Sentinel: Mark Udall "a Johnny-come-lately" on Comprehensive Energy Solutions

I won't say the editors of the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel have followed the lead of this blog's writers, but it's safe to say they've studied many of the same materials and come to a similar conclusion. From their editorial yesterday (you really ought to read the whole thing):

[Mark] Udall is a Johnny-come-lately to the we-have-to-do-everything-we-can solution to the nation’s energy woes. Of course, he really doesn’t mean everything, and some of what he wants to do is nothing more than silly ideas designed to do nothing other than generate votes for his Senate race.

Couldn't have said it any better ourselves. For just a few recent examples:
- Mark Udall: "Shifting Sand"
- Nailing Down Mark Udall's Shifting, Cuban-Centered "Comprehensive" Energy Policy
- Mark Udall Still Says "Heck No" to Offshore Drilling as Part of Comprehensive Energy Solution
- If Mark Udall Has Changed His Mind About Drilling, then What About ANWR?

Nailing Down Mark Udall's Shifting, Cuban-Centered "Comprehensive" Energy Policy

As reported in today's Grand Junction Free Press, from last Saturday's Club 20 debate:

[Bob] Schaffer pounced on [Mark] Udall for supporting drilling in Cuban waters of the Gulf of Mexico, something Udall said he backed in order to give Americans the opportunity before someone else got to it.

In the interest of general consistency, doesn't Mark Udall also want to give Americans the first opportunity at ANWR, oil shale, and most - or even all - offshore drilling in American waters? No. Meanwhile, drilling in Cuban waters appears to remain Udall's idea of "responsible drilling."

Mark Udall's energy policy is "comprehensive" - if by "comprehensive" you mean "any energy source that won't soon be profitable nor help quickly lead to energy independence for the American people, plus a little bit from Cuba, plus whatever else absolutely has to be done to win a few extra votes." That's the best definition I can come up with after following the issue for months. Any alternative suggestions?

Contrast that with Bob Schaffer's reasonable comprehensive energy policy.

Mark Udall Still Says "Heck No" to Oil Shale as Part of Comprehensive Energy Solution

Boulder liberal Mark Udall continues to put ideology over comprehensive energy solutions that could benefit Coloradans. The Glenwood Springs Post-Independent reports that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has worked on new regulations to open up oil shale leasing in western Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah. But Udall wants to fight to keep the oil shale leasing ban in place, no matter what the BLM says:

Republicans have targeted U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., and Rep. Mark Udall, D-Eldorado Springs, for criticism because of their support of a measure that prohibits the BLM from issuing final oil shale leasing regulations.

That ban is set to expire at the end of September, but Udall has said he is going to work to keep it in place. That position has drawn criticism from Bob Schaffer, a former congressman from Fort Collins, who is running against Udall in their battle to replace U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo.

Oil shale isn't the panacea, and its benefits in energy supply can't be fully reaped right away. But there are 800 billion barrels of oil there, making it a significant part of a long-term solution for American energy independence.

Even so, Mark Udall is working to prevent any reasonable process from even starting. Udall is saying "No way" to oil shale, while also blockading efforts to open up ANWR and latching desperately onto the Gang of 10's restrictive plans on offshore drilling.

No wonder Environment America - a major lobbying group that opposes any drilling - has judged Mark Udall's U-turn on energy production insincere. When it gets down to it, Udall's shift toward the center has left him far from supporting a truly comprehensive energy solution. Mark Udall is trying to buy votes from middle-of-the-road, independent voters who want more drilling. To do so, Udall is supporting the least possible drilling that he thinks he absolutely has to support in order to appear that he's on the same side of the issue.

In other words, Mark Udall has gone from "The only place he wants to drill is your wallet" to "The only places he wants to drill are your wallet and off the coasts of four states that don't include the most promising areas for energy development." It doesn't fit on a bumper sticker anymore, but it still doesn't help struggling Colorado families. And it doesn't look much better for the Boulder liberal Congressman.

DNC Could Be Mark Udall's Stage to Show He's Serious about Drilling for Energy

Regarding Mark Udall's apparent U-turn on energy policy, the Wall Street Journal has been on the case. Last week, Kimberly Strassel pointed out that Udall's newfound support of the so-called "Gang of 10" energy proposal shows Udall still isn't serious about real solutions:

Any guesses as to Mr. Udall's other action this week? That's right. He embraced the Gang of 10's "compromise." It wasn't a huge sacrifice, since the proposal mostly limits drilling to a few coastal states, while spending $84 billion in subsidies primarily for the sort of "green" energy Mr. Udall favors. Meantime, he's betting the "bipartisan" nature of that bill will provide him political protection against Mr. Schaffer's attacks, while heading off more aggressive GOP drilling proposals in Congress this September. [emphasis added]

Today the Journal's editors speculate on the possibility of bold action at the Democratic National Convention to dig the party out of its hole:

For example, the platform draft now says that "We know we can't drill our way to energy independence." Then there's the bit about ending "the tyranny of oil," which will require "far more than simply expanding our economic and political resources to keep oil flowing steadily" from overseas and elsewhere. There's also no mention of drilling offshore, much less in Alaska, and nothing about exploiting our vast domestic supplies of oil shale.

Fortunately, Democrats have time to fix these political oversights. If they are serious, surely Democrats will have someone rise on the convention floor next week and offer an amendment that endorses offshore drilling and pledges not to extend the Congressional ban on drilling that expires on September 30. Come to think of it, Democrats should offer this amendment in prime time. How better to steal the drilling issue from Republicans?

It's a terrific idea to test the Party's seriousness about applying a truly comprehensive energy solution that would benefit Colorado's middle-class families.

What better approach than having Mark Udall be the one to offer the amendment? Since the DNC is in Udall's backyard (relatively speaking - as close as Denver is to Boulder), and since Udall has professed a serious change of heart on the issue, why not? Maybe the amendment at least could come from the Colorado delegation, and Udall could publicly endorse it.

The Journal expounds:

Mr. Udall's lead in the polls has vanished. "We've got to produce our own oil and gas here in our country," he now says in a new TV spot. But a campaign ad isn't enough. Surely, Mr. Udall will now want to acknowledge his mistake of a year ago and fight to lift the oil-shale ban on the House floor next month. That is, unless his new pro-drilling rhetoric is merely campaign triangulation that he doesn't really believe.

If Mark Udall wants to take the energy issue off the table, and show he is truly serious about solutions rather than political posturing, he could join Bob Schaffer in endorsing a comprehensive energy policy.

Mark Udall Should Be Asked Whether He Agrees with Pickens Entirely, or Selectively

A watcher reports hearing Mark Udall say - and really, you don't have to listen long in this campaign to hear Boulder's liberal Congressman say it - "T. Boone [Pickens] has it right" - in reference to America's energy policy and the need to break our dependence on foreign oil.

But as this video from the Senate Republicans points out, Democrats have been quoting Pickens out of context:

T. Boone Pickens has been calling for a comprehensive energy policy - wind, solar, biofuels, offshore drilling, ANWR, the whole caboodle, or as some have called it, the "kitchen sink" approach. One candidate in Colorado's U.S. Senate race has been on the same page: Bob Schaffer.

Mark Udall? As another well-known political Mark in Colorado points out, Udall has pulled one of the more drastic U-turns in recent campaign memory, leaving heads scratched:

As to the sincerity of Udall's conversion, only the commercial paid for by his senate campaign backs him up. All other evidence suggests that this is a poll-driven conversion of political convenience.

Udall's campaign website dwells on developing wind and solar power but says little about developing new sources of oil and gas. Instead, Udall falls back on old liberal canards: "we cannot drill our way to energy security" and "not every place that can support oil drilling should be drilled."

Memo to Mark Udall: If you're going to cite T. Boone Pickens, don't be selective. Or then again, maybe you really do agree with him now. It's hard to tell after that recent whiplash-inducing U-Turn. Reporters need to look at Pickens' complete position and ask Mark Udall the tough questions.

Mark Udall's Whiplash U-Turn, Distortions Undermine Credibility on Energy Issues

The day after we reported Boulder liberal Mark Udall's whiplash-inducing change of policy on offshore drilling - the Denver Post's Michael Riley followed up with a piece on the topic:

Battered on the energy issue for weeks, Democratic Senate candidate Rep. Mark Udall moved Wednesday to close the distance with his Republican opponent on the issue, calling for more domestic drilling and reversing his long-standing opposition to drilling off America's shores.

Both were sharp turnarounds for a man who has made the expansion of renewable energy a cornerstone of his career and who has consistently dinged the aggressive drilling policies of the Bush administration during this campaign.

But both Udall and his staff emphasized that the nation's energy crisis called for a sweeping rethinking of possible solutions — and that the country could no longer afford to keep much of anything off the table.

Perhaps the last paragraph should be reworded: "...[Mark Udall's looming election] crisis called for a sweeping rethinking of possible solutions." Let's just be honest - Udall has changed his mind because he was reading the polls.

Mark Udall still has much explaining to do to overcome years of opposition to expanded domestic energy exploration. In the Rocky Mountain News, the Democratic candidate tries to dig himself out of a hole:

"I've always said we have to have responsible drilling," Udall said during the news conference. "I'm not opposed to drilling. What I've been opposed to is the Bush-Cheney focus solely on oil. I've been opposed to (the) Bush-Cheney line that we can drill our way out of this challenge."

By "responsible drilling," Mark Udall must mean drilling off the shore of Cuba.

Udall then goes on to tell intentionally deceive about his opponent Bob Schaffer's position:

"My opposition to (Schaffer's) energy plan is based on the fact that it's a drill, drill, drill approach," Udall said. "We need a much broader approach, a much more comprehensive approach that understands that the future includes renewables, conservation, . . . these amazing fuel-efficient cars."

Does Mark Udall want us to believe he doesn't know what Schaffer's position on energy really is?

At public meetings Bob Schaffer has conducted across the state, Coloradans have made it clear they want to help lead America to a future of energy independence. It’s a positive and necessary goal Bob believes can be achieved by taking a long-range, comprehensive approach.

Helping Colorado advance a freedom-based energy strategy means broadening the incentives, research and investment in renewable energy science, production, conservation and improved development of American-based conventional energy resources. This will provide greater energy security as we reduce our dependence on energy needs from potentially hostile countries.

A leader in innovative energy solutions, Bob’s practical experience spans both public policy and real-world business. Colorado is blessed with abundant clean natural gas, oil and coal resources as well as being a robust producer of wind-generated electricity, solar power, crops and technologies used to create alternative fuels. Additional opportunities exist for geothermal, hydroelectric and nuclear production. Combined with world-leading research capabilities and an energy-savvy citizenry, Colorado can and should be a national leader in achieving energy independence.

Mark Udall is drastically changing his position on energy - the preeminent issue of the day - and distorting his opponent's position. Is this the guy independent Colorado voters want to represent them in the U.S. Senate?

Bob Schaffer's Reasonable Comprehensive Energy Policy: A Contrast with Mark Udall

This ad, touting Bob Schaffer's record in support of comprehensive energy solutions, also highlights a key contrast with Mark Udall. Schaffer supports extending tax incentives to renewable energy providers. So does Udall.

What's the difference? Mark Udall also voted to impose tax offsets on oil and gas companies - all part of Udall's efforts to raise prices on average, hard-working Coloradans who still depend on these traditional energy sources.

Bob Schaffer has a more reasonable and moderate approach that recognizes the advantages of renewable energy without running roughshod over the economic well-being of families and small businesses. Schaffer's solution - a comprehensive energy policy - is more sensible than Udall's, because it's friendlier to the pocketbooks of average Coloradans.