Is Clinton Currying Favor With the Oil Companies to Win Texas?

Today's Houston Chronicle has a feature article where both candidates discuss issues near and dear to Houston voters: space exploration and oil exploration. Bowers has covered the space exploration angle at Open Left.

Some interesting tidbits emerge on the oil issue however.  In a bright contrast to the tough talk about reigning in the oil companies she did in New Hampshire, Clinton is now making nice with the oil companies.

Clinton said her White House agenda would include environmentally friendly policies that would create millions of jobs. But she said the plan "also recognizes the continuing vital role of the oil and gas industry," another huge Houston-area employer.

She said she voted for legislation to expand oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico because she backs such projects that have local support and are environmentally sound. Obama voted against, she added.

"I think on that issue alone, I should be able to make a strong case to the energy community" for support, the New York senator said.

Clinton added that energy companies have to be part of a national push for conservation and cleaner energy sources.

Jerome's post on the Oil Accountability Project outlines some of the stakes here. The oil companies have colluded with the Bush administration to systematically underpay royalties owed for taking petroleum off public lands. Numerous whistler blowers have come out and documented the atrocities.

The sad thing is that neither Democratic candidate has publicly pledged to end the corruption. And from hearing Hillary's remarks to the Houston Chronicle it looks like her position at least is up for negotiation.



Display:


Re: Is Clinton Sucking Up to the Oil Companies to (none / 0)

Her position is UP FOR SALE. Not negotiation.


by crazymoloch on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 01:48:15 PM EST

Re: Is Clinton Sucking Up to the Oil Companies to (none / 0)

Not just money, but clearly votes as well.


by crazymoloch on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 01:48:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

TRUTH PATROL (none / 0)

Sen. Obama voted for Dick Cheney's energy policy, the 2005 Energy Bill.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ro ll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?con gress=109&session=1&vote=00213


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 01:50:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: TRUTH PATROL (none / 0)

Yep. Pretty shameless vote on Obama's part. Even the pork for Illinois in that bill isn't even close to sufficient justification.


by crazymoloch on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 01:57:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: TRUTH PATROL (none / 0)

Factcheck.org mythbusted that Clinton talking point. That bill raised, not lowered, taxes on the oil companies and included billions for renewables.


by EMTP democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 03:02:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: TRUTH PATROL (none / 0)

Well come on, I mean they are cousins.  Family first!


Tony Romo for Secretary of Awesome
by kasjogren on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 03:28:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What a title! (2.00 / 2)

What a nice title! Certainly has nothing to do with the content of the diary. "Sucking up?" a great choice! Wonderful tactic, indeed! Like Fox, you seem to believe that putting a question mark at the end of the sentence makes everything o.k. Just perfect.


by praxis1 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 01:54:26 PM EST

Re: What a title! (none / 0)

fair enough. changed.
Substance of her remarks hasn't changed though.
by Texas Nate on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 02:05:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What a title! (none / 0)

Agree.  And I was just praising the mature, civil tone of this blog elsewhere.  How disappointing.


by Larissa on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 02:06:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is Clinton Currying Favor (none / 0)

I'm not understanding from Clinton's comments how she is sucking up to the Oil Companies.  Here in Texas we do lots of drilling offshore.  We don't have a big constituent like Florida or California that is against offshore drilling.

So here is the money quote from the Houston paper:
"She said she voted for legislation to expand oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico because she backs such projects that have LOCAL SUPPORT AND ARE ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND. Obama voted against, she added.

"I think on that issue alone, I should be able to make a strong case to the energy community" for support, the New York senator said."

She does continue to use the line in her stump speech that she would revoke the tax giveaways to the oil companies.  I don't see why she can't support more drilling while also refuse to continue unneeded tax credits.


by wasabi on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 02:21:00 PM EST

So it's not O.K. for Clinton... (none / 0)

"to recognize the continuing vital role of the oil and gas industry"... but it IS o.k. for MyDD to accept the continuing [funding] from the oil and gas industry giant "Chevron" in the form of their green-washing revolving ads?


Invest in nature
by NCDem on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 02:38:36 PM EST

Cheap shot (2.00 / 1)

Maybe Clinton should tell Shell, Mobil, we're gonna f*** u up? Is that what you would like to see Clinton say?  I'm sure the GOP and Obama zealots would love it. In 2000, Gore said he favored a 30 yr program to fund devel of alternative energy sources.  The wingers went nuts.  My airplane buddies said we had to vote for Bush because Gore was going to outlaw the internal combustion engine.  So apparently Clinton doesn't think we can turn this country on a dime and switch to solar electric overnight.  Sounds realistic to me.


by cj51 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 02:47:03 PM EST

Re: Is Clinton Currying Favor With the Oil Compan (none / 0)

I disagree with Obama on space exploration, particularly manned exploration. Our planet is most likely doomed, and even if it weren't, we need to escape (the planet) to fulfill our potential.


by MNPundit on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 03:02:43 PM EST

Manned space exploration (2.00 / 1)

Obama is quite correct that we need to prioritize investments right now.  I'm a space exploration fanatic, but it's clear we need to address the problems here on Earth first.  The republicans have squandered our treasury on war and tax give-aways to the rich.  

I really respect Obama's willingness to tell the truth in Texas, where it's not a popular position.  

Hillary, on the other hand, continues to demonstrate that she will say anything and do anything to win.  It's pretty disgusting.


by susanWAstate on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 03:20:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is Clinton Currying Favor With the Oil Compan (none / 0)

Careful, careful crazymoloch-

Her position is UP FOR SALE. Not negotiation.
by crazymoloch on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 01:48:15 PM EST
---------------------------------------- -----------
Senator Obama and donors from the Carlyle Group.

www.politicalamnesia.blogspot.com


by darlamc on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 03:10:54 PM EST

Wow (none / 0)

This surprises people?  Come on!  Hillary is in the deep pockets of lobbyists and has been for years.  Obama doesn't take any money from lobbyists while Hillary leads in this dirty money.


by crackerdog on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 04:06:43 PM EST

Re: Ask Obama, he voted for the Oil/Energy bill. (none / 0)

Considering Obama voted for Cheney's Energy bill, and Clinton didn't, I'd say you're grasping at straws here.


by Catriley sez on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 04:50:26 PM EST

Re: Is Clinton Currying Favor With the Oil Compan (none / 0)

Of course, she has their money and Bill has gotten money form several oil producing countries.  Having the Clintons at the Whitehouse will be like keeping Bush and his VP.  It will be oil all over again.  The job the Clintons will expand will be for the oil companies and to get millions of $$$ for themselves on the way.  


abi
by Abigail on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 09:44:33 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.