In addition to selecting candidates who have "pro-green" policies on Tuesday, voters across the country (including here in Pennsylvania) will also be able to vote on those green policies themselves.

In Pennsylvania, the ballot referendum asks voters for permission to borrow $400 million to improve water and sewer infrastructure.

The bond, if passed, would be in addition to the $800 million the 2008 budget already authorized to upgrade plants, primarily in the watersheds that drain into the struggling Chesapeake Bay.

The economy being what it is these days, the issuance of those bonds was put on hold last month because of the state of the bond market.

But that didn't keep Gov. Ed Rendell from promoting the issue during a campaign stop in Pottstown on Saturday.

The state government estimates Pennsylvania has a $36.5 billion need over the next 20 years to repair and upgrade water and wastewater systems. The state has 2,200 water systems and 1,100 sewage treatment systems.

Some taxpayer watchdog groups are urging voters to reject the measure because of the increased debt load it will place on Pennsylvanians.

But Matthew J. Brouillette, president and CEO of the conservative Commonwealth Foundation
which opposes the measure, nonetheless predicted: "Most likely, voters will overwhelmingly approve this measure, just as they have in the past," he said, making specific reference to the $625 million for Growing Greener II in 2005.

Given that most sewer systems in established towns dump sewage, treated to various levels of cleanliness, into rivers that also serves as drinking water sources; and given that most of those towns, like Pottstown, are cash-strapped, it certainly seems like a better thing to spend money on than say, a new sports stadium.

But Pennsylvania is not alone in putting green questions to voters this Tuesday.

According to this article in USA Today, several states are asking green questions and many of them, have to do with promoting renewable energy sources.

According to the paper, three states have renewable energy questions on the ballot.

Missouri's initiative would require investor-owned utilities to buy or produce 15% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020. It has broad support and no organized opposition, the paper reported.

Not so in California where an initiative that would require utilities to get half their power from renewable resources by 2025, setting the toughest standard in the nation, has drawn much opposition. Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, and both political parties say it has too many loopholes.

Another California proposal would authorize $5 billion in bonds to give rebates for alternative-fuel vehicles and to promote renewable energy.

And a measure in Colorado would increase taxes on the oil and gas industry and use 10% of the revenue to promote energy efficiency and renewable sources. The oil and gas industry opposes it.

It will be interesting to see if the recent downturn in the economy will convince voters to pull back from measures which may cost them money in the near future, but save them money in the long run.

But given the nature of the presidential race, don't expect any screaming headlines on the subject until the dust settles.