If you want us to email Mrs. Clinton, you will have to post her email. It's pretty hard to email any senator or congressman not in your state or district.

John, You can email Senator Clinton directly using this online form: http://clinton.senate.gov/contact/webform.cfm?subj=issue And you can see other ways of contacting her here: http://clinton.senate.gov/contact/

I just went to the contact form on her website and sent an email without any problems, and I don't live in New York. Whether or not she responds is another issue.

i wrote mrs. clinton a email at her govt. website in her message box then i checked my personal email and got her confirmation that she had recieved her message. im sure one of her assistants will look at the message so if enough of the pickensplan members mail her she will see that this is serious stuff when thousands of people contact her. i personally like her and think shes a fighter from everything she has experienced in her bid for president and should make her a stronger person. just think if she could fight for the pickensplan and then with all of the other senators together and have all the congress together on one page about our energy future and reduceing our dependency upon foreign oil if not eliminating it all together for our country's future. i look forward to the first 100 days after jan. 1

Here is Senator Clinton's automated email response going out to emails received that are not from NY. Dear Friend: Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns with me via e-mail. I hope you will understand that, because of the volume of e-mails I receive from residents of New York State, I cannot at this time respond to messages received from residents of other states. I encourage you to contact your U.S. senators if you have an issue or concern that needs immediate attention. You can access your senators electronically by visiting http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index_by_state.cfm for a listing of their contact information. If you are still interested in learning more about the work I am doing on behalf of New York State, I hope you will continue to monitor my work through my website at http://clinton.senate.gov. Sincerely, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton New York State

1. Many homes heat with natural gas and stoves use natural gas for cooking. If you replace that natural gas with wind-generated electricity, how do you plan to rig the existing facilities run on natural gas? 2. Why this plan so late in the game? Many of us for years have been asking for entrepeneurial effort in alternative energy? 3. Along those lines, I am very skeptical of anymore Nanny state regulations in the name of "public use" and national security such as recent Supreme Court takings cases. Are you committed to pushing government to lessen, not increase, regulations so that free enterprise can commence to solve these problems that our increasingly fascist government has exacerbated?

My Senator is Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison United States Senator 284 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510 If you are from Texas, write her.

LadyLiberty, 1. No where in the plan is there anything about replacing residential or commercial natural gas service. The wind energy contribution would actually free up gas, which is now tied up in electric generation, for other uses, including local natural gas service and transportation. Sorry if that was not clear. Also, note that while oil is getting harder and more expensive to find, natural gas reserves and supplies are on the rise due to the new technologies that allow it to be extracted from shale. However, in recognition of that fact that natural gas is not a boundless resource, the Pickens plan only sees natural gas as a way to buy us the time necessary to convert more fully to renewables. Plug in electric hybrid Mac Trucks, for example, are not on the menu yet. But natural gas powered ones might be. 2. Well, that's an excellent question. I've been waiting since I was first made aware of the issues in 1974 at age 11. I'm truly optimistic, after 34 years, that this plan might actually get implemented. 3. The plan would be helped by government *incentives* which reward those who pursue and use renewable energy sources, in general, and use natural gas for transportation. (The initial focus is on trucks and other commercial fleets, which are not easily transitioned to, say, plugin hybrid electrics, and for which fueling is not as much of an issue as for regular cars.) Mr. Pickens fully recognizes that for the plan to succeed, utilities, and other companies involved must perceive a good economic reason for doing these things. Our electric utility here in central and western Oklahoma, OG

(The commenting system did not like the ampersand in OS ampersand E and cut off my post.) Our electric utility here in central and western Oklahoma, OG ampersand E, already employs 170MW of wind energy, and are happy enough with the bottom line that they in the process of expanding that to 770MW. So for much of the plan, government incentives (as opposed to "nanny" regulations) will simply save precious time. Remember, we're spending $700 billion per year (and rising) on imported oil. Likely $10 trillion over the next 10 years. Time is money. Incentives are cheap compared to the enormity of those export dollar figures. And as a conservative republican and long-time oil man, I really don't see Mr. Pickens calling for restrictive regulation. Also, I apologize for the poor formatting of my previous post

I firmly believe that this is the best plan going forward and needs to be implemented. Yes, the grid is faultering but the money saved as stated in the video from not buying foreign oil can be reinvested in upgrading the grid infrastructure. Folks, we are at the precipice of a very important juncture regarding global warming. We do not know the exact tipping point of not being able to repair what we as a species have done to our planet. But what we do know is that we need to stop using oil and coal as our fuel sources and this plan is a very good beginning.

The link to Sen Clinton's email is right in the message above; I did it and it's very easy to get a message thru to her. Please mention that NG vehicles are a reality in California and Utah mainly because the refueling infrastructure is filling in, and cost of fuel in Utah is 63 to 80 cents /gallone (gas equivalent). Half the vehicles in Argentina are NG; why aren't WE pushing this in the U.S. ?!?!? Her sub-committe on Clean Air and Nuclear safety could propose a mandate that some existing government vehicles convert to NG and new government vehicles should be NG. Also that any Interstate highway service area MUST offer NG refueling. Every major car maker has NG models they sell overseas, and until 2003 most sold them in the US; they just need to renew the EPA approvals and we at the Pickens Plan are DONE! $1.00 a gallon fuel will sell itself once this becomes public knowledge. Articles on the NG vehicle boom in Utah: http://www.kutv.com/content/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=6b29cc7e-44e3-4339-8652-6febb1c6601d http://www.kengarffhondadowntown.com/natural_gas_vehicles.htm?bhcp=1 http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/SavingandDebt/SaveonaCar/FillUpFor5DollarsYouCanInUtah.aspx http://www.lubbockonline.com/stories/050108/bus_274066949.shtml Dr Mark