Obama's State of the Union Address Generating Mixed Reaction From Both Sides of Drilling Debate
First, from Forbes comes an article entitled "President Obama Gets It: Fracking Is Awesome." The article starts out by praising and agreeing with Obama's comments about oil and natural gas production increases and the positive impacts they have had for Americans. But then it states:
So, a slightly mixed reaction from that Forbes staffer.No wonder President Obama said tonight that “my administration will keep cutting red tape and speeding up new oil and gas permits.”That’s music to the ears of the oil and gas industry.But then why does the president have to go and mess it up? In his speech tonight he said:“Indeed, much of our new-found energy is drawn from lands and waters that we, the public, own together. So tonight, I propose we use some of our oil and gas revenues to fund an Energy Security Trust that will drive new research and technology to shift our cars and trucks off oil for good. If a non-partisan coalition of CEOs and retired generals and admirals can get behind this idea, then so can we. Let’s take their advice and free our families and businesses from the painful spikes in gas prices we’ve put up with for far too long.”
Next up, the staunchly anti-fossil fuel organization Food & Water Watch makes their mixed view on Obama's comments clear in the first line of their press release:
President Obama was right to proclaim the importance of speeding our transition to a clean energy future last night in his State of the Union Address, but natural gas has no place in that plan. The so-called natural gas boom he described is only locking us into further dependence on dirty, polluting fossil fuels, while destroying our communities and the resources on which they thrive.And then there's the American Petroleum Institute, which begins its press release by welcoming Obama's call for more domestic oil and natural gas development. By the fourth paragraph, though, the API is calling out Obama for failing, in their view, to do what is necessary to truly allow that increased development to happen:
Unfortunately, 83 percent of the land and offshore areas controlled by the federal government are still off-limits to oil and natural gas development. President Obama must follow through by implementing a national energy policy, lifting existing restrictions in support of responsible development of our vast energy resources, approving the Keystone XL pipeline, and standing up against unnecessary and burdensome regulations that chill economic growth.The Marcellus Shale Coalition, meanwhile, focused only on the part of Obama's address that they liked, and released a wholly positive response:
Tonight, President Obama laid out an aggressive agenda for America’s future, with energy, job creation and manufacturing leading the way. As the President made clear, the responsible and effectively-regulated development of clean-burning American natural gas has lowered ‘nearly everyone’s energy bills’ all while safeguarding our environment and strengthening our economy.Marcellus Drilling News, on the other hand, was completely negative in their assessment of Obama's speech:
Because there’s a manufactured “crisis,” the Great and Powerful BHOz will fix it. He “urges” Congress to address it, and if they don’t? This threat: “I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future.” That is, he will rule by fiat. He will create laws in place of Congress—a 100% violation of the U.S. Constitution. In other words, he’ll behave like Adolf Hitler did. Like Benito Mussolini did. Like Joseph Stalin did. Like Hugo Chávez does. Like Fidel and Raul Castro do.But seriously, MDN, tell us how you really feel! You can read that whole article by clicking here (subscription is required).
None of these responses are terribly surprising. They basically demonstrate that no matter what Obama - or anyone else - says, people are going to be unhappy.
Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!
Follow @EnergyNewsBlog
