On Wednesday, February
23rd, the four Republican presidential candidates were in my town, Mesa,
Arizona, for yet another round of “debate.” As everyone knows (and as
Tom Zoellner’s recent book excerpt
reminded HCN readers), Arizona is friendly turf for these guys, and
conservative Mesa may be friendliest of all. The audience at the Mesa
Arts Center consisted mostly of local GOP bigwigs – there are lots of
those, including virtually the whole state legislature — so it was not
surprising that Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, and Paul spent little time
defending the substance of their remarkably similar views and instead
squabbled about who disagrees most fiercely with President Obama.
Of course, that’s an
oversimplification. No doubt some serious policy concerns were
addressed, but isn’t it all starting to blur together after the nineteen
previous debates? The local media complained afterward that few hot topics
for Arizonans (except immigration, of course) came up, but by now the
four men know the script so well they may not be able to stray from it.
So, what are some
Arizona hot topics? One that we share with other Western states is
energy development, both the renewable and non-renewable kinds. For a
red state, Arizona’s been making some positive strides in solar and bio-fuel
production. Where do the GOP candidates stand on those? Though the
subject of energy was mentioned in Wednesday’s debate, I visited each
Republican candidate’s website to check out his views
There are no big
surprises, of course. They are unified in their desire to step up
exploration for traditional non-renewable sources such as oil, natural
gas, coal, and uranium. While Santorum’s site
mentions bio-mass, wind, and solar (one of the few to do so) with the
vague promise to “expand domestic innovations” into these sources, he is
much more explicit about his plans to support private sector oil and
natural gas drilling by gutting all regulations associated with them.
And, of course, this is the guy who equates President Obama’s
environmental views with “phony theology.” Romney and Paul
simply dismiss efforts to expand alternative energy sources. Romney,
echoing the “phony theology” reasoning, accuses the Obama administration
of “operating more on faith than on fact-based economic
calculation” in supporting green technologies. Paul blames
“environmental alarmists” for designing “federal policies to punish traditional energy production.” Gingrich,
on the other hand, proposes a fiendish compromise wherein the U.S. will
“finance cleaner energy research and projects with new oil and gas
royalties.”
I wish there were a better way – perhaps a real
debate? – to engage the presidential contender in a serious, detailed
discussion of energy policy. Unfortunately, voters must rely on the
carefully spun, substance-free P.R. in websites, ads, and events like
the one here in Mesa. Then again, Al Gore tried to talk energy and got
dismissed as too boring and wonky. I guess we get what we ask for.
Jackie Wheeler teaches writing and environmental rhetoric at Arizona State University.
Essays in the Range blog are not written by High Country News. The authors are solely responsible for the content.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
