Breaking News

Capital Region announces $35 million expansion May 24, 2013

Romney promises energy independence by 2020

HOBBS, N.M. (AP) — Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney promised on Thursday to aggressively expand offshore oil drilling along Virginia, North Carolina and the Gulf of Mexico, changing the subject from social issues like abortion and Medicare that have dominated the debate in the days before the critical Republican National Convention.

Speaking to voters in the heart of New Mexico's oil and gas industry, Romney declared that his energy plans — which include drilling for oil in a federal Alaskan wildlife reserve — would create 3 million jobs and more than $1 trillion in new revenue. And he predicted complete "North American energy independence by 2020," a never-realized goal claimed by presidential candidates for decades.

"That means we produce all the energy we use in North America," Romney said, emphasizing an expansion of oil and gas over wind and solar production. "This is not some pie-in-the-sky kind of thing. This is a real achievable objective."

President Barack Obama did not face voters on Thursday. Instead, he deployed a popular former president, Bill Clinton, to help convince a divided electorate that he simply needs more time to fix the nation's struggling economy. Clinton is expected to speak at the Democratic National Convention next month and play a prominent role in the final months before Election Day.

"We need to keep going with his plan," Clinton says of Obama in a new television ad set to run in eight battleground states.

The push to re-frame the debate comes at a delicate time, sandwiched between the sudden resurgence of abortion in the race and Monday's opening of the Republican National Convention. The event in Tampa is supposed to be all about nominating Romney, emphasizing his plans for the economy and projecting unity. But those plans were disrupted this week by Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin of Missouri, who said in an interview that victims of "legitimate rape" can biologically avoid pregnancy. Romney, who has relentlessly tried to avoid a fight over social issues, led a chorus of Republican officials who demanded Akin abandon his Senate bid. The congressman has so far refused.

The uproar raises broader concerns for Romney's effort to win over female voters. At the same time, a strengthening tropical storm is forcing Republicans to prepare for big schedule changes or even the possibility of mandatory evacuations. GOP convention planners on Thursday said they are working closely with local officials and are moving forward with the convention as scheduled.

The stakes are high, the outcome uncertain 75 days before voters choose their next president and the majorities of Congress.

Polling suggests that the presidential contest is essentially a tossup, although Obama maintains a slight lead among women. Research also suggests that more voters trust Obama's plans for Medicare than Romney's. It's an advantage that could prove significant given Romney's selection of running mate Paul Ryan, the House budget architect who crafted a controversial plan to transform Medicare into a voucher-like system for future retirees.

But Romney did not mention Medicare or abortion in Hobbs. And he agreed to an interview with CBS' Denver affiliate, KCNC, only under the stipulation that he would not be asked about abortion or Akin's comments.

Instead, the former Massachusetts governor accused Obama of crafting an energy policy designed to benefit campaign contributors.

"He's taken federal dollars, your money, to advance these companies — solar companies, wind companies — $90 billion in so-called green jobs," Romney said of the president, seizing on the administration's investment in the failed solar company Solyndra. "I don't want the government investing in companies, particularly companies of his campaign contributors."

That's much the same argument Democrats levy against Romney, whose energy policy favors the oil and gas industry. The former businessman has deep ties to big oil and raised more than $7 million from industry executives during a campaign fundraiser in Texas earlier this week.

Obama campaign spokeswoman Lis Smith called Romney's energy plan "backward."

"This isn't a recipe for energy independence," Smith said. "It's just another irresponsible scheme to help line the pockets of big oil while allowing the U.S to fall behind and cede the clean energy sector to China."

The cornerstone of Romney's plan is opening up more areas for offshore oil drilling, including mid-Atlantic swing states like North Carolina and Virginia, where it is currently banned. He also wants to give states the power to establish all forms of energy production on federal lands, a significant shift in current policy that could face strong opposition in Congress.

Romney specifically cited drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as part of a broad plan to generate millions of additional barrels of oil each day.

A Romney campaign official later downplayed the comment. The plan would revive a longtime Republican goal to allow drilling for oil in the wildlife refuge. Congress has blocked drilling there for more than a quarter-century.

Romney also plans to approve the Keystone XL pipeline that has worried environmentalists and would run from Canada to U.S. refineries in Texas. And he is calling for the end of a production tax credit for wind power that is set to expire at the end of the year.

Many Republicans in battleground states such as Iowa support the credit, which the American Wind Energy Association says sustains 37,000 jobs.

"I think all energy sources need to stand on their own two feet," Romney said in an interview with a Colorado TV station Thursday, arguing that wind and solar power are subsidized at a higher rate than oil. "I would level the playing field."

Romney's campaign says he does not support ending oil subsidies.

The Obama administration has proposed a plan that would allow energy companies to begin seismic testing to find oil and natural reserves in the Atlantic Ocean. Companies would use the information to determine where to apply for energy leases, although no leases would be available until at least 2017.

The president told donors in New York this week that under his administration, dependence on foreign oil has gone below 50 percent for the first time in 13 years.

While the energy debate dominated the discussion on Thursday, Democrats will continue to pursue the abortion debate to help drive a wedge between Republicans and women.

Obama advisers consider Akin's comments a significant development and plan to continue linking Akin to Romney's running mate, Ryan, who cosponsored a bill with Akin to permanently ban federal funding for abortion except in cases of incest and forcible rape.

That language, which was eventually changed, would have narrowed the exception for rape victims.

Romney does not oppose abortion in cases of rape and incest or if it will save the mother's life, while Ryan does oppose abortion in cases of rape and incest.


Daly reported from Washington. Associated Press writer Steve Peoples in Washington contributed to this report.

Comments

RobHunterJohnson 9 months ago

So did Jimmy Carter! Romeny will say anything to get elected, if he wants energy independence build more Refineries, but thats not going to happen. Rob

0

spelchek 9 months ago

"Romeny [sic] will say anything to get elected"...you mean like promising to close Guantanamo? Cut the deficit in half? Lower the sea levels? End the Bush tax cuts? Bring the country together? Being against gay marriage?

0

Paroquet 9 months ago

Don't forget Romney promised energy independence by 2012. He left out how, at what cost, and what effects. Efficiency improvements? Which we know only leads to energy suppliers to base needs and justification for price-hikes because consumers are being too energy conscious and efficient. More green energy initiatives?

We already burn 40% of our corn at a negative trade-off for both energy and cost efficiency. Much of that was mandated under (R) leadership. Here's the math: 1.3 units of energy to produce 1 unit that is 1/3 less efficient, heavily subsidized (propped-up & funded by taxpayers whether or not they use the products), and driving-up food costs. Total bril. A first-grader could figure that one out as being unwise.

As for gay marriage, if you care, you're not conservative; you're supporting government intrusion into private matters. Same with abortion. Same with many other social controls proposed by so-called "conservatives". You're not conservative. Theocrative at best, totalitarian at worst.

On closing Guantanamo, Obama promised that too. He re-thought that position on becoming privy to intelligence he previously did not have access to.

0

spelchek 9 months ago

How are those new coal plants going? Did you know that for the first time that WV coal miners unions are not voting for either party. That's right, the man they put in office hates their industry and so a little pay back is in order.

0

Sequoia 9 months ago

The thing Romney forget to mention, and won't mention, is that energy independence achieved by burning North American fossil fuel is possible ONLY in conjunction with massive reductions in demand. Romney won't say anything about that.

Of couse, neither will Obama. The fact is, whether you're talking about living off domestic fossil fuels OR domestic wind and solar, you can't achieve any sort of energy independence AND STILL consume the amount of energy that we currently do. We can't drive the SUV 45 miles each way to work, come home and have every member of the family watching a different big screen TV while using a computer and an Ipad and a phone and a pod with either domestic fossil fuels or solar generation. We just can't.

There is no way we can be energy independent, and at the same time live the high-consumption lifestyle that we do. Energy independence means living a more simple lifestyle, especially since the rest of the developing world is now poised to adopt the same high-consumption lifestyle they've seen us live for the past 75 years.

We simply can't keep taxing the earth this way. We'll either ratchet things down in an orderly way, or a catastrophic way where we all end up keeping warm with open burning like they do in North Korea. The American public doesn't have the guts to hear this, so the politicians don't tell them.

0

asb 9 months ago

Sequoia's points are key to any vision of our future. Energy use is locked to our economy; reduce one, the other goes with it. Efficiency improvements can extend the crisis, but only so much as long as carbon is the source. Our transition to non-carbon energy is critical, and coal miners may well pay the brunt, so Sequoia's phrase of "ratchet down in an orderly way" is vital. Total energy independence is like total economic isolation, it would mean our nation's death. If we suddenly had cheap non-carbon energy available to us, the middle east would collapse and the resulting horrors would defy imiagination. Their carbon does have other uses and transitioning to them will be key to the stability of that whole region. Doesn't matter? Look at the price we pay now for their instabilities. We're part of the world, arguably the key part, and we have responsibilities that can appear to be at odds with each other: drive and manage a huge part of the global economy that absolutely must grow, vs the need to lead the transition to non-carbon energy. I don't think we can afford to have the oil industry, of any nation, play more than a technical role in that transition, it's againt their interests and they cannot be expected to play well.

0

Sequoia 9 months ago

The point about interconnection is an important one, because the price we pay for oil is based on global demand, no matter where we drill from. No matter if we drill in Saudi Arabia or ANWR, we pay a price for oil set that is set in a global market. As demand increases and supply decreases around the world, the price goes up. It's not "our" oil. It is the oil companies' oil. We're just another customer.

0

RobHunterJohnson 9 months ago

Spck, the coal miners will Vote, there is only one choice if you are a workin man, and it is not Romeny. Breaks over Rob

0

RobHunterJohnson 9 months ago

Spck, the Coal plant We are bldg today is doing fine. Rob

0

asb 9 months ago

Energy independence would be the end of America, just as economic independence would be. A better term, and goal, would be energy soverignty, and in the global politic even soverignty is a relative term. I don't think we can even consider reducing our energy use if we wish to maintain our economy, they're tied by the laws of physics. Our carbon stocks are very limited; if not in actual available energy, then certainly in the cost to handle production, use and waste. Carbon is simply too toxic to let loose in the air. We still subsidize carbon more than any other source of energy. If that were changed, and we accelerated non-carbon source development, we'll still be in a climate bind for a long time, but we must. It's tragic that this obvious problem, and its equally obvious solutions, have divided us politically. The facts, the solutions, and the urgency are all there, but greed has trumped them all. The non-carbon energy sector grows every day but sadly not fast enough to avert the damage already clearly at hand, and with the foot dragging of the most powerfull economic sector in history, it may well take long enough that our future will be a long long sttruggle to deal with the massive climate changes already underway. This issue should be a unifying force in our nation, but instead it is a dividing point of potentially tragic scale, all in the name of slightly higher profits for a single sector of the world's economy, carbon.

0

dokeus6 9 months ago

Drill Baby Drill!

One of these days we won't be importing oil we will be importing drinkable water.

0

dokeus6 9 months ago

"And he is calling for the end of a production tax credit for wind power that is set to expire at the end of the year.

Many Republicans in battleground states such as Iowa support the credit, which the American Wind Energy Association says sustains 37,000 jobs.

"I think all energy sources need to stand on their own two feet," Romney said in an interview with a Colorado TV station Thursday, arguing that wind and solar power are subsidized at a higher rate than oil. "I would level the playing field."

Romney's campaign says he does not support ending oil subsidies."

Romney just may kill 37000 jobs right off the bat . We can tell where his priorities lie. Take from the green energy and give to the dirty energy.

0

Paroquet 9 months ago

"I think all energy sources need to stand on their own two feet," Romney said in an interview with a Colorado TV station Thursday, arguing that wind and solar power are subsidized at a higher rate than oil. "I would level the playing field."

Huh. Wonder why he didn't single-out ethanol? Subsidies are for starting-up a business, not sustaining an unprofitable venture. Seems to me, with record profits, subsidies on oil are a bit superfluous.

0

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting