The Colorado Index

Are Roadless Areas Necessary...Even a Good Idea?

Today's Denver Post has an editorial with some very offensive lines in it, at least for a conservative.  They assume that the Supreme Court wouldn't be rational when conservatives win on the court on the subject of Colorado's roadless areas:

We'd rather trust our governor and our forester to craft a good plan than risk the possibility of a 5-4 disaster written by Justice Antonin Scalia.

Ever one to get into the fray on this subject, I left the following comment:

But, are roadless areas even a good idea?

They assume that wildlife cannot coexist with humans when they can. Yesterday, I had a ten point buck in my side yard, chomping away at the wife's carefully planted flowers and trees. Two bear sows live in my area with their cubs. We have foxes galore and have had mountain lion. The funny thing is that I live in the middle of Colorado Springs, east of the interstate.

Of course, there is no hunting in my area, so the animals co-exist in greater safety than they would in a roadless area. Even my next door neighbor, who thinks that there are too many deer in the area and routinely chases adult deer away from his bushes was quite content to allow a doe to raise her offspring in the neighborhood's collective back yards unmolested this summer.

The claims that wildlife can't coexist with development are without merit. Hunting can't coexist which explains that community's opposition to development.

The real danger of roadless areas is that the forest service no longer feels an obligation to manage them. Mark Udall's campaign has been starcrossed this year with oil prices and Russia's adventure in Georgia, but in one way, it has been really lucky. None of those 1.5 million acres of dead trees in Colorado that his roadless policies and anti-logging policies have helped create caught fire.

We have extremely unhealthy forests in Colorado. More roadless areas will make the problem worse.

Be Careful What You Wish For

The Democrats and the environmentalists have been wishing for years for higher gas prices.  At one point there was a proposal to impose an additional 50 cent a gallaon gas tax just to get the price up.  Of course, the side benefit of having more money to spend never was considered by the tax and spend party.

Now, they have $4/gallon gas and they are running from it like stuck pigs.

Mark Udall's recent switch from a lifelong and ardent opponent of drilling to an offshore drilling cheerleader has been noticed in Washington by Politico:

His family name is closely tied with the protection of natural resources and conservation, consistent with the approach that he has advocated in the House. In Congress, Udall opposed offshore drilling on numerous occasions, and voted against expanding refinery capacity six times...

Udall’s adapted position on drilling was particularly surprising because his election to the Senate has become a leading priority for environmental groups. The League of Conservation Voters even aired an early advertisement portraying his GOP opponent, Bob Schaffer, alongside oil rigs.

I've had an interest in politics since the early 1960's.  This year is unlike any other in terms of a single issue forcing changes in long held positions by politicians.  What is amazing is that there are two issues that might turn the electorate:  Gas Prices and Georgia.

The Democrats have gotten what they have wished for for years, high gas prices.  It is hurting them, rather than helping them.

Bill Ritter Angry About Roan Lease Price, Should Blame Himself

Colorado made a lot of money last week when the Bureau of Land Management sold exploration leases on the Roan Plateau at record prices.  However, Governor Bill Ritter is upset at the lower than estimated price that the Bureau of Land Management received.

Federal oil and gas leases on the Roan Plateau fetched a record $114 million Thursday, according to Bureau of Land Management officials.

No lease sale in the lower 48 states had ever generated that much money, BLM officials said.

Despite the record, both Gov. Bill Ritter and industry officials — for different reasons — criticized the sale, saying the state lost millions of dollars.

"Today we lost significant resources," said [ Bill ] Ritter, who had urged a slower-phased development and then filed a protest with the BLM opposing the sale.

"The BLM's decision to lease the entire top of the Roan Plateau all at once has severely shortchanged Colorado citizens," Ritter said.

Bill Ritter has no one to blame but his own anti-energy policies for the lease prices.  His own policies drove down the value of the Roan leases. Ritter's proposed Severance Tax ballot initiative will remove the tax credit energy companies receive for paying local property taxes, raising taxes on energy producers.  His proposed drilling rules will halt oil production for as much as three months per year.  He appointed radical environmentalists to consumer advocacy boards.  All of this along with Bill Ritter's longstanding opposition to drilling on the Roan Plateau provided a level of uncertainty to energy companies.  Why would a company spend top dollar for a lease that may be regulated to worthlessness?

The short answer: they wouldn't, and now Bill Ritter has to deal with the reality of the leasing.  He overpromised the revenues from the Roan leasing to colleges and universities in Colorado.  Now, Ritter will have to wait for actual production on the Roan Plateau to receive the extra money he desired for state coffers.

by Civil Sense

Sage Advice From Vail

After Saturday's forum, I happened to be standing nearby when Mark Udall said "T. Boone has it right."  He said it over his shoulder on the way out the door.  I likened it to Santa Clause's parting words in Twas the Night Before Christmas - just a throwaway line.  If it isn't, then Mark Udall is cranking on the big blue lie machine again because he now claims in commercials to favor drilling.

Yesterday, the Vail Daily editorial page writer was obviously distraught at the drilling sellout of Mark Udall:

...The latest casualty of logic is our own representative in Congress, Mark Udall. The normally sensible Democrat, in his race for a U.S. Senate seat, has joined the chorus to drill, drill, drill and severely compromised his long-standing commitment to sustainable energy. Sure, Udall says more drilling should be part of an overall plan that includes other solutions, but the reality is it’s a cynical response to polls that show most Americans think drilling will quickly reduce prices at the pump.

The editor has some sage advice for Mark Udall and Barack Obama that we sincerely hope they will follow:

...it’s incumbent upon more progressive voices like that of Udall and Barack Obama – who also reversed his stance to embrace more drilling – to put the facts in front of the American people and support what they know is right, not what they think will help get them elected. Americans respect leaders who lead even the face of political expedience.

That's right, election and $4 gas prices be damned.  Ignore the polls.  Stick to your guns.  The fact that Mark Udall and Barack Obama have caved on drilling identifies them as nothing more than ... politicians.

On a similar subject, Mark Hillman is writing on a similar subject at Townhall.com.

T. Boone Pickens, Opportunist?

I watched the Archer Daniels Midland commercials for years before I realized how bad what they were trying to sell was for my personal pocketbook.  The price of hamburger and the price of corn has gone up five times in my lifetime, most of that movement since the ADM campaign began.

Along comes "oil man" T Boone Pickens with a plan to get the economy off oil and on to natural gas, which happens to be a byproduct of oil production.

Suppose we do what Pickens is proposing.  The price of electrical power will go up several times because wind power is much more expensive than coal and gas.  He proposes to hide that price increase in government subsidies, forgetting to remind us that there isn't a free lunch.

The demand for natural gas will also expand because the demand will have expanded.  With increased demand comes increased prices.  Someone owning natural gas reserves will profit handsomely, more handsomely than someone owning oil fields.

Forgive me, but T. Boone Pickens looks like another opportunist who is trying to cash in.

Bill Ritter Files Petitions for Tax Increase

Governor Bill Ritter is not one to back down from raising taxes—or a photo op. The Post reports that yesterday Governor Bill Ritter personally helped haul his tax increase petitions to the Secretary of State’s office.

 

With a stubborn resolve — and a dolly — Gov. Bill Ritter helped cart hundreds of thousands of signatures to the secretary of state's office Monday in order to place on the ballot a proposal to eliminate an oil and gas industry tax credit.

 

The initiative is the first Ritter has put his political weight behind as governor, and he acknowledged Monday that taking on one of the state's largest industries will be a tough fight.

 

"It's really about sound tax policy," Ritter said at a rally before delivering the signatures. "There are times when you provide a tax incentive to grow an industry. This is not the time for oil and gas."

 

Bill Ritter’s idea of sound tax policy is suspect based on his previous actions, such as his illegal property tax freeze. This proposal will allegedly increase State revenues $300 million, play money with which Ritter will spread around to his allies in the “green” industries and to college scholarships. While this initiative may sound benign at first glance, there are multiple reasons why this initiative would be bad news for Colorado.

 

Primarily, this tax increase will remove a local property tax credit from the energy producers. Currently, the local ad velorum tax is credited against the severance tax bill, thus lowering production costs. Removing this credit will increase the amount of taxes that these companies pay. Obviously, the companies will pass increased production costs onto customers. This means that consumer heating bills will increase for all of Colorado’s citizens. At $300 million, this translates roughly to $63 per person per year. Industries that rely on natural gas and energy will also see increased prices and pass those on to the consumers.

 

Secondly, more state-financed college scholarships will encourage Colorado universities to increase tuition even more. Already, both University of Colorado and Colorado State University raised tuition over 9 percent for the upcoming year. Why colleges are raising rates much faster than the rate of inflation is another topic for another day. However, this gives them further license to raise rates while benefitting few people.

 

Finally, this tax increase is part of a pattern of Bill Ritter. Bill Ritter’s positions on energy production fit squarely with the Delay, Don’t Drill, Do-Nothing Democrats in Congress. From stacking the Office of Consumer Council with anti-energy environmentalists to appearing in silly, taxpayer funded “green” commercials, Bill Ritter’s legacy will be nothing more than busting the budget to provide taxpayer giveaways to environmental groups.

 

The only possible positive outcome of Ritter’s taxation and energy regulation zealousness would be him leaving as a one-term governor. Unfortunately, he still has two more years to wreak havoc on the economy before he again answers to the voters of Colorado.

 

by Civil Sense

Mark Udall Blames Republicans For Lack Of Energy Debate

At the end of last week’s House adjournment controversy, Boulder County Liberal Mark Udall did insert a statement as promised into the Congressional Record opposing adjournment. Mark Udall’s statement appears to be from an alternative universe, as Mark Udall blames Republicans for the adjournment of the Democrat-controlled House.

 

Madam Speaker [ Nancy Pelosi ], I must oppose this motion to adjourn, because I think the House should continue trying to pass legislation to improve our national energy policies.

 

Regrettably, so far our repeated efforts to do that have been thwarted by the refusal of our friends on the other side of the aisle to support any of the proposals that have been considered.

 

Of course, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s strategy has been to suspend the rules, thus disallowing any floor debate on the bills presented. This tactic forces a two-thirds supermajority to approve any bill proposed in this situation. A good Wall Street Journal analysis of the Delay, Don’t Drill, Do-Nothing Democrat procedure is here.

 

Mark Udall proceeds to detail his litany of assertions towards Republicans.

 

They have voted against renewable energy, against the first new vehicle efficiency standards in 32 years-saving $1,000 in fuel costs per car per year - and against reducing transit fares for commuter rail and buses.

 

Nothing in this paragraph will affect energy supply or policy. Renewable energy production cannot compete with fossil fuels in the market, and the taxpayers should not pay for subsidies to help Mark Udall’s allies in the green energy business. Fuel efficiency standards are completely unnecessary. Not only do they limit the choice vehicle manufacturers may offer consumers, rising fuel costs already shifted consumer demand towards more efficient vehicles and away from SUV’s and trucks. Transit fare subsidies do lower the costs to the rider. However, these extreme fare subsidies do not affect the underlying high energy costs, causing situations such as Denver’s RTD increased ridership with lower fare revenue.

 

They have voted against expedited drilling in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve and against adding a due-diligence requirement that could stimulate expedited exploration and development on other Federal lands already leased for that purpose.

 

They also voted against releasing 10% of the record amounts of oil stored in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (to be replaced with heavy oil that is better suited for that storage) even though that addition to the supplies on the market could ease gas prices.

 

The reason for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is to have an emergency supply in case of a catastrophic cutoff of the supply, not to manipulate the oil markets. When Hurricane Katrina hit, the physical oil infrastructure was knocked offline. It made some sense to release some of the Strategic Reserve then. Today, there is no physical shortage of oil, which is why one can buy as much as one wishes at the market price. Instead, it is the perceived scarcity in the future oil supply that drives the high petroleum prices. A one-time reserve release may temporarily drop prices slightly; however, it will do nothing about the economic factors driving the price of oil. Plus, the government will need to refill the Strategic Reserve at the market prices of the day. At $120 per barrel for 70 million barrels, this will cost the taxpayer $8.4 billion.

 

And, finally, too many of our Republican colleagues opposed better regulation of the commodity markets, to reduce the ability of speculators to artificially increase the price of oil, even though the bill had been approved in the Agriculture Committee by voice vote and was supported by the committee's ranking Republican Member.

 

Mark Udall, whether inadvertently or deliberately, displays a remarkable lack of understanding of speculators. While Congress could limit or ban US trading in the oil markets, it would do nothing to lower the costs of oil. Oil is traded worldwide, and limitations on trade only increase prices. Speculation can also lower prices. No one complained in the late 1990’s when excess oil supply caused gas prices below $1 per gallon.

 

Mark Udall then closes his statement thusly:

 

But I think we owe it to our constituents and to the country to stay here at least for now, and to continue working on energy legislation. And for that reason, I cannot vote for this motion to adjourn.

 

This is perhaps the only sentiment of the entire statement that makes sense. However, if energy prices truly concerned Mark Udall, he would have joined the Republican “Guerrilla Congress” who remained after Nancy Pelosi shut off the lights debating energy policy options, not blaming the Republicans for the summer recess. Unfortunately for Colorado, Mark Udall’s only true concern is for his allies in the alternative energy and environmental lobbies who, in turn, line Udall’s campaign coffers.

 

by Civil Sense

Helping Out Obama

On Saturday, the El Paso County GOP, led by Greg Garcia, passed out tire guages at a local gas station.  Barak Obama claims that we can solve the oil crisis and bring down the price of gas just by keeping our tires properly inflated.

The Local GOP took him at his word and passed out tire guages.

Boulder County Liberal Mark Udall Makes A Promise

Boulder County Liberal Congressman Mark Udall and Republican Senate Candidate Bob Schaffer squared off in a debate yesterday.  Today's Denver Post previews the debate that will air next Sunday on Denver Fox 31.

 

In the debate taped Monday to be televised Sunday evening on KDVR-Channel 31, [ Mark ] Udall talked repeatedly and aggressively about energy, hoping to recapture the issue. He underscored short-term fixes that include an effort by Democrats in Congress to rein in oil price speculation and force oil companies to drill on current leases or lose them.

 

For his part, Republican Bob Schaffer challenged [ Mark ] Udall to vote against letting Congress go to summer recess if it hasn't passed a new energy bill — something that's unlikely — and Udall agreed, surprising even Schaffer's campaign manager, Dick Wadhams.

 

"We'll see what he actually does" next week, said Wadhams, who said he expects the energy issue to dominate the race right up until the election in November.

 

It is unlikely that Nancy Pelosi and the Delay, Don’t Drill, Do Nothing Democrats would allow debate on an energy bill before summer recess as this would force vulnerable Democrat House members to vote against their leadership. Time will tell whether or not Mark Udall will have to follow through or renege on his promise to vote against summer recess.

 

Perhaps the saddest part of Mark Udall’s statement is his continual blame of speculators for high oil prices. The speculators are only pricing oil based upon the incomplete information that they have about future supply and demand. To a speculator, Udall’s own anti-drilling, alternative energy-only rhetoric shows that future supply will be curtailed even with increasing demand. All else being equal, if Mark Udall came out tomorrow with legislation supporting drilling, chances are that oil prices would fall. Obviously, his friends in the environmental movement would burn him in effigy for that.

 

The only question left is why Mark Udall transfers blame from his own policy decisions to supposedly nefarious speculators. Perhaps he believes the electorate to be naïve. Or, perhaps the naïve idealist is actually Boulder County Liberal Democrat Mark Udall.

 

by Civil Sense

Colorado Presidential, Congressional Races In Dead Heat

The Colorado Senate race is now back to a statistical dead heat. Today’s Rocky Mountain News reports that Liberal Boulder County Congressman Mark Udall lost his polling lead over former Congressman Bob Schaffer.

And in the U.S. Senate race, Republican Bob Schaffer has closed the gap against Democrat Mark Udall. [ Mark ] Udall was ahead a month ago by 10 percentage points, but the latest numbers show a dead heat — 44 to 44.

In addition to Bob Schaffer closing the gap, Republican Presidential nominee John McCain now leads Democrat Barack Obama in Colorado.

John McCain is now winning among likely Colorado voters, helped by a surge of sentiment blaming Democrats for the soaring price of gas, new poll results show.

The Quinnipiac University polls show [ John ] McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, the top choice among 46 percent of likely voters. Democrat Barack Obama is the top choice among 44 percent of likely voters.

A month ago, [ Barack ] Obama held a 49-44 percent lead over McCain in the same poll.

These poll numbers seem to be more reasonable. Colorado still has more Republicans than Democrats or unaffiliated voters. Both races are likely to be close in the end. Still, something else may have caused this shift in polling data.

Democrats were winning on the energy issue as recently as April -- convincing voters that their recipe for alternative fuels, wind and solar energy, was the best solution for America's future, public opinion guru Floyd Ciruli said this morning.

"Then it shifted in April, when gasoline hit $4 a gallon," said Ciruli, who heads Ciruli & Associates of Denver.

Suddenly, the pain at the gas pump was so acute that most voters moved away from the idealistic view of an American energy diet and looked for who to blame for the high prices, he said.

They chose the Democrats, who've opposed drilling off shore and in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, in the name of environmental sustainability.

After several months of $4 gas, people realize that the policies of the Delay, Don’t Drill, Do Nothing Democrats will only further erode our standard of living. While July poll results obviously are subject to change, this data shows that the Republicans have a great wedge issue with energy policy. In any event, Bob Schaffer and John McCain have a long, hard battle to election day.

by Civil Sense