It’s unusual for the Speaker of the House to vote on legislation, but Thom Tillis did so yesterday when it came to the fracking bill. He explained that he wanted to “make it very clear where I stood on this issue.” Clearly, Tillis is a big fan of fracking and he wants everyone to know it.

The reason Tillis is being so vocal about this is obviously because of his candidacy in the U.S. Senate race against Kay Hagan. Unfortunately for Republicans, Hagan has the political sense to not take the side of the extreme environmentalist wackos; she supports fracking – with conditions – and completion of the Keystone Pipeline. These stances align her with the vast majority of North Carolina voters, who are somewhere in between the far left and the far right on this issue.

Disappointingly, this makes it tougher for Tillis to paint Hagan as an environmental extremist who is beholden to left-wing groups like the Sierra Club. Not when they have essentially the same position. The only solution, then, is to cast Hagan as being disingenuous about her support for energy exploration, that she’s halting progress with bureaucratic red tape and onerous regulations that will continue to prevent our nation from being energy independent. Tillis’s stance of “frack here, frack now” creates a contrast between the two which could come up in the campaign this fall.

When it comes to fracking, North Carolinians are divided into three camps. The “frack quickly” crowd and the “frack with caution” crowd compose a majority. The environmental wackos are a small minority, but they’re by far the loudest and the ones who care about the issue the most. But they actually have the ear of those suburban moderate swing voters, so crucial to statewide elections, when they make dire warnings about the consequences of fracking. The potential benefits of fracking, like job creation, doesn’t resonate with them as much because they already have jobs. This is especially true in the prosperous Research Triangle. But poisoned drinking water, whatever its actual chances of occurring, gets their attention, and voters here are a little more cautious of environmental consequences after the Dan River coal ash spill. If Hagan depicts Tillis as a reckless extremist on this issue, she can win their votes.

On the other hand, there are a lot of low-skill, blue-collar voters out there who care more about jobs than about trees, birds, moles, or whatever animals might be harmed by hydraulic fracturing, and are wondering why we aren’t moving faster on this front. By supporting the fracking bill, Tillis has clearly placed himself to the right of Hagan, setting up a contrast which ensures we’ll hear a lot more about this issue through November.

9 Comments

  1. Troy

    The rationale presented in the ads to sell this piece of ‘legislation’ if one can call it that, is that it is going to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. Interesting.

    A report released just last week through the Federal Reserve of St. Louis says that domestic gasoline consumption is down in the United States by 75% from its peak in 1998.

    In 2012, the chief number one export from the United States became refined petroleum products, including fuels.

    Given those two facts, I’m wondering what dependency we are hooked on. Dependent on the elites making money hand over fist while the public subsidizes their gains at the pump? We continually pay more, our roads are deteriorating back into their base aggregate element, and our consumption is down so we are demanding less, but yet, we are paying more, and to lessen our ‘dependency’ even more, we need fracking, which is going to generate 300 to 400 jobs tops?

    Of course, now it’s too late. By the time the fallout over this action surfaces, it will be well into the future and someone else’s problem.

    North Carolina is rapidly devolving and those that are perpetuating it will get elected again. Why? They profess a belief in Jesus and low taxes. They fail to say that their vision of the Christ has a fist full of dollars and low taxes are for themselves and their generous campaign contributors. Those same people that will hire them when they no longer have a seat in a legislative body. I’m so proud.

  2. KD

    The solvents used in the fracking injection process are the problem and therefore remain secret. We have plenty of references from Pennsylvania concerning the “balls to the walls” strategy to frack with no regard for the side effects to the ground water. When these solvents are found to be contaminating the ground water the laws are not in place to govern the damage.

  3. Matt

    When neither political party represents the more informed and scientific environmental position of at least half the electorate, you’d think only hack pundits would be deploying cheap smears and labels as if they were established “political wisdom.”

  4. larry

    Dude…the wackos are the majority of the NC General Assembly who pass legislation that outlaws anyone making available to the citizens of this State what chemicals are used in fracking! So in 5 years time we should surely revisit your characterization of wacko.

  5. Vicki Boyer

    The fracking bill contained a requirement that our community colleges gear up to teach what I call ‘oil rig roustabout’ skills to our citizens so they would be prepared to take these 385 jobs when they become available. But at their present rate of ramming the legislation through the legislature those classes won’t even have time to get started before drilling is on-line. The jobs touted as possibly coming from fracking for NC citizens cannot be measured against an eternity of poisoned aquifers, human health problems and land contamination.

    Meanwhile, our governor and legislature, who are so excited about 385 possible jobs, turned down the 23,000 to 25,000 jobs the expansion of medicaid would have brought to our state. If jobs were as important to them as they claim they would not have done that.

  6. Eilene

    I’m confused about the term “environmental wacko” myself. If you know very much about the process of hydraulic fracturing, then you know that there are many environmental dangers involved in the process, and proceeding with caution or not at all are preferable to going gangbusters and destroying something we might not be able to put right again in our lifetime. With proper precautions, it might be useful. As for the jobs, most of the well-paying jobs are temporary. After the wells are built, most of the labor need disappears, so jobs aren’t really going to be a big factor. My husband and I both have environmental degrees, and think maybe the legislature should have had the rules in place BEFORE allowing fracking, but I guess I’m a wacko.

  7. Mick

    Define “environmental wackos,” John?

    • John Wynne

      Environmentalist wacko = someone who is against fracking, no matter how many regulations are in place or how cautiously industry proceeds.

      And actually, I might have been wrong about a majority supporting fracking. A new poll from Civitas has 41% supporting fracking and 41% against. Interestingly, men support it but women don’t.

Related Posts

GET UPDATES

Get the latest posts from PoliticsNC delivered right to your inbox!

You have Successfully Subscribed!