By Vanessa Crawford, Special to The Kansas City Star

Missouri’s unemployment rate currently sits at 8.9 percent. That’s a little better than Illinois with its 9.1 percent but much worse than Kansas’s 6.1 percent.

If you’re one of the thousands of Missouri families that’s been touched by a round of lay-offs, business closings, hour cut-backs or wage decreases, that number seems a lot bigger.

That’s why it’s so baffling that Congressman Roy Blunt is so opposed to using our skilled workforce, technological capabilities and bountiful natural resources to create the best vehicle for job creation and economic recovery Congress can consider.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act, the most comprehensive clean energy package the country has ever seen, is currently before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, of which Rep. Blunt is a member.

It includes a renewable energy standard that assures that more and more of our power comes from sources like solar and wind. It has incentives for energy efficiency that will help individuals and businesses cut back on their energy consumption and reduce their utility bills. The bill also limits the amount of pollution companies are allowed to put into our atmosphere.

Considering that Missouri passed our own clean energy initiative by a landslide last November, it would seem that the voters have spoken on the priority of these issues.

Most importantly, the American Clean Energy & Security Act will get our economy moving again, and make the U.S. a global leader in clean energy technology. Dollar for dollar, an investment in clean energy creates three times the number of jobs as the same investment in dirty energy sources like coal.

What does that translate to for Missouri? A study by the American Council on Capital Formation and the National Association of Manufacturers – two groups that are nothing if not business-friendly – have estimated that a comprehensive clean energy policy would help create nearly 340,000 new jobs here in Missouri.

Transitioning to a new clean energy economy will take the skills of everyone from the steelworkers and machinists who will manufacture the new wind turbines, to the electricians and roofers needed to install the new solar panels, to the HVAC technicians and energy auditors who will help to makes homes and businesses more energy efficient. This is to say nothing of the clerical and service industry jobs that crop up around new businesses.

But for some reason, Rep. Blunt is more committed to the status quo on energy, and has dismissed the American Clean Energy & Security Act as an “energy tax”.

To validate this spurious claim, Rep. Blunt cites an MIT study that apparently concludes that such an energy program would cost consumers $3,100.

As it turns out, Rep. Blunt is happy to freelance with the numbers when it serves his interest, and in this case, he’s been caught squarely in “pants-on-fire” territory.

An author of the study has publicly rebuked Rep. Blunt’s portrayal of their study, saying $3,100 was actually “10 times the correct estimate which is approximately $340,” and that the costs on lower and middle income household can be completely offset. That’s right—to make his case, Rep. Blunt had to multiply the cost of the program by 10.

In fact, a new analysis released by the Environmental Protection Administration shows that the American Clean Energy & Security act “could make the median household, and those living at lower ends of the income distribution, better off than they would be without the program.”

More importantly it is precisely the type of forward looking energy policy that will finally cut America’s dependence on foreign oil, stimulate investment in clean energy industries and create millions of new jobs, including thousands here in Missouri.

In fact, it seems like there are only two reasons to oppose a new energy future: either you are happy with the status quo on energy, or you don’t believe Americans can become a global leader in clean energy. Rep. Blunt, which one is it?

Vanessa Crawford is climate change coordinator for Missouri Votes Conservation in St. Louis, a group dedicated to improving the political clout of the conservation community.