Are McCain and Obama Playing Leapfrog with Our Energy?
By Johnny Roosh
Both Obama and McCain have historically been pro-environment and to a varying degree anti-drilling advocates until they felt the pain among their would-be constituents as gas prices squeezed their budgets and subsequently the economy.
McCain has opposed drilling in ANWR. In the past he’s compared it to drilling in the Grand Canyon. But as energy prices climbed over the past several months, he has been careful to avoid locking himself into an anti-drilling position.
First it was a loosening of the noose on offshore drilling, a move even whatshername Pelosi is now conceding (no doubt with a veritable fur ball of strings attached).
“It bodes well for him as a pragmatic and wise and experienced statesman,” says (Alaska Governor) Palin. “What he’s doing here is he’s calling an audible when conditions on the field are changing.
McCain is moving to beat Obama to the punch as he reconsiders his position on drilling ANWR. One has to wonder if he is actually changing his philosophy or simply executing a tactical adjustment to capture the political high ground before Obama gets back from vacation.
Part of the calculus at work is that, like McCain, Obama has moved to get closer to where voters are on drilling but the Democrat likely couldn’t go as far as flipping on ANWR.
For months, McCain had worked hard to portray Obama as “Dr. No” on energy. With his statement, Obama became Dr. Maybe-Under-the-Right-Circumstances.
McCain advisers are eager to restore a sharp contrast on energy and say they’re skeptical Obama will ever voice support, however qualified, for drilling in ANWR.
The only way McCain can move upmarket on Obama is to shift his thinking on oil from offshore drilling to ANWR, and hope that Obama won’t match him move for move.
(Governor Palin) added: “And I know up here in Alaska, most every Alaskan believes that ANWR should be drilled, and no one cares more about Alaska’s environment–our lands, our wildlife, our fresh air, our clean water–than Alaskans themselves. And we know that this can be allowed safely, cleanly, ethically–this type of exploration and development of an American supply of energy.”
That last point could be significant. When McCain changed his position on offshore drilling earlier this summer, he did so on federalist grounds. If states believe that drilling can be safely done off their shores, and choose to allow it, he argued, the federal government should no longer stand in their way. He could make the same argument on ANWR.
The real question is whether either candidate’s shift will translate in January to future increased domestic crude oil production. In the mean time the American consumer has turned his nose up at the pumps, allowing reduced demand to drain the market for now. But supply is the only solution to the current crisis until viable technology to replace the use of fossil fuels presents itself.
August 18th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
This Federalist line of reasoning gets problematical for McCain, though, because then he’d have to oppose the Bush Administration’s pushing drilling in Colorado’s Roan Plateau against the wishes of the Governor, legislature, and most of the state, including its hunters.
August 18th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
A fair point. Being unfamiliar with Colorado’s political geology, allow me to ask: is the Roan Plateau federal land?
Federal land is kinda anti-federal itself.
August 18th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Yep, it’s Federal, as is a good chunk of the West, which makes for politics the rest of the country doesn’t appreciate. I may write later about McCain’s problems dealing with water politics, and he’s from Arizona, so he should know better!