Let’s talk about the issues. Here is the first of three side-by-side comparisons so far put out by the Webb campaign. This one covers the environment and energy. What do you think?
Technorati Tags: Jim Webb, George Allen
5 thoughts on “On the issues: Webb v Allen on environment & energy”
Comments are closed.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Properly fund the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) and give them the authority and tools to enforce the environmental regulations of the Commonwealth. These folks have been starved and demoralized by neglect from the legislature and open derision by the regulated community.
George Allens record at the helm:
While governor, George Allen appointed the unqualified and incompetent Becky Norton Dunlop, as his cabinet secretary for Natural Resources – with oversight of the VDEQ.
Her handling of the department drew a broad and bipartisan backlash. General Assembly auditors found that enforcement actions and inspections for clean air and water fell to the lowest levels in the region. Surveys done for their audit found that only 20 percent of agency employees believed that their leadership “values environmental protection.”
After Allen left office, legislative auditors also reported that a database of toxins in state waterways was kept secret during his administration, which refused access even to the EPA.
One DEQ reorganization under Dunlop drew protests not just from environmentalists but also from the Virginia Chamber of Commerce, the Virginia Manufacturers Association and the Virginia Municipal League. Del. George W. Grayson (D-James City) wrote of her, “No one since Gen. Ulysses S. Grant has posed a greater threat to our resources and our people.”
In 1997, the EPA threatened to take over DEQ, which it called ineffective. The controversies grew so intense that even Republican James S. Gilmore III, in his successful bid for governor that year, promised to replace Dunlop.
The state of Virginia water resources:
The American Rivers organization named the Shenandoah River as one of the 20 endangered rivers in America this year (2006). Development County governments along the Shenandoah have a rapidly-closing window to get a handle on runaway development before it changes the character of the river and valley forever. Fishing has all but disappeared from this great river, and the fish that remain are often diseased and inedible.
The Chesapeake Bay continues to struggle with nutrient overload and sedimentation from a population explosion in the basin. A no-oxygen dead zone continues to develop every summer where no animal life can survive. Shellfish (crabs, oyster, clam) populations are at record lows. Attempts to improve water quality involve folks as far west as Lexington – requiring near statewide water quality improvements.
These solutions will take money and good stewardship. Virginia needs to set her priorities and meet the challenge of maintaining our common wealth.
Bravo…Vivian.
Virginians also need to be “on guard” about the hog industry wanting to promote the growth that NC is denying them here in VA.
Every industrial hog farm is the equivalent of a city of 100k people. The state of VA won’t allow a city of that size to be without a waste sewage system….This will KILL our rivers and our bay….But the money has probably already started pouring into buying out our legislature.
To do “it” correctly will increase the cost of pork…but will insure that we don’t end up footing the bill trying to clean up the runaway pollution while our seafood costs rise b/c the fish die in the Chesapeake Bay….
We need to make sure that the VA legislature does not soon b/c the Corporate legislature….
Buzz…Buzz…
ANWR is an 11 million acre tract of mostly wasteland in the frozen tundra of Alaska.
We drill oil out of people’s BACK YARDS. It is absurd to think we can’t drill a couple thousand acres out of 11 million acres without “destroying the environment”. If that was the concern, we could put controls in the law requiring environmental reports, tracking of carabou, or whatever else the environmentalists can think of that they fear.
But the simple fact is that there is no reason not to drill in ANWR, from an environmental perspective. ANWR is a perfect wedge issue for the democrats (who don’t have many), because none of their consituents could care less about drilling for oil, none of their states would get any money from it, and it plays to their environmentalist base (which simply wants to stop all drilling because the sooner we run out of oil, the better).
So here’s the truth — we will keep using oil. FOr every barrel we don’t take out of ANWR, we will take it somewhere else. And whereever else another country drills for oil instead of us, they will meet LOWER ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS than we enforce on drilling in this country.
If they drill it in the mid east, they have few controls at all. A million-barrel-a-day oil field in Alaska would be more environmentally friendly than any place else in the world.
Of course, eventually everybody else will run out of oil, and before that happens, we WILL drill ANWR, because the world isn’t going to limp back into the stone age while there is still a known oil supply.
But if ANWR is still untapped when the oil gets scarce, it will become a target for countries who want the oil, leading to increased global tensions, as people realise the U.S. bled them dry of their oil while sitting on our own. Which isn’t really a bad idea, but I don’t see anybody arguing THAT point.
Allen proudly and rightly supports drilling in ANWR. Personally, I think we should drill it whether you want to pump it or not. Because if we don’t do it now, we WILL do it when we get into an emergency, which will happen eventually.
And if we have to RUSH TO DRILL IT, we won’t do it as safely or as cleanly as we will if we drill it now before the crisis.
as a matter of states rights, it is absurd that a minority of senators from other states have seen fit to essentially steal the land and its resources from the people of Alaska, people who were promised they would keep their land when they joined our union.
But mostly we should drill ANWR because there’s oil there, it’s easy to get, and we can do it without hurting the environment.
I’m not sure about your other issues: If I was presenting an objective discussion of issues, I think I’d take the sections from the two candidate’s web pages, rather than use the biased release from one campaign to present the opponent’s viewpoint.
For every barrel of oil that we CONSERVE, we need one LESS barrel of oil from our enemies, our wilderness, our coast lines. America consumes far more oil than it has reserves. Even new finds in Alaska represent 6 months of American consumption. Yet much of the Alaskan oil goes to Japan, because they will pay more for it.
Petroleum reserves have peaked while consumption increases – the result is that oil has become a precious commodity that is traded world-wide and speculated upon like precious metals. It will increasingly go to the highest bidder in world markets.
Wild price fluctuations are here to stay. America can either attempt to occupy oil producing countries (Iraq), and support corrupt, unstable regimes (Saudi Arabia), or America can get serious about moving away from OIL dependence.
The path begins by acknowledging our addiction and changing policies that subsidize wastefulness – mileage standards, mass transit, energy efficiency standards. This will bridge the gap to a transition to alternative sources – biofuels, solar, and emerging technologies. Oil will become a minor source. There is no holy grail, there is only a will to move away from oil addiction. One step at a time. One day at a time.
Charles wrote:
If I pull information from both websites, then I’m getting biased opinions, too, so I’m not sure that is any different. Besides, the whole point of this exercise is to talk about the issues. If Allen’s position is misrepresented, by all means point that out.