By Dick Miller
WE CONNECT DOTS: In a campaign drowning with distractions from reality, the “War on Coal” ranks among the most ludicrous.
The fictitious accusation that President Obama is doing his utmost to close every coal mine has all the ingredients needed for a lampoon saga. True, coal is on the decline as an energy fossil fuel. After all, other fuels burn cleaner and can be mined with less damage to the environment. The previous goes without saying in this 2012 Presidential campaign patterned after “Alice in Wonderland.”
Drop in a segment of the electorate seeking any and all excuses to oust Obama without revealing their true bigotry. Factor in a castrated media, afraid of alienating big energy companies and investor-owned utilities, large advertisers all.
Finally, a stunt like this could never be pulled off without an opposition party cowering and cringing on all major issues where the Republicans have already been deemed to occupy the high ground. And from Richard Trumpka, United Mine Workers leader who now commands the entire AFL-CIO: nary a peep.
First thought: this is a sequel to Michael Moore’s movie “Canadian Bacon,” where President Alan Alda declares war on our northern neighbor to raise his poll numbers. John Candy, shouting “Canadian Beer Sucks,” leads the invasion.
Instead, the issue has made West Virginia a sure bet for Mitt Romney and done unfair damage to U.S. Senator Bob Casey’s support in Western Pennsylvania. Casey’s opponent, Tom Smith made a fortune underpaying his workers to dig coal from the landscape. He should know better, but needs to capitalize on the issue because he runs too far behind otherwise.
Here is the truth about the “War on Coal,” but keep it under wraps or the Republicans won’t be able to fool the voters.
Four years ago the campaign issue was this. “Environment be damned,” we need to drill in every nook and cranny for cheap energy instead of patronizing banana republic dictators. This year the candidates argue about renewable energy and fossil fuels. Changes in technology in the last four years has made these newer domestic sources more feasible.
Continued advancement in technology is certain to make drastic changes in the market. For example, demand for coal is shrinking. A new natural gas-fired electric generation plant is proposed for Lawrence County to replace a half-dozen plants now using coal.
Perhaps because coal was always plagued by environmental concerns, a corporate welfare system, similar to the oil industry, was never developed. Coal companies actually had to function in the manner Republicans always claimed their business base did in the “free market.” Campaign checks from coal barons don’t buy as much influence as those from oil and other energy companies.
Beginning with the price of gasoline, Romney has blamed every energy fuel problem on Obama, some legitimate, some not. For example, Romney ignored the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico as a reason for a drop in domestic production during Obama’s first term.
Overall, domestic oil production under Obama has increased to the highest level in two decades. Romney has no counter to this statistic so he denies its veracity.
Romney’s energy policy is fixated on reducing “mpg” targets for vehicle fuel efficiency, deleting mercury levels in coal burning and dropping greenhouses gases from the Clean Air Act. Romney’s failure to deliver on these commitments could result in refunds of campaign contributions.
Obama’s delay in approval of Keystone pipeline construction has been another target of Romney’s attack, everywhere but Nebraska. Obama is expected to approve the pipeline when all concerns with the pipeline endangering an aquifer which is the source for most of that state’s drinking water. That will be too late to turn Nebraska blue.
Market forces, not government and politics, dictate retail energy prices. The only ways Romney can earn his campaign support are creating new tax breaks and sabotaging environmental regulations. He and his campaign contributors know that.
