Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, June 2, 2010
Oil Murray vs. Rossi on Offshore Drilling: An Emerging Contrast
Posted by Eli Sanders on Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 4:27 PM
Republican Dino Rossi says that his race against Democratic Senator Patty Murray is "gonna be about the purpose and role of government."
Specifically, Rossi says, the race is going to revolve around a fundamental question: "Is it going to be a limited government or an overreaching government?"
Great. Everyone enjoys a clear contrast. Especially in politics.
And right now, according to Rossi, what we have is an overreaching government—one that's mistakenly gotten into the ownership of banks and car companies, waded inappropriately into the student loan business, and grabbed too much power with its new health care overhaul. While Rossi's campaign has not responded to repeated requests for clarification of his positions, and his campaign web site, now in its second week of existence, still lacks the standard "issues" page, it's nevertheless possible, based on some interviews Rossi's given over the last week, to see how his stated desire for "limited government" is shaping his reaction to the mammoth oil spill that's still spreading in the Gulf of Mexico.
Unlike Murray—who has proposed re-instituting the complete ban on drilling off the west coast of the United States (it was allowed to lapse during the Bush administration), and wants to raise the oil company liability cap (the cap is currently $75 million for economic damages resulting from a spill, Murray wants it to be $10 billion), and has been hammering Transocean (owner of the Deepwater Horizon) for failing to produce copies of legal waivers it reportedly forced employees to sign after the rig exploded—Rossi has taken a more "limited government" approach.
He supports President Obama's temporary ban on offshore drilling, and has said he would support a moratorium on drilling off the west coast, but that's it. And what both of those Rossi positions have in common is their temporary nature.
"I think the ban needs to be in place until they actually figure out exactly what's gone wrong down in the Gulf ... and how to avoid it in the future," Rossi told the Seattle Times last week. In the same article, the paper noted:
In the long run, though, Rossi said he believes America needs to increase its domestic output of oil, as well as wind, solar and nuclear power. "You have to have it all," he said. "Otherwise, we are going to be dependent on people who sometimes don't care for us all that much."
In other words, after a pause, it's back to "drill baby, drill."
All of which points up a problem with the bedrock campaign position that Rossi has staked out.
If the spill in the Gulf of Mexico continues through the summer, and continues to be a political issue, then the mood among Americans—and, most germane to Rossi's future, the mood among the environmentally conscious voters of this state—is not likely to favor limited government involvement in regulating oil companies, preventing oil spills, and being prepared to clean up quickly when spills do happen.
Nor is it going to favor seemingly flawed calculations like the one Rossi appears to have made on drilling off the west coast of the United States.
While Rossi says we have to keep finding new sources of domestic oil because "otherwise, we are going to be dependent on people who sometimes don't care for us all that much," Murray points out the following:
The United States has less than two percent of the world’s oil in its reserves, and off the West Coast, only enough oil to last 500 days—less time than it can take to clean up a serious oil spill. Washington state’s offshore oil supply alone would only power the nation’s oil addiction for less than a month. By contrast, if all vehicles’ tires were properly inflated, cars would achieve more efficient gas mileage, saving the equivalent of all the oil off the West Coast in only 25 days.
Add to that the $540 million fishing industry in Washington, the 16,000 jobs connected to that industry, and the wild weather and unique seismic risks off our coast, and it quickly becomes unclear why it would ever be worth taking the risk of having a Deepwater-like disaster here—or why Rossi would take the political risk of seeming to open the door to one.
2
First off, nobody knows how much oil is off the coast. The numbers are proven reserves, and I'm guessing exploration has not been a priority where a categorical ban has been in place.
Second: soon or later, whether we like it or not, that oil is coming up. Not because of evil oil companies, not because of complacent government, but because of us. We all use it, and we all get VERY CRANKY when the cost of gas cruises towards $5 a gallon. The drilling will eventually happen, and we should be focused on making sure the producers pay the fuck up when they blow it.
Second: soon or later, whether we like it or not, that oil is coming up. Not because of evil oil companies, not because of complacent government, but because of us. We all use it, and we all get VERY CRANKY when the cost of gas cruises towards $5 a gallon. The drilling will eventually happen, and we should be focused on making sure the producers pay the fuck up when they blow it.
3
Just like the last governor's race, it's a fake progressive versus an authentic lunatic. One pays lip service to social responsibility while giving handjobs to lobbyists, as long as they're lobbyists from the right industries, while the other gibbers and flings his own shit and all-but-openly hates us all.
Whee.
Whee.
4
@2 - Yup, we might as well just bend over and accept the impending disaster. Good plan. While we're at it, we might as well build a big nuclear plant right on the outskirts of every city in the state but make sure that the companies who run them are prepared to pay when they inevitably meltdown. All because people don't like to pay too much.
5
He's Cheney all over again.
This is why we have Three Strikes and You're In Idaho in this state - to take care of socialists like Comrade Rossi who want to privatize your wealth and socialize the risk on the backs of the working poor.
This is why we have Three Strikes and You're In Idaho in this state - to take care of socialists like Comrade Rossi who want to privatize your wealth and socialize the risk on the backs of the working poor.
6
Anyone who opposes
"drill, baby, drill!"
must come up with a concrete alternative
that can be implemented now
or shut the fuck up.
"drill, baby, drill!"
must come up with a concrete alternative
that can be implemented now
or shut the fuck up.
7
@6
Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand.
Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand. Reduce demand.
8
So he is quoted as saying he wants all alternative feuls and you summarize his word with "drill baby drill"? That's top notch writting. Very accurate, without bias and overall very intelligent.
9
@7 - use alternatives. Wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, the list is MILES long.
Just tell that to Dino "Oil Spill" Rossi.
Just tell that to Dino "Oil Spill" Rossi.
11
@9 That won't ever happen until it is economically feasible. Most people don't give a shit about the environment if their personal bank balance is involved.
As was mentioned above if you ban drilling and the price of gas goes to $5 a gallon heaven and earth will be moved to get an oil rig setup immediately. This is pretty basic psychology and political science.
Once we burn through enough oil and it becomes more rare then it will be cheaper to use alternative fuels. The only way to speed up this process is to invent and invest in alternative fuels so make the curve of adoption lean away from oil sooner.
As was mentioned above if you ban drilling and the price of gas goes to $5 a gallon heaven and earth will be moved to get an oil rig setup immediately. This is pretty basic psychology and political science.
Once we burn through enough oil and it becomes more rare then it will be cheaper to use alternative fuels. The only way to speed up this process is to invent and invest in alternative fuels so make the curve of adoption lean away from oil sooner.
12
@11 removing corporate tax exemptions and subsidies for oil is what makes it feasible.
I've been playing this investment and energy game for so long and there's always excuses for not doing things.
But they're just excuses.
I've been playing this investment and energy game for so long and there's always excuses for not doing things.
But they're just excuses.
13
@6: Hum, perhaps higher standards for industry? More recycling? I also think we do need more nuclear power plants, but I know that isn't very "liberal" of me. If we added 2 or 3 more I think it could really help us out. Or how about a program to put solar panels on the roof of every building in the sunniest states? (cali, arizona, texas, florida, etc). With the amount we are paying each MONTH to be in Iraq, we could fund a hell of a lot of solar panels.
But hey, if you want to suck down oil til we all go tits up in economic meltdown, be my guest asshole.
But hey, if you want to suck down oil til we all go tits up in economic meltdown, be my guest asshole.
14
To the muddled thinking and reporting: If you wish to have more control over your life (and money) vote for less government intrusion--in this case Rossi. If you need or want a Mommy/Daddy that wants all of your money so they can manage you, vote for Murray.
If you vote for Rossi, you'll have more money, for a variety of reasons, and then spend freely on health care for your neighbor, buying solar panels, etc. It's a win-win.
If you vote for Rossi, you'll have more money, for a variety of reasons, and then spend freely on health care for your neighbor, buying solar panels, etc. It's a win-win.
15
completely slanted article, from the pic to the language... we have no viable alternatives right now and I for one dont want to pay more for everything under the sun to limit a few gases that plants like... public transportation is a joke, it takes too long to get anywhere.... i will drive my car, fly planes, and heat my house.. so why not search for oil locally as opposed to depend on countries that are hostile to the US...
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (15) RSS