Near the end of the late-night election reporting, one commentator said the results did not feel like the anticipated “blue wave,” but “more like purple rain.” It was an apt description of an election that produced only mixed results for either side.
Sovereignty in America does not belong to government, but to citizens, and they have spoken. What they said, though, is open to interpretation, especially with respect to energy and natural resources. The American Energy Alliance wrote an astute analysis the next day, on the future of energy policies under new leadership. They concluded that voters expect a new “focus on policies that expand the availability, affordability, and reliability of energy, rather than on policies that make energy more scarce, more expensive, and less reliable.”
In many ways, Colorado was a microcosm of that message. Voters in the Centennial State elected the most liberal Governor and Legislature in history, while on the same day rejecting ballot measures supported by the same candidates. Pundits have commented on what seems almost schizophrenic – voting against anti-fossil fuel restrictions, while electing a Governor who promises to rid the State of fossil fuels. Some say we are likely to see oil, gas, and coal banished anyway, with one-party in control of all three branches of state government. That would devastate the economy, but I am much more optimistic, precisely because the will of the voters on energy issues is clear, both in Colorado and nationally.
Nationally, America seems more divided (almost equally) than ever. Democrats won control of the House, as predicted, but not by the giant landslide they wanted, and Republicans gained seats in the Senate, leaving Congress divided and generally dysfunctional again. Democrats also picked up seven governorships, but are still short of a majority.
The new Democratic House of Representatives will, of course, do everything it can to thwart the Administration’s agenda to increase domestic energy production. Amid all the promised oversight hearings and investigations, which will attract most of the media attention, expect also to see more attempts to lock up public lands, increase spending on renewable subsidies, and adopt stricter emission standards and climate laws.
Those attempts will mostly fail, however, because the new Senate is more pro-energy than before. Influential anti-energy senators were defeated in South Dakota, Missouri, Indiana, and Florida. In Nevada, ousted Senator Dean Heller was a Republican, but notoriously unreliable on domestic energy production, and one of the few remaining advocates for wasteful electric vehicle subsidies. Similarly inconsistent on energy issues, Tennessee Senator Bob Corker was replaced by the staunchly pro-energy Marsha Blackburn, and the loss of the Arizona seat held by Jeff Flake will merely replace one inconsistent energy voting record with another. Mostly, with control of the two Houses divided, we will likely see a bickering and disabled Congress, unable to pass any substantive legislation on any subject. That suits me.
On natural resources issues, however, the election results are not fuzzy at all. Anti-energy ballot measures, such as 112, were defeated in Colorado, Arizona, and Washington, leaving California to “lead” that charge almost alone. They must hate it when they lead, and no one follows.
Even usually-liberal voters in Washington resoundingly rejected a carbon tax for the third time, even though the revenues were promised for all sorts of popular causes. That’s because voters fully understand the enormous costs such taxes would impose on that state’s economy.
Similarly, Colorado voters decidedly rejected (by a 14-point margin) Proposition 112, which under the guise of “setbacks” would have essentially banned oil and gas production and killed thousands of good jobs. Various tax-and-spend measures were also defeated despite strong support from politicians who won.
Colorado’s new Governor, Jared Polis, has advocated completely “decarbonizing” the state, making him a disciple of California’s new Governor, Gavin Newsom. Both propose to power their states with 100 percent renewable energy. They want zero diesel emissions (meaning zero diesel engines; take note, truck owners) and much higher energy prices for everyone. California voters also had a chance to lower their unconscionably high gas taxes, but refused. Governor-elect Polis might want Colorado to look like California-Lite, but his voters clearly do not.
With solid control of the Governor’s mansion and the Legislature, Colorado democrats could jam through a very anti-energy, anti-consumer agenda. But I am betting that they won’t do so. Even if they try, their tenure will likely be short-lived. Their constituents plainly do not support policies that threaten the affordability and reliability of the energy upon which life depends.
A version of this column appeared in the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel November 23, 2018.
Comments on this entry are closed.