|
Tue Aug 31, 2010 at 10:11 PM CDT
|
| Among the issues that voters are concerned about during the midterm elections, energy may not be a deciding factor in how they cast their votes. However, energy is often considered to be a component of the economy, and the economy will easily be the most important issue during the midterm elections. According to a recent Gallup poll, 30% of those survey said that the "economy in general" is the most important problem facing the country, and 28% said that "unemployment/jobs" are the most important problem. Where do each of the candidates for Congressional District 17 stand on the issue of energy?
According to his campaign web site, Flores believes that America should focus on fossil fuels and develop "more of our own oil, natural gas, oil shale, clean coal, and geothermal resources." Also, Flores argues that nuclear power should be developed and we should eliminate "barriers to create new nuclear power plants" because "it is proven to be safe, clean for our environment, and a cost effective energy source." However, Flores does endorse alternative energy and states that "expand incentives to allow more wind, next generation solar, and other energy technologies to emerge." While Flores states that he supports alternative energy he also is against Cap and Trade and argues that it would "stifle domestic energy development, kill our economy, and cause the export of American jobs."
Edwards makes the case on his campaign web site that there "is no one silver bullet to ensure more energy independence" and that it "includes more domestic production, research on renewable energy and clean coal technology, robust expansion of America's nuclear power and sensible conservation." Also, Edwards supports "tax incentives such as oil depletion and intangible drilling costs" as well as supporting "domestic gas producers to use hydraulic fracturing," and Edwards also supports "increasing nuclear loan guarantee programs."
More Below the Fold... |
|
|
| While Edwards and Flores have similar positions on energy the campaigns have disagreed in the press of the issues. The Edwards campaign strongly criticized Flores for remarks he made during an interview about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, saying that BP had done "a reasonably good job in trying to kill that well under very adverse circumstances." Flores criticized the Obama Administration for the drilling temporary moratorium on deep-water drilling claiming it would have "a hugely adverse impact on jobs in Texas and Louisiana." However, the New York Times has reported that the moratorium did to have the drastic effects predicted by the industry, and that "unemployment claims related to the oil industry along the Gulf Coast have been in the hundreds, not the thousands." According to an article in the Waco Tribune-Herald, Edwards stated that Congressional hearings were "an important way to hold BP accountable and protect the American people," while an article in the Madisonville Meteor quoted Flores as saying that he didn't think it would be helpful to "having a bunch of Congressional hearings and trying to make victims out of the companies involved."
While what the candidates say about the issues is part of how you can judge their positions, who they receive campaign contributions from, is another important indicator of their positions on the issues. According to records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, both Flores and Edwards received significant amounts of campaign contributions from the oil and gas industries. Edwards received $133,630 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry that represents 5.1% of his total campaign contributions, and Flores received $73,452 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry that represents 4.5% of his total campaign contributions. However, it must be consider that Flores made the majority of his personal wealth in the oil and gas industry, and has contributed $670,867 to self-financing his campaign which represents 42% of his total contributions.
Overall both candidates have similar positions when it comes to energy, and both candidates present problematic positions for ensuring a transition for American to an alternative energy and a green economy. While Flores supports the myth of clean coal, Edwards supports the
environmentally catastrophic process of hydraulic fracturing. Both candidates oppose the American Clean Energy and Security Act which would reduce America's green house gas emissions by 83% by the year 2050. Flores has criticized Edwards not for voting against the legislation but for "silently voted no on Cap and Trade," even though Edwards criticized the legislation for increasing "gasoline and utility costs for families, farmers and businesses during tough economic times." Neither candidate presents real policy ideas for how America can move to clean energy and a green economy. However, Congressman Edwards is somewhat more likely than Bill Flores to support policies encourage the development of alternative energy and protect the environment. Either way, it is unlikely that leadership on the environment, clean energy, and climate change will come from Texas Congressional District 17.
Political and Social Thought...
to the Left of College Station |
|
|
