Janet Contreras Vs. Ed Pastor : On Energy And Oil

63

By Ghost32

Common Sense

When it comes to energy policy, Janet Contreras (candidate for Congress in Arizona CD4) is easy to understand: If it helps the nation and also helps people, let's do it. (I'm paraphrasing.) Incumbent Ed "Puppet" Pastor, unfortunately, takes his energy stand--if you can call it that--based on the Pelosi party line and (Socialist) Progressive ideology.

Am I the only one who notices the similarities between those two words, i.e. "ideologue" and "idiot"?

On the energy front, nothing would make Contreras happier than to see energetic private sector businesses--oil giants and brand new Mom & Pop startups alike--freeing the U.S.A. entirely from dependency on foreign oil (easily done if we fully develop the Bakken formation in North Dakota and Montana--Google it)...while at the same time improving wind and solar technology to the point that neither one needs federal subsidies to compete in the energy market.

Wow, that's a long sentence. Says what it needed to say, though. Oh, not quite. Please add clean coal and nuclear power plants to the mix.

Now, Mr. Pastor? Essentially--remember, he's toeing the party line, damn the People and full speed ahead--essentially, he'd like to shut down drilling for oil and natural gas entirely. Force the country to turn instantly to wind and solar energy, no coal, no nuclear, no s**t.

Can you spell "cold turkey"?

I've long believed that if every voter clearly understand both candidates when the polls open on November 2, Janet Contreras will defeat Ed Pastor in a landslide not unlike the 1959 earthquake in Montana that buried a whole bunch of campers and created what has since been known as Quake Lake. In the interest of simply seeing her win by a sizeable margin, how be we take a looksee at the Pastor Pattern.

It's not hard to do. There's a website that sums up every Congressman's positions on major issues. Here's Ed Pastor on Energy and Oil:

  • Voted YES on enforcing limits on CO2 global warming pollution. (Jun 2009)
  • Voted YES on tax credits for renewable electricity, with PAYGO offsets. (Sep 2008)
  • Voted YES on tax incentives for energy production and conservation. (May 2008)
  • Voted YES on tax incentives for renewable energy. (Feb 2008)
  • Voted YES on investing in homegrown biofuel. (Aug 2007)
  • Voted YES on criminalizing oil cartels like OPEC. (May 2007)
  • Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jan 2007)
  • Voted YES on keeping moratorium on drilling for oil offshore. (Jun 2006)
  • Voted NO on scheduling permitting for new oil refinieries. (Jun 2006)
  • Voted NO on authorizing construction of new oil refineries. (Oct 2005)
  • Voted NO on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy. (Jun 2004)
  • Voted NO on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy. (Nov 2003)
  • Voted NO on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels. (Aug 2001)
  • Voted YES on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. (Aug 2001)
  • Voted YES on starting implementation of Kyoto Protocol. (Jun 2000)
  • Regulate wholesale electricity & gas prices. (Mar 2001)
  • Preserve Alaska's ANWR instead of drilling it. (Feb 2001)
  • Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence. (Dec 2006)

The Bakken formation, ALL we need for complete independence from foreign oil.  Google it!
See all 2 photos
The Bakken formation, ALL we need for complete independence from foreign oil. Google it!

Commentary

One item in that anti-oil voting history deserves a bit of clarification, namely the first (at the bottom, above) entry from 2005. First of all, the CAF is not about energy independence. It's about, and this comes from the actual CAF website,

"...support for homegrown, clean energy alternatives...."

In other words, a 100% CAF rating (which Ed Pastor earned) means no drilling. Anywhere. Ever. The CAF? Oh, that's the Campaign for America's Future, and yes, it is indeed a Progressive organization.

Was there ever any doubt?

Summary: If you're a CD4 resident who already has a high paying job (my last job in western Colorado's gasfield drilling boom paid roughly $80,000 per year)...and who always has more cheap gas for your ride than you can fit in the tank...then you might want to vote for Ed just 13 days from now.

Otherwise....

Contreras 2010 and Remember in November.

Janet Contreras for Congress.
Janet Contreras for Congress.

Comments

pcoach profile image

pcoach Level 3 Commenter 19 months ago

Hey, thanks for the new link to ontheissues.com. Have not used it before. I have passed your info on to my Phoenix daughter. I really hope Arizona cleans up this year. Good job as usual.

Ghost32 profile image

Ghost32 Hub Author 19 months ago

Yeah, we hope Arizona cleans up this year, too. It's certainly a pure dee fact that a lot of us are scrubbing as hard as we can!

Submit a Comment
Members and Guests

Sign in or sign up and post using a hubpages account.



    • No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked
    • Comments are not for promoting your Hubs or other sites

    Please wait working