Wednesday, August 13, 2008

U-Turn Udall: From "Stand" To "Sand" On Domestic Drilling

U-turn Udall goes flippity-floppity once again, this time on offshore drilling.

Mark Udall Ad--“Stand”--5/14/08
Mark Udall: Standing on your own: that's just the Colorado way, and it's what America's got to do with our energy policy. Which is why I've led Republicans and Democrats to end our addiction to foreign oil, develop renewable fuels, and provide tax incentives to grow Colorado's new energy economy.

We need energy solutions--green jobs and a cleaner future--for Colorado.

I'm Mark Udall and I approve this message because we've got to get this right.


Well apparently Udall didn't get it right back in May. Domestic drilling now? Great! Back in May? Not so much. There appears to be more air in this ad than the ones powering those turbines:
Mark Udall Ad--“Line in the Sand”--8/12/08
Mark Udall: We got to draw a line in the sand, that starting today, right now, America’s going to work toward energy independence.

Through new technology and increased efficiency, and with all this wind, why depend so much on foreign oil? We got to produce our own oil and gas, here in our country. And keep it here to power America’s economy.

I’m Mark Udall, I approve this message because we have so much at stake, and together we can get this right.

Besides the rather annoyingly colloquial "we got" instead of "we have to" (paging my old English teachers--see, I was paying attention in class!), this rather large shift in policy outlook reveals a candidate who has read the tea leaves and is slowly losing his once sizable lead. With 67% of Americans supporting domestic petroleum production increases, it was quickly becoming obvious that Udall's special interest allies and environmental record was turning into a distinct liability.

Bob Schaffer's campaign manager Dick Wadhams summed up what that 10 year record of domestic drilling opposition looks like:
“Boulder Liberal Mark Udall has made a remarkable transformation from domestic drilling opponent to suddenly deciding it should be a part of our energy policy,” said Bob Schaffer for Senate campaign manager Dick Wadhams. “It is quite amazing how public pressure for more domestic drilling has forced Boulder Liberal Udall to make such a remarkable u-turn on domestic drilling.”

“Boulder Liberal Udall has voted against offshore drilling fifteen times, voted against drilling in Alaska four times, voted against exploration on Colorado’s Roan Plateau, blocked legislation for oil shale development, voted against expanding refinery capacity six times, and voted against clean coal technology six times,” Wadhams said.
Nothing like running from your record--and tossing in a little domestic oil production as part of "energy independence" that once precluded drilling from the "new energy economy."

Democrats may claim that we will not be able to "drill our way out" of high energy costs, but Udall is hoping to drill his way out of what would be an unexpected defeat in November.

3 comments:

Curious Stranger said...

"We got to produce our own oil and gas, here in our country. And keep it here to power America’s economy."

There's the rub - keeping it here. The only way drilling might have an impact on prices here is if we keep it here and don't allow it to be sold on the global market. Its still not a short term or long term solution, but if you're going to do it, keeping it here and deploying it strategically is the only way it will have any impact at all.

I haven't seen any details, so I'll withhold further comment until some emerge, but I will point out that compromise is not "flip-flopping". Compromise is an essential part of governing - something most Republicans seem to know little about, which is why the US finds itself in such a mess after 8 years of Republican rule.

Chaz said...

"comprimise is not flip-flopping"?

I agree, but Udall is not comprimising in order to move legislation ahead (governing), he is comprimising to win an election. Why should I have faith that a "comprimise" during an election will equate into a vote once elected? Won't he just "comprimise" back the other way when pressure is applied?

"8 year republican rule"?

Who controls congress? The Senate? Name calling and finger pointing are very poor debate tactics (not that it isn't used by both parties). It might make you feel better, but it doesn't really convince anyone of your point of view.

I don't hear anyone accusing Udall of being in the back pocket of Big Oil now that he has "comprimised". When Schaffer is for drilling he is in the back pocket of Oil companies, when Udall does it he is comprimising. The issue hasn't changed, only the polling data (assumtion).

It would be helpful if everyone stopped playing party politics and focus on the candidates. Not thier children, thier wives, or thier party whip.

Curious Stranger said...

"Udall is not comprimising in order to move legislation ahead (governing), he is comprimising to win an election"

You can't govern if you aren't elected. And it would seem to make sense that you would run for election as you would govern. Given this sites dreadful fear of Udall's "extremist" environmental positions, I'd think you all would laud his attempt to find a middle ground.

"Who controls congress? The Senate?"

The Democrats - since 2006. And Bush has been quick with the veto pen ever since.

"I don't hear anyone accusing Udall of being in the back pocket of Big Oil now that he has "comprimised". When Schaffer is for drilling he is in the back pocket of Oil companies, when Udall does it he is comprimising"

No one is saying Bob Schaffer is in the back pocket of Big Oil because he is for drilling. I'm saying he's for drilling because he's in the back pocket of Big Oil. There's a big difference.

Bob Schaffer has been a Big Oil lobbyist since he left office, Big Oil has been a huge source of his campaign funds during his entire political career, and he has been extremely generous in the tax breaks he's given Big Oil in the past.

His motives are suspect.