By: Doug Roth

Speaking in Elkhart, IN last week, Senator Barack Obama unveiled his energy plan for America at the Concord high school gymnasium. Our Senator Evan Bayh, who may be on Obama’s short-list for VP, was on hand to introduce his liberal colleague to a community devastated by the energy crisis through job cuts in the struggling RV industry. The speech offered by Obama was similar to many of his recent engagements, with a central theme of vilifying “big oil.”

Senator Obama’s plan focuses on massive amounts of spending, relying much too heavily on increased taxes for so-called “windfall profits.” It includes plenty of government mandates on the types and amounts of fuels America will pursue and employ in the future; yet another instance of liberal Democrats deciding what is best for you. Additionally, Obama seems to think, as does Joe Donnelly, that in order to reign in skyrocketing fuel costs, we should penalize those that provide our energy.

The centerpiece of Obama’s energy plan is undoubtedly the “windfall profits tax.” Despite a profit margin that is considerably lower than other industries such as pharmaceuticals or software, many left-leaning politicians have placed a large target on oil companies. Even though economic models show that taxes are always passed on to consumers, Obama and the Dems think that higher taxation will somehow alleviate the price you pay at the pump. Where is the logic in this? Disincentives such as these will only lead to lost tax revenue for the government and less energy for Americans, as providers scale back to avoid penalization.

Obama’s long-term energy plans are not much better. Although he has recently relented to the overwhelming support for offshore drilling, it is painfully obvious that any new exploration or extraction of oil will be so heavily regulated that the investment would be nearly impossible to justify. Furthermore, the “use it or lose it” approach to existing leases by oil companies will result in even more lost tax revenue for the US government. If the investment in extraction could be justified, these leases would be producing energy today. Finally, Obama’s cap-and-trade policy on emissions will greatly hinder the US economy by placing unnecessary regulation on American industry. This policy initiative would be of great advantage to competing industries in developing nations like China, India, and Brazil.

My absolute favorite Democratic energy policies are “responsible” drilling and “safe and secure” nuclear. These promises of safety, security, and responsibility imply massive regulation and oversight in the unlikely event that such avenues are even pursued by the Democrats in Congress or Obama. As far as I know, no one is pushing for reckless drilling and negligent nuclear. The technology exists for an American energy industry that can operate efficiently without government interference.

Barack Obama’s energy policy is wrong for America. Even more distressing for 2^nd district Hoosiers is the fact that our Congressman, Joe Donnelly, has chosen to endorse Obama despite Senator Clinton’s victory in the Indiana primary election. Joe Donnelly could learn a thing or two from other Democratic superdelegates such as Pennsylvania Rep. Christopher Carney, who said that “Pennsylvania’s 10th District overwhelmingly chose Senator Clinton in the Pennsylvania primary and I will respect their decision.” Even Utah Democratic Party official Helen Langen, responsible to no constituency, chose the high road, stating, “I feel an obligation that my vote reflect the way Utah Democrats voted. Most of us didn’t expect to find our votes mattering so much this time.”

After pocketing $7,500 in campaign contributions from Obama’s HopeFund PAC, Donnelly has once again shown blatant disregard for his constituency by offering his support as a superdelegate to Obama, flawed energy policy and all. Donnelly sure is an “independent voice” in Washington; independent of what the 2^nd district of Indiana elected him to do. It sort of makes you wonder who else is buying Joe Donnelly’s votes.

By: Doug Roth

Back in April, Joe Donnelly announced his plan to lower gas prices by about 25 cents. All the local news stations covered the story, and on April 24, 2008, Donnelly even sent an open letter to President Bush with his plan for “immediate relief.” Donnelly and his liberal colleagues in the House of Representatives eventually got their way, but has anyone noticed a drastic drop in prices at the pump? I surely have not. The reason is because Joe’s relief plan was to suspend shipments to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which would bring about 70,000 more barrels of oil to market per day. Sounds like quite a bit of oil until you take into consideration U.S. demand is nearly 20,000,000 barrels per day. Suspending SPR shipments is just a drop in the bucket, a plan that University of Notre Dame economist Tom Gresik claims will only have an impact for “about 5 days.”

So what was the impact you may ask? Well, the bill passed, and shipments were suspended on July 1. On June 30, oil was being traded at $139.96 and gas was at a nationwide average of about $4.14. One week later, with an extra 70,000 barrels of oil per day, gas was at $4.16 and oil was $141.37. Some relief, Joe! In fact, oil was trading above the June 30 levels for more than two weeks beyond the suspension of SPR shipments, and gas did not fall below $4.14 for three weeks.

When will Joe Donnelly and his liberal friends finally accept the concept of supply and demand? Like it or not, oil drives our economy, and although we must work to change that, it is not going to happen over night. With no immediate substantial change in the demand for oil, it is essential for us to increase the supply of oil by pursuing increased domestic production. Increasing the supply of oil by less than one half of one percent through suspension of shipments to the SPR is not relief. It is a political gimmick used to make Joe Donnelly appear to be concerned with your painful experiences at the gas pump.

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a pristine piece of land.  The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a barren piece of land full of mosquitoes and other bothersome bugs.  Which statement is true?   Both of them are.  Opponents of expanded domestic drilling use only the first statement to jin up support for their side.  What they don’t tell you is that Area 10-02 in the Coastal Plain north region of ANWR is described by the second statement while the first statement only refers to the southern part of the Refuge.  The oil is located in the northern Coastal Plain area where mosquitoes abound.

Don’t believe me?  Check out the below video.  Luke Puckett and his trusty aide Jack Flock were trying to do a quick YouTube shot for the folks back home when they had to cut it short thanks to a swarm of mosquitoes that was trying to eat them alive.  

 

It is Joe Donnelly’s record on energy issues that is under scrutiny, but as you look at that record it becomes quite obvious that consistent votes against opening up domestic oil resources comprise a record of lethargy on an issue many Americans are concerned about.  The Luke Puckettcampaign issued a hard-hitting press release today drawing attention to Donnelly’s consistent record (his rhetoric changes, but his record doesn’t) of anti-domestic drilling votes.

Here is the Release:

Fairbanks, AK-Today Congressional candidate Luke Puckett declared that he is the only candidate running for Congress in Indiana’s 2nd District who supports lowering gas prices for Hoosiers by expanding access to large domestic oil reserves like the ones in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the oil shale deposits of Colorado and Utah.

“From January of 2007 to today, Joe Donnelly has never voted for a bill that would expand domestic oil exploration and drilling. I find it unconscionable that Mr. Donnelly would repeatedly vote to block our access to domestic oil reserves and effectively vote to hold Hoosiers hostage to foreign oil and high gas prices,” Puckett remarked.

Puckett believes that Joe Donnelly has failed to be a leader in Washington on the single biggest issue people across the district care about. The rising gas prices affect everyone from blue collar workers to white collar business owners, from soccer moms to farmers. These people were not helped when Donnelly chose to co-sponsor an obscure energy bill that will probably never see a floor vote while opposing a floor debate and vote on an energy bill that was co-sponsored by 177 members of Congress.

According to Puckett “Co-sponsoring an obscure energy bill while voting time after time against increased domestic drilling hardly qualifies as leadership. If Joe Donnelly were a leader he wouldn’t have waited until gas prices were $4 dollars a gallon and jobs were being lost before he took action. These gas prices are not new and they deserved meaningful action a long time ago.”

For Puckett, Donnelly’s vehement refusal to even sign a simple non-partisan petition stating that we should drill for domestic oil right now in order to lower gas prices illustrates how out-of-touch he is with the district. “Everywhere I go I find people talking about high gas prices and every time our campaign offers them the American Solutions ‘Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less.’ petition they jump at the opportunity to sign it,” said Puckett.

-30-

Footnote: In 2007 Joe Donnelly voted four times against increased domestic drilling. These votes were, in order, Roll Call 40, Roll Call 553, Roll Call 578 and Roll Call 1171. They may be accessed at: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/index.asp

Ten years ago we were told that it would take ten years to get the oil out of ANWR and onto the market. Today we’re told that drilling for oil in ANWR is not really much of a solution because-you probably guessed it-it will take ten years for that oil to reach the market. This argument is rather handy for opponents of domestic drilling because it allows them to eliminate a solution that they don’t like simply by inserting an amount of time between the discussion at hand at when the proposed solution is expected to take affect. In part they are relying on you to forget ten years later when the problem is still around that you mentioned the same solution before-ten years ago.

But does it really take ten years before that oil can reach us and provide us with the relief that we need? Luke Puckett wanted to find out, and here’s what he learned:



Looks like the ten year argument was another one of those myths that seem to cloud the debate about whether or not we should drill for domestic oil.  Hopefully, however, this campaign and Luke Puckett can help clear away some of those myths.

Standing at the airport waiting to board his flight to Alaska, Luke took some time to reiterate why he’s on this trip and why Joe Donnelly isn’t the right choice for Hoosiers tired of high gas prices.  Time after time Donnelly has voted against domestic drilling.  Time after time Donnelly has effectively voted to keep Hoosiers hostage to Middle Eastern oil.  We simply can’t trust Joe Donnelly to put politics aside and America first on the issue of lower gas prices and real energy independence.

This week Luke is in Alaska leading a group of congressional candidates from around the nation on a trip to the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  The purpose of the trip is to draw attention to the fact that we need to drill for domestic oil if we are going to lower gas prices and ease the burden imposed on many Americans by our nation’s over-reliance on foreign oil.  Throughout the trip Luke is doing short YouTube videos talking about where he is at, what he is doing and what he is finding out as he talks to energy experts, environmental experts, and average Alaskans. 

If we can replace Joe Donnelly’s anti-domestic drilling vote in Congress with Luke Puckett’s pro-drilling vote, we’ll begin to see a shift in how Washington approaches the issue of high gas prices.  Second District Hoosiers need somebody who will talk about real solutions and not simply repeat the latest party talking points.

In a few days Luke will be heading off to Alaska with several other congressional candidates to tour the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in order to draw attention to the fact that we need to drill for domestic oil. With gas prices at a record high, and with a significant amount of our oil coming from foreign countries that are sometimes hostile to our interests, Luke believes the time has come for us to declare our energy independence and begin drilling for American oil.

When he’s out talking to people about the need to drill in ANWR, the Gulf Coast and elsewhere, one frequent question that comes up is how much land it will take for drilling operations in ANWR. The answer is that only 2,000 acres out of ANWR’s 19,000,000 acres will be used for drilling and support operations. For a comparison, the state of Indiana is roughly 23,000,000 acres.

The 2,000 acres that we need to access for drilling operations are located on the Refuge’s northernmost section known as the Coastal Plain. This area is not the lush and beautiful part of the Refuge that tourists are often familiar with. Instead of green mountains, blue rivers, and pastures teaming with animal life, the Plain is home to bugs and hardy grass plants and vast spaces of nothingness.

To get an idea of what drilling in ANWR would be like, check out the below chart.

Lately the Puckett for Congress team has been promoting the American Solutions’ “Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less” campaign that is focusing on putting grassroots pressure on Congress to open up access to American oil resources and expand domestic refinery capacity.  (Click here to learn more about Luke’s approach to domestic drilling.)

Congress has dallied about energy independence for years.  Even as late as last year the new Democratic majority was staunchly opposed to allowing energy companies to drill for American oil in environmentally friendly ways.  Although other countries that posses large oil resources are drilling for their own oil (think of Saudi Arabia, Canada, Venezuela, and on the list goes) the United States is not tapping into its own massive oil resources even as the price of oil and refined fuels climbs higher and higher and as citizens feel more and more pain in their wallet at the pump.

Fortunately, our work here in the 2nd Congressional District has had something of an impact on our sitting congressman.  He recently came out in favor of drilling for oil in ANWR.  But isn’t it frustrating that it he didn’t have the foresight and the vision to lead on this issue last year when he cast at least 4 votes to block our access to our own oil resources?  High gas prices didn’t start this year, they’ve been going up for several years now and any leader would have recognized the need to drill for American oil.

If you have not yet done so, take a moment to sign the American Solutions “Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less” petition and watch the video below.

By: Luke Puckett

Hoosiers are rightfully frustrated as they pay $4 or more for a gallon of gas. Every time they fill up they are painfully reminded of our nation’s excessive dependence on foreign oil. For decades now we’ve heard a lot of talk about energy independence. In 1970 we imported 12% of our annual oil consumption. Last year we imported 66% of oil that we use to fuel our cars, our homes, and our transportation industry.

The rising price of gas should come as no surprise to our leaders. Since 2003 the price of oil has climbed higher and higher and recently it hit a record of $138 a barrel. You can be sure that right now there are some very happy oil producers in the Middle East.

Fuel and oil prices have risen in part because current oil production levels cannot keep pace with a growing global demand. Countries such as India and China are going through a growth spurt that shows no signs of slowing down anytime soon.

So does all of this mean Americans have to get used to paying higher fuel prices? No! The good news is that we can begin to lower the price at the pump by doing several things. First, we need to rid ourselves of excessive government regulations that hold us hostage to foreign oil. Government regulations stand between us and lower gas prices and energy independence.

From the arctic tundra of ANWR to the cold dark depths of the Gulf Coast seabed and the outer continental shelf, billions upon billions of barrels of oil wait to be tapped into. Why is that we aren’t working to extract the roughly 1.2 trillion barrels of oil in the shale of Colorado and Utah? Why is that the Chinese can drill in the Gulf of Mexico thanks to their Cuban friends but the United States can’t drill in that same Gulf?

The answer is energy companies are prohibited by federal law from tapping into some of our most promising oil fields. Washington has told these companies that they cannot use environmentally friendly drilling technology to bring this oil to the surface and onto the American market. Just last year Rep. Joe Donnelly voted at least 4 times to prevent us from drilling for domestic oil.

In addition to increasing domestic oil production we need to allow for the construction of new oil refineries. It’s been over 30 years since a new refinery was built in our country and if we merely allow for more domestic oil drilling without allowing for new refineries to be built, a bottleneck will be created and Americans will still be paying high gas prices. Congress and the federal government must act to allow more refineries to be built and existing refineries to be expanded. We don’t need the kind of politics that led Rep. Joe Donnelly to vote last July to condemn the expansion of a Midwest oil refinery.

The second thing that we must do to bring down high gas prices is focus on long term alternatives to oil. While our nation has immense oil reserves, we must keep the future in mind and begin working today to provide long term energy solutions. In Germany they have successfully used a process that takes coal and turns it into liquid fuel that can be used by vehicles. We must make sure that American companies are free to forge ahead in the area of coal-to-liquid technology.

Renewable energy sources such as ethanol and fuels made from organic matter must also be a part of our nation’s long-term energy plan. While these fuels still need to be perfected before they are ready to replace our current petroleum fuels, now is the time for the research and development to take place.

If I am elected to be the next Congressman from Indiana’s 2nd Congressional District, I will make energy independence one of my top priorities. It is time for us to be free to drill for our own oil, lower our gas prices, and begin research and development projects that will give us a future fueled by renewable energy resources.

Luke Puckett is the Republican candidate for Congress in Indiana’s 2nd Congressional District.