggest suckers in the state. But, at least we aren’t whores.

Comments are closed.