Clinton Sidesteps Keystone, Vexes Environmentalists and Coal Advocates : Ben Wolfgang
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/2/hillary-clinton-makes-no-mention-keystone-pipeline/?page=2
““You can hope all you want, [but] the reality is [Mrs. Clinton] is not likely to stray very far from the path Barack Obama has outlined as far as energy,” said Marita Noon, executive director of the advocacy group Energy Makes America Great. “Unfortunately, energy has become a very partisan issue, which I think is a shame. Democrats are totally going down the path of the fantasy that we can power the world on butterflies, rainbows and pixie dust.”
Hillary Clinton’s refusal to even mention the Keystone XL pipeline — let alone take a public position on the project — during a high-profile speech Monday night underscores the mystery surrounding her energy platform, with both environmentalists and coal advocates believing the former secretary of state could be an ally of theirs if she seeks the White House in 2016.
Mrs. Clinton’s address to the powerful League of Conservation Voters demonstrated her appeal to environmentalists, who hope the Democratic Party’s presidential front-runner would stick with President Obama’s ambitious climate change policies if she becomes the next president.
Hillary Clinton’s refusal to even mention the Keystone XL pipeline — let alone take a public position on the project — during a high-profile speech Monday night underscores the mystery surrounding her energy platform, with both environmentalists and coal advocates believing the former secretary of state could be an ally of theirs if she seeks the White House in 2016.
Mrs. Clinton’s address to the powerful League of Conservation Voters demonstrated her appeal to environmentalists, who hope the Democratic Party’s presidential front-runner would stick with President Obama’s ambitious climate change policies if she becomes the next president.
She’s explained away her lack of a position by claiming conflict of interest, since the State Department, which Mrs. Clinton led from 2009 to 2012, is overseeing environmental reviews and permitting processes for the pipeline.
During her address, Mrs. Clinton did indicate energy and climate change would be priorities of hers if she ends up in the Oval Office.
“The science of climate change is unforgiving, no matter what the deniers may say. Sea levels are rising, ice caps are melting, storms, droughts and wildfires are wreaking havoc,” Mrs. Clinton said. “The political challenges are also unforgiving.
There is no getting around the fact the kind of ambitious response required to effectively combat climate change is going to be a tough sell at home and around the world at a time when so many countries, including our own, are grappling with slow growth and stretched budget. … If we act decisively now, we can still head off the catastrophic consequences.”
Mrs. Clinton also said it will take “strong leadership” to change the fact that the U.S. economy still runs primarily on fossil fuels. Those comments hint that the former first lady will continue in Mr. Obama’s footsteps, using federal money and regulations to muscle out coal while heavily supporting renewable energy.
But hours before Mrs. Clinton spoke, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) said it’s eager for the former secretary of state to be in their corner, both during her campaign and during her potential time as president.
“As Mrs. Clinton considers another run for the White House, we hope that she continues to be the voice of reason for coal-powered electricity,” said Laura Sheehan, ACCCE’s senior vice president for communications.
Ms. Sheehan pointed to comments Mrs. Clinton made during her previous run for president in 2008. At a campaign stop in Indiana that year, she said the government must invest in clean coal and recognize the fact that the energy source will remain vital to America’s growth for years to come.
Coal provides nearly 40 percent of the nation’s electricity.
“We’re going to use coal. There’s no doubt about that. It’s just that we’ve got to figure out how to make it as clean as coal can be,” Mrs. Clinton said in 2008.
Political analysts say the energy issue is an example of classic presidential politics on the part of Mrs. Clinton, who wants to remain as vague as possible for as long as possible and court supporters on each side of a given debate until such a strategy no longer is viable.
“She’s got both sides considering her a potential ally, and that’s exactly what you want, especially in this early stage,” said Bruce Buchanan, a political science professor at the University of Texas at Austin who specializes in presidential politics. “At some point you do have to get specific. That time will come during the middle of a televised presidential debate, when seeming equivocal in front of a national audience is hurtful. … But she’s not there yet.”
But critics say Mrs. Clinton is being disingenuous on the issue of energy, and that groups such as ACCCE should not put much hope in the idea of the former first lady supporting their interests.
There is no getting around the fact the kind of ambitious response required to effectively combat climate change is going to be a tough sell at home and around the world at a time when so many countries, including our own, are grappling with slow growth and stretched budget. … If we act decisively now, we can still head off the catastrophic consequences.”
Mrs. Clinton also said it will take “strong leadership” to change the fact that the U.S. economy still runs primarily on fossil fuels. Those comments hint that the former first lady will continue in Mr. Obama’s footsteps, using federal money and regulations to muscle out coal while heavily supporting renewable energy.
But hours before Mrs. Clinton spoke, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) said it’s eager for the former secretary of state to be in their corner, both during her campaign and during her potential time as president.
“As Mrs. Clinton considers another run for the White House, we hope that she continues to be the voice of reason for coal-powered electricity,” said Laura Sheehan, ACCCE’s senior vice president for communications.
Ms. Sheehan pointed to comments Mrs. Clinton made during her previous run for president in 2008. At a campaign stop in Indiana that year, she said the government must invest in clean coal and recognize the fact that the energy source will remain vital to America’s growth for years to come.
Coal provides nearly 40 percent of the nation’s electricity.
“We’re going to use coal. There’s no doubt about that. It’s just that we’ve got to figure out how to make it as clean as coal can be,” Mrs. Clinton said in 2008.
Political analysts say the energy issue is an example of classic presidential politics on the part of Mrs. Clinton, who wants to remain as vague as possible for as long as possible and court supporters on each side of a given debate until such a strategy no longer is viable.
“She’s got both sides considering her a potential ally, and that’s exactly what you want, especially in this early stage,” said Bruce Buchanan, a political science professor at the University of Texas at Austin who specializes in presidential politics. “At some point you do have to get specific. That time will come during the middle of a televised presidential debate, when seeming equivocal in front of a national audience is hurtful. … But she’s not there yet.”
But critics say Mrs. Clinton is being disingenuous on the issue of energy, and that groups such as ACCCE should not put much hope in the idea of the former first lady supporting their interests.
Mrs. Clinton did, for example, tell environmentalists Monday night that the Obama administration has taken “unprecedented action” on climate change and that action should be protected from any Republican attempts to roll it back.
The administration’s specific steps include dramatic new limits on power plant emissions, which, by all accounts, will result in far less coal being burned.
“You can hope all you want, [but] the reality is [Mrs. Clinton] is not likely to stray very far from the path Barack Obama has outlined as far as energy,” said Marita Noon, executive director of the advocacy group Energy Makes America Great. “Unfortunately, energy has become a very partisan issue, which I think is a shame. Democrats are totally going down the path of the fantasy that we can power the world on butterflies, rainbows and pixie dust.”
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/2/hillary-clinton-makes-no-mention-keystone-pipeline/#ixzz3Kptq1ng8
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Comments are closed.
