A serious national energy policy and discussion about the trade-offs between development and its environmental, social and infrastructure impacts have not caught on as part of the national dialog. In Colorado however those issues are front and center in the senate race between Mark Udall and Bob Schaffer. Here's a recap from yesterday's Club 20 debate between the candidates, from The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
Potential oil shale development, water and U.S. energy policy drew sharp lines between U.S. Senate candidates Mark Udall and Bob Schaffer as they debated before Club 20 on the Western Slope Saturday night...
Udall, citing a Grand Junction Daily Sentinel editorial opposing leasing oil shale tracts until vital questions about water and power can be answered, called for a continued moratorium on leasing by the Bureau of Land Management. "We're not going to turn northwest Colorado into a sacrifice zone with so many unknowns," the Democratic 2nd District congressman said. "Counties and communities on the West Slope are urging the BLM to go slow."
Schaffer, the former congressman from the 4th District, said he believes the moratorium is "counterproductive. It keeps us from asking the questions we need. Applicants need to know the rules, lease sizes, royalties." He said Udall, U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., and Gov. Bill Ritter "have done nothing about these questions." Schaffer said there is "no rush to development. We're probably 10 to 15 years away from a business standpoint."
Udall said he has "already joined" the so-called "Gang of 16" senators who are proposing a comprehensive energy plan for the county, which he said is "an opportunity to throw the kitchen sink at energy." Among other things, he said, the bill calls for off-shore drilling, nuclear power, coal, oil and gas, renewables and car efficiency standards. But Schaffer said there is a "bipartisan bill on the House floor right now, but the House took time to go on vacation." He said the Gang of 16 proposal is "drive-by energy policy" and called for development of American energy...
Schaffer slammed Udall for supporting a reduction of Colorado's oil and gas royalties, which used to be split 50-50 between the federal government and the states where oil and gas development is occurring. The recent change means the federal government keeps 51 percent, with states getting 49 percent. Udall said the Bush administration was responsible for inserting the change, "and we're working to fix it."
Udall also attacked Schaffer for supporting Referendum A, a 2003 ballot measure that would have provided $2 billion for financing of water projects. The measure failed in all of the state's counties. He said former Rep. Scott McInnis, R-Colo., "accused you (Schaffer) of selling out the Western Slope and the San Luis Valley with Referendum A." "I happen to be in favor of water storage," Schaffer responded. "I voted for it."
Helped by the debate's format, the event produced one of those rare moments on this campaign when Udall and Republican Bob Schaffer confronted each other with their own questions. And neither held back. Udall asked whether Schaffer regretted a fact-finding trip to the Northern Mariana Islands which turned out to be paid for by allies of jailed lobbyist Jack Abramoff. (Schaffer said no).
And Schaffer asked why Udall authored a bill to allow American companies to drill off the coast of Cuba, potentially helping prop up the communist regime. (Udall gave no clear answer).
Near the debate's end, the two were asked to come up with three things on which they would vote differently from Wayne Allard, the Republican who currently holds the seat. Udall ticked off a list of major votes: Allard's vote for the Iraq war (which Udall opposed); his vote against a Federal Renewable Electricity Standard (which over time would require 20 percent of the nation's electricity to come from renewable sources); and the vote by Allard for the Bush tax cuts (Udall supports tax cuts targeted at the middle class). Schaffer paused for a moment, and then said he could think of only a few minor differences he has with Allard, in whose footsteps Schaffer has often said he wants to follow. "I think Sen. Allard has done a heroic job as a member of the United States Senate," Schaffer said.
