McDonnell to DO something about the environment, not just talk about it
By JR Hoeft | Thursday, April 23rd, 2009 | Catch-AllI got a chuckle yesterday reading Lowell Feld’s post on Blue VA about McDonnell citing the independent Thomas Jefferson Institute’s report on off-shore energy sources. Lowell practically seethed condescension as he attempted to broad-brush TJI as a partisan organization and that the study, which referenced science from Australia, was somehow flawed.
What’s interesting about TJI, is that at least three of its board members are pretty connected to the Democratic Party. Not the least being Eva Hardy who gave $5000 to Lowell’s guy, Chairman Terry McAuliffe and is considered part of the McAuliffe “kitchen cabinet”.
Additionally, since when is citing a study conducted from a G-20 country somehow not valid? Australia is and economic power and one of the world’s largest producers/exporters of agriculture and natural resources, so they probably know a thing or two about off-shore drilling.
But I digress…instead of poking holes in scientific facts, Feld should be applauding the one candidate in this race who actually promised to do something substantive, without fleecing the taxpayer, for the environment yesterday.
During the Kaine administration, 400,000 acres of land in Virginia were conserved in a bi-partisan effort between the governor and Speaker Howell. Yesterday, McDonnell said:
“As our population increases, and land is developed in Virginia at a rate of roughly 60,000 acres a year, it is important we continue this bipartisan conservation effort. As Governor I will do so by ensuring that we conserve another 400,000 acres by the conclusion of my term in January 2014.”
McDonnell continued by proposing to increase the land conservation tax credit from 40% to 50% of the qualified appraised value of the land to “further incentivize citizens to participate in our successful land conservation efforts.”
“We will use free market policies to pass on Virginia’s natural wonders to our children, grandchildren and all who follow,” said McDonnell.
Imagine that…the free market and the environment working together. One might call it a symbiotic ecosystem.
I doubt our friends on the left will see it that way though. They’d rather chase rainbows than do something real.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of “Blogs United” in Virginia. E-mail J.R.. Follow J.R. on Twitter.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
9 Responses to "McDonnell to DO something about the environment, not just talk about it"
Just a few points that their paper does not speak to. One, it appears the lease is more than 3-6 miles off our coast; so, that means no state royalty revenues. Second, it talks a lot about this supplying Virginia’s energy needs, but that is bogus (at least for the oil piece). There is one refinery in the state that refines a pawltry 70,000 bpd. There are bigger refiners up the east coast and that is where it would be going. Well, you could load it on to small carriers and send it via the intercoastal waterway to Houston.
Also, the job creation and economic value to the state of Virginia are suspect. Yes, these projects will undoubtedly create economic activity in federal offshore areas. But that will most likely be performed by the experienced staff of folks like Schlumberger and Halliburton who will bring these folks from Texas to do the work. That’s not to say these folks won’t take advatage of the hospitality industry in Virginia Beach. But that will probably be a drop in the ocean for hotels and restaurants there. Please correct me if I am wrong, I am not aware of any companies with staff experienced in oil exploration here in the state. Now you may point to Exxon Mobil Corporation’s Downstrean HQ located in lovely Fairfax, VA. But the upstream activities including their upstream technology center is located in my equally lovely hometown of Houston, TX. And even if these fields turn out to be worth developing, there is no guarantee that those offshore workers will come from Virginia.
McDonnell’s land conservation pledge is truly a conservative act, if the meaning of the word has any weight. I’m glad McDonnell realizes this. there is no reason for the GOP to have to immediately write off the conservation vote. There is a strong conservative conservationist base out there of hunters and fishermen to be courted.
First I am supporter of drilling off Virginia’s coast as part of a national effort to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
I find the piece J.R. linked to as an example of the extremes in the argument. This example comes from the left pointing to examples that come from the right. There is a center in this argument and I think this centrist position allows for increased drilling offshore.
What do I base my opinion on? Such an overwhelming percentage of citizens are in favor of this drilling that a strong majority of centrists (a.k.a. moderates) must be in favor of it or the overall majority would not be so large.
I have to give McDonnell points here. Although, I don’t like politicians making promises like:
“As Governor I will do so by ensuring that we conserve another 400,000 acres by the conclusion of my term in January 2014.”
We don’t need a number and you don’t need to hold yourself to that number. I don’t want to see some excuse for eminent domain use. what if you don’t get enough takers? These kinds of promises are over done in my opinion. I would rather have a plan and a stated goal rather than a promise in this instance.
What I absolutely applaud is the giving of incentives. The Free Market and conservation can work hand in hand.
Oil – Of course, I would prefer that Virginia get royalties. However, the oil market is a global oil market. New sources will contribute to downward pressure on oil prices. Additionally, whether we get royalties or not, the US secures a buffer against dependence on foreign oil. It is just a plus even if we don’t get royalties or economic boosts from the industry. Of course, I will hold our elected officials to do their jobs and secure for Virginia what is deserved.
Points for McDonnell on this one.
I am not against offshore drilling. I think we should lift the moratorium as a whole than and not piecemeal. If we do that, then we could make a significant dent in oil imports. All I am pointing out is the promises of jobs, royalties, some fabulous benefit to the VA economy or some significant reduction oil imports are not likely on any counts. We shouldn’t promise the public something we can’t deliver from one lease sale off of VA’s coast. That is just going to piss people off and ultimately turn them against additional exploration. Because then people will use VA as an example as to why we shouldn’t drill off Florida’s coast.
The moratorium as a whole needs to go, but that is a federal issue.
tx2vadem,
Well I am a moderate. I’m in favor of off shore drilling but along with the drilling comes a price. Royalities (not necessarily making Virginia rich, although nothing wrong with Virginia getting a slice – twist my arm and reduce my taxes PLEASE).
Such a royalty should be structured so that if crude oil prices are low, royalty payments are low so that oil companies can count on at least some reasonable return on their exploration efforts. However if crude oil prices climb to unreasonable levels the royalties get an ever increasing slice of the pie.
Such royalty payments should be targeted at subsiding other alternative energy so that our efforts snowball into further ever more increased efforts to wean ourselves off our addiction to foreign oil. It is my belief that anyone who fails to support a plan such as mine will be exposed as being in favor of special interests instead of what is best for America.
This should even help out those concerned about global warming (people like me) because it would provide revenue to our own citizens (through the government) for alternative energy and research into the problem.
Why should it be mandatory that all the money for oil consumption (which even environmentalists engage in) must go overseas? What is wrong with keeping some of the money here within our own shores instead of forcing ourselves to crawl on our knees to the members of OPEC and asking them to fund the steps that will slit their throats?
I am going to double post.
First, in the third paragraph above the word should have been subsidizing where it appears subsiding. I think most everyone can understand from the context what I meant, however somebody is going to have a hoot pointing my mistake out since the meaning of the two words is so polar opposite.
Don’t you just hate guys like me who proofread after we hit the post button? Please understand that question is a bit of self criticism, and a feeble attempt at humor.
Little David,
I am not against reasonable royalties either. My point here and in other similar comments I have made is that if the oil is more than 3-6 miles off the coast of VA, VA gets nothing. The federal government (via the Minerals Management Service) will collect royalties though. In all of the maps I have seen, the lease appears to be solely in federal waters and not within 6 miles of our coast. But don’t count on your fed taxes going down any futher even with open offshore drilling.
On your points about using royalty revenue to help address global warming, that’s a potential (but you know government revenues all basically flow into the same bucket for expenditure purposes). Royalties are currently a percentage of the cash value of oil or natural gas sold. So, they currently do what you want: rise with higher prices and fall with lower prices. They also fall when production in a field declines.
I am not an expert on the royalties thing. I have heard from someone else who is not an expert that royalties are not owed beyond 50 miles. I have also heard that if off shore drilling is approved it will only be approved in Virginia (even though Jeb Bush came out in favor of this in Florida).
I look at Virginia as being the land of leadership. Virginia at least has in the past proved to be the spawning ground of Presidents. Perhaps it is time for Virginia to once again take a leadership role.
My plan would succeed if we are faced with peak oil. I find little evidence that the real oil experts disagree with peak oil. But I am going to go with the winning bet.
Based upon the evidence, and history, oil prices are going to spring back. If those who claim we should sell Virginia’s offshore rights at fire sale prices keep yelling, I am going to yell back “PEAK OIL”. They know it is coming and so do I. I smell a healthy amount of revenue for the citizens of America (and Virginia citizens should get their cut). Anyone objecting to the cut should only look at what happens in Alaska. Fair is fair.
Leave your response