Romney's Ever-Changing Coal and Climate Policies
If Mitt Romney wins the presidency, the implications on energy and the environment could be far-reaching. But figuring out what he actually believes is a challenge -- or whether he is just a drifter who shifts with the political winds and hopes to land in the Oval Office.
As governor of Massachusetts, he started out leading as a moderate-to-liberal Republican, at least until the time came to take his political skills to a higher level. Around 2005, he began moving to the right in an effort to get beyond his Northeastern base and into the more conservative national realm where he would seek his party’s 2008 presidential nomination.
His positions are “evolving,” causing skeptics both within the party ranks and outside of them to question whether he has a core belief system and whether he would govern as a moderate or a conservative. Setting aside the whole Romney-Care health package that he once ushered in with great fanfare, there’s also his apparent flip-flop on climate change and on coal. Once an advocate of tighter controls, now he is not.
“The same policies that protect the climate also promote energy efficiency, smart business practices, and improve the environment in which our citizens live and work,” Romney wrote in a 2003 letter prefacing a 52-page plan, in a story that appeared in the National Journal.
Consider that in his first term as the Bay State’s governor, Romney initially supported a regional agreement in which the state would establish controls to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In 2006 -- two years before his 2008 presidential bid -- he changed his tactics. Instead of the cap-and-trade program, he supported modest penalties for coal-fired power plants that release harmful emissions.
As for coal, Romney has been extremely critical of President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency and what he says are the excessive regulations that the administration is putting out. The impact on coal and the utilities that burn it is adverse and if elected, he will work to reverse such actions. Those attacks are occurring in few battleground states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Colorado where the coal issue could tip the scales.
Taking Heat
But Obama is not taking these broadsides sitting down. Just recently, his campaign released footage of Romney giving a talk in front of angry miners -- a 2003 speech in Massachusetts in which he is vowing to shut down a single coal plant there that he says is “killing” people.
Today, Romney says that he is the only remaining White House aspirant who truly supports an all-of-the-above energy strategy -- as opposed to President Obama who has a vengeance for the fossil fuels, and who endorses “crony capitalism.”
“Our extracting industries have become so effective in remediating lands after they have been mined for coal, for instance, as well as making sure that we are not polluting the air,” Romney says, on the stump. “We really don’t have to say to ourselves that we can’t afford to have oil, coal and gas as part of our energy mix.”
Romney continues, noting that he cannot say for sure whether global warming is a naturally-occurring event or whether it is man-made. He does say that any resolution to the phenomenon is the responsibility of the international community and that this is not something that this country should undertake alone, emphasizing that it would damage the United States’ competitiveness.
The positions on climate change and on coal-fired electricity are widely held within the Republican ranks. Those positions are, in fact, separating the two political parties and are giving voters a true and honest distinction. What’s less clear, though, is whether Romney actually believes his words or whether he is just doing what he must so that he can be president.
And while politicians and lawyers are known for prostituting themselves, the nomination process revealed that many Republicans would prefer a candidate on whom they could count through thick and thin -- not one who will change sides during the heat of the battle. For better or worse, former presidential candidate and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorium has always been consistent.
“There’s a big difference between the Northeast and the rest of the country on these issues,” says Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who advised Republican Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign and is now president of a conservative think tank called American Action Forum, in the National Journal story.
Those of presidential timber are able to mature and transform. But the electorate typically prefers the tried and true and not the fickle and fain. Now, though, Romney must stick with the side that got him to where he currently stands -- a position that will undoubtedly move closer to the center as the fall campaign heats up.
EnergyBiz Insider has been awarded the Gold for Original Web Commentary presented by the American Society of Business Press Editors. The column is also the Winner of the 2011 Online Column category awarded by Media Industry News, MIN. Ken Silverstein has been named one of the Top Economics Journalists by Wall Street Economists.
Twitter: @Ken_Silverstein
energybizinsider@energycentral.com



Comments
Catch of the Day
Great column, Ken.
Given the "etch-a-sketch" comment by Romney's own communications director Eric Fehrnstromon, it is certainly reasonable to raise questions about the Governor's intentions here should he become President. Frequent changes in publicly stated positions at politically expedient moments are different than beliefs that evolve over time because you get more information or gain insights into what a given position means.
Based on campaign contributions and the direction of the Republican Party, it is reasonable to anticipate that a President Romney will favor continued subsidies and support of oil, gas, and coal and his administration will abandon financial and rhetorical support for smart grid, renewables, and energy policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gases or pollution.
Whether you support President Obama or not, one has to admit that his administration has supported and accelerated the clean energy goals that many who read Energy Biz are trying to implement. I fear it is wishful thinking to imagine President Romney would govern as a moderate rather than a 'severe conservative' regardless of what is in his heart.
Catch of the Day
Great column, Ken.
Given the "etch-a-sketch" comment by Romney's own communications director Eric Fehrnstromon, it is certainly reasonable to raise questions about the Governor's intentions here should he become President. Frequent changes in publicly stated positions at politically expedient moments are different than beliefs that evolve over time because you get more information or gain insights into what a given position means.
Based on campaign contributions and the direction of the Republican Party, it is reasonable to anticipate that a President Romney will favor continued subsidies and support of oil, gas, and coal and his administration will abandon financial and rhetorical support for smart grid, renewables, and energy policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gases or pollution.
Whether you support President Obama or not, one has to admit that his administration has supported and accelerated the clean energy goals that many who read Energy Biz are trying to implement. I fear it is wishful thinking to imagine President Romney would govern as a moderate rather than a 'severe conservative' regardless of what is in his heart.
List of Flip Flops
http://www.businessinsider.com/14-bald-faced-mitt-romney-flip-flops-that-were-dug-up-by-john-mccain-2012-1?op=1
the original source is john mccain.
Mitt's Energy Views
I read your article on Mitt Romney's energy views with great interest. Just wondering if this report was a factual analysis or a political ad for the Obama campaign. In his short stint in office, Obama has de-energized the nuclear renaissance while virtually eliminating coal as a viable energy source. His absurd focus on wind as a solution to our long term power needs has resulted in increased costs and wasted time in addressing what could potentially become a national crisis.
In the meantime, power providers have sat idle waiting for an energy policy to provide some stability to the market and direction for the future.
And you want to criticize Romney.....?
How will Mitt govern as president?
I don't believe this article is suggesting that Mitt cannot change positions on the subject matter but rather asking the question: "Will Mitt govern as president [on these subjects] based on his campaign platform or his past record?" His position has changed so siginificantly that it's a worthwhile question in my book.
National Energy Debate-Ken Here
Hi to all. I've responded to some direct emails but I think the most efficient way to get out a general response is this way. Most of our readers know that this is an open and civil forum that encourages debate. Most of our readers know that the columns I write generate a thesis and draw a conclusion. This one is no different.
The national election is a few months away. Both Romney's and Obama's records are fair game here. I promise to scrutinize the records of both candidates. In this particularly story, one has to ask if Romney is more interested in being president or whether he has truly shifted polltical philsophies. This story tacitly concludes he is an opportunist -- not unlike a lot of politicos, except that he is running for president.
Agree? Disagree? That's what the forum is about.
If you disagree, don't despair: Obama will get his due too -- specifically tomorrow on a ccompletely different matter.
As to the comment about 'who' our audience is: I get a feel for it, obviously because I write each day. What I can say is that it is wrong to assume they are of one political ideology. They are all over the board, actually. All I try to do is be intellectually honest, which many of you have heard me say. Generally, our audience is highly educated, which has made me be at the top of my game, improving it.
I enjoy reading your comments. The above are some of mine.
Ken S
Wrong Audience
Ken,
You are singing to the wrong choir here. We are not market Marxists. You should have submitted this sorry tome to Pravda on the Potomac – The Washington Press. You are becoming very left Ken.
Romney's position changes are legitimate
Romney's Ever-Changing Coal and Climate Policies
Which is more suited for a person leading this country? To evolve a policy as more is learned about the subject, as Romney is doing, or to stick to a policy that is based on destroying the coal industry and giving the UN control over our energy production as Obama is doing. Basing the future of the US energy industry on unproved global warming hype is not the way to arrive at a policy that is beneficial to US citizens. However, it is a really good way to attain more presidental power and reduce the freedoms enjoyed here. You decide which you prefer.
Romney energy policies
Ken,
Obama changes his position over a period of months (e.g.: gay marriage) and he's "evolving", but if Romney changes his position over a decade he's "ever-changing".
The only thing missing from this article was at the end:
"I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message."
Ok to Evolve
OK, but Romney's positions are consistent. That is that he is in favor of government staying out of the private sector. That said, he does and should reserve the right to change opinions as more information unfolds on any subject.
We all should have an open mind and reserve the right to get smarter. Just the facts. Rational thinkers will draw their own conclusions.