Web Only// Views » July 3, 2010
A New Deregulatory Push In the Energy Heartland
Congressional reluctance to proactively legislate eco-friendly regulation is less outrageous than the state-based push for full-on deregulation.
In recent weeks, Washington has provided ample evidence that the fossil fuel industry remains as powerful as ever in the wake of the Gulf Coast apocalypse. Whether it’s Louisiana’s Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu demanding more offshore drilling as her state gets covered in sludge, or Texas Republican Rep. Joe Barton criticizing the government for forcing BP to finance a spill relief fund, major political players in D.C. still do energy firms’ bidding, leaving both national parties disinclined to champion stronger environmental statutes.
Such Beltway intransigence is certainly atrocious, and has rightfully generated media fury. However, congressional reluctance to proactively legislate eco-friendly regulation is less outrageous than the state-based push for full-on deregulation.
The key political battlefield in this little-noticed but big-impact fight is Colorado, which holds one of the country’s largest oil and natural gas reserves. In the state’s 2010 gubernatorial campaign, former congressman Scott McInnis (R) and Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper (D) have turned the race into a competition to see who is more enthusiastic about shredding the minimal energy regulations already on the state’s books.
Among the rules in question are: requirements that drillers consult with regulators when operating in sensitive wilderness, provisions creating no-drill buffers around drinking water supplies and mandates that energy companies follow more strict waste management guidelines. To understand how crucial such regulations are in the Rocky Mountain region, just look at Chevron’s 20,000-gallon petroleum spill in Utah a few weeks ago, peruse the Denver Post’s recent report documenting 1,000 drilling-related spills in Colorado over the last two years, or watch the HBO documentary Gasland showing citizens in drilling country lighting their chemically contaminated tap water on fire.
Despite all this, and despite analysts now warning that Gulf-inspired offshore drilling restrictions could mean even more drilling throughout Colorado’s fragile ecosystem, both McInnis and Hickenlooper last week told energy executives that they would try to weaken state environmental regulations if elected.
As a former oil lobbyist, McInnis was at least consistent in his “drill, baby, drill” posture. Hickenlooper, by contrast, had been billing himself as an environmental advocate. That is, until he launched his gubernatorial campaign by attacking environmentalists as “overboard,” insisting he is skeptical about climate change’s potential consequences, and now criticizing energy regulations as “onerous.”
But, then, consistency (or lack thereof) is less troubling than both candidates dishonestly justifying their positions with old fables about the environmental rules allegedly hampering energy exploration and killing jobs.
These industry-manufactured claims, mind you, have been previously debunked. The Associated Press, for instance, has reported that though the recession hurt all energy producers including Colorado, the state still “led its energy-producing neighbors” in drilling permits last year–even with the rules. Meanwhile, the Ft. Collins Coloradoan in February noted that “after years of claiming Colorado’s new oil and gas regulations will chase the energy industry and its jobs from the state, oil and gas operators and an industry group are now saying the rules will have little impact on future energy development.”
In light of those facts, the deregulatory push by McInnis and Hickenlooper can be viewed as the equivalent of trying to ramrod candy down a child’s throat. So desperate to display their fealty to the fossil fuel industry, the two candidates have resorted to force feeding oil and gas executives goodies–even if those executives say they don’t need them.
Such persistence exposes the destructive corporatism baked into our politics. Suddenly, we can see both parties’ ideological rejection of the Gulf Coast’s “first do no harm” lesson in favor of industry’s consequences-be-damned reflex.
That profiteering ethos, of course, originally birthed the Gulf crisis. Now, thanks to Colorado, it threatens yet more ecologically sensitive regions with the prospect of yet more man-made disasters.
ABOUT THIS AUTHOR
David Sirota, an In These Times senior editor and syndicated columnist, is a bestselling author whose book Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now—Our Culture, Our Politics, Our Everything was released in March of 2011. Sirota, whose previous books include The Uprising and Hostile Takeover, hosts the morning show on AM760 in Denver. E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com or follow him on Twitter @davidsirota.

SAVE 53% OFF
Reader Comments
For some time I have thought we need a Constitutional Amendment to limit the runaway power of the US Congress.
Now I think we need to relocate the nation’s capitol…to Peoria!
So much of what apparently passes for wisdom in D.C. doesn’t play well out in mid-America.
Although people have tried to express these alternate views in Tea Parties, emails, snail mail and town hall meetings — they either just don’t care or are totally oblivious.
I think the original idea was our representatives were to act as our lobbyists without the thousands of go-betweens running interference.
Posted by whattheheck on Jul 3, 2010 at 8:55 AM
Thanks…
Posted by zayiflama lida on Jul 4, 2010 at 5:28 PM
nice efforts
Posted by ellim on Jul 5, 2010 at 11:12 PM
Posting Security