Yesterday I received an email from Mass. Congressman Marty Meehan announcing his next Town Hall meeting. Seeing as his last Town Hall meeting on Iraq didn’t go exactly as planned, I offer this post up to those with a strong enough stomach to attend his next charade, er, Town Hall meeting on the environment.
Here is the congressman in his email announcing the meeting,
Our dependence on Middle East oil is hurting our economy and compromising our national security. America has the resources and the technology to develop clean, renewable sources of fuel from solar power to hydrogen fuel cells. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife is not the answer. We just need to make developing clean, renewable sources of energy a priority.
It’s great see the congressman so concerned about our dependence on foreign oil. What is he doing about it?
Voted YES on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. (Dec 2005)
Voted YES on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. (Aug 2001)
Voted YES on starting implementation of Kyoto Protocol. (Jun 2000)
Preserve Alaska’s ANWR instead of drilling it. (Feb 2001)
Aha, now I understand, here is Meehan in The Boston Globe on December 13,
Obviously he’s (Mitt Romney) playing to the Republican right that would rather protect oil companies than pristine open spaces in ANWR
George Will had a few words for phony baloney enviro hypocrities like Meehan in a recent column,
Few opponents of energy development in what they call “pristine” ANWR have visited it. Those who have and who think it is “pristine” must have visited during the 56 days a year when it is without sunlight. They missed the roads, stores, houses, military installations, airstrip and school. They did not miss seeing the trees in area 1002 (where drilling is proposed). There are no trees.
Oh yes, the “pristine” wildlife refuge is too sacred to disrupt, even if drilling is proposed on 2,000 out of 19 MILLION acres. Our reliance on the Saudi’s isn’t that bad if it means ruining 1% of ANWAR. Solid reasoning congressman. Meehan would probably tell you, like John Kerry did, that the amount of oil from ANWAR would be inconsequential anyway.
Once again, George Will,
opponents say the environmental cost is too high for what the ineffable John Kerry calls “a few drops of oil.” Some drops. The estimated 10.4 billion barrels of recoverable oil — such estimates frequently underestimate actual yields — could supply all the oil needs of Kerry’s Massachusetts for 75 years.
Flowing at 1 million barrels a day — equal to 20 percent of today’s domestic oil production — ANWR oil would almost equal America’s daily imports from Saudi Arabia. And it would equal the supply loss that Hurricane Katrina temporarily caused, and that caused so much histrionic distress among consumers.
Liberals like Marty Meehan want to have it both ways when it comes to energy policy. They can’t and I hope someone at his Town Hall charade reminds him of it.
Here is a post from last fall, Liberals and the energy crisis
They say no to new refineries (last one built in 1976) to nuclear power (20+years), to more drilling in the lower 48 states, in the Gulf and in Alaska, to onshore liquid natural gas facilities and oceanic wind farms within view of their summer retreats.
At the same time, they decry our dependence on â??foreign oilâ? and sneer that it has something to do with Bushâ??s cozy relationship with the Saudiâ??s and â??big oilâ?Â. Itâ??s all politics to them. Liberals like Al Gore and Chuck Schumer were looking to tap the Strategic Petrolium Reserves after oil crossed $34 per barrell! Can you imagine? Good grief.
Would it surprise you that Marty Meehan was right besides Gore and Schumer calling for the strategic petrolium reserves to be tapped? Of course not. Would it surprise you that this call had everything to do with politics and nothing to do with economics? Of course not.
When was all this happening? In the fall of 2000, leading up to the mother of all presidential elections. At the time, Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan called the Democrats idea to tap the reserves, “a major and substantial policy mistake.”
Marty was undeterred.
CNNâ??s Crossfire: Should the Government Release Oil From the Strategic Petroleum Reserve?
Aired September 21, 2000
MATALIN: Five million gallons…
MEEHAN: Five million gallons initially, and then they’ll monitor the situation if it needs an additional 5 million. There are 570 million that are in that reserve, and if we can’t use it for a crisis like what we — what we have now, when can we use it?
MATALIN: So are you suggesting that Lawrence Summers, who would be the treasury secretary in a Gore administration, god help us, or Alan Greenspan, whom we all agree is, you know, the word on high — this is what they said to the vice president or to the president, who’s thinking about the release.
Quote: “Chairman Greenspan and I believe that using the strategic petroleum reserve at this time, as proposed by the Department of Energy, would be a major and substantial policy mistake.” Larry Summers also says it would set very bad precedent.
MEEHAN: Mary, that was an internal memo months ago. The fact is today…
MATALIN: This is last week, congressman.
OUCH!
While we should applaud the congressman for his consistentcy, he should be reminded at this meeting that he is part of the energy problem, not the solution. He is more interested in posturing that he is protecting the environment against the evil Republicans and their friends in big oil than he is on reducing our dependence on foreign oil. He’s a phony and fraud on energy policy.