Boucher or Griffith?

[VHSLhelper 571]

EH31...

Speaking of WDBJ, they ran a "green" story on the 5:00 news. Students at Tech want the coal plant in front of BK shut down in 10 years. Tech says that's not possible. Nothing out there yet that compares to coal. Switching to natural gas would cost about $300 per student. I'd say that comes out to a $15 increase per credit hour

Fact is, coal isn't going to get "killed" anytime soon.

[VHSLhelper 571]

The real problem with it is that it does nothing to promote cleaner energy.

So I ask why isn't Boucher and Griffith doing something about promoting cleaner energy in conjuntion with saving coal?

 

Maybe because a certain nearby locality in the 9th is SO opposed to wind energy that they didn't even want the extra taxes a wind farm would generate.

[bucfan64 309]

WINDMILLS.

 

Check this out, windfall the movie...

 

http://windfallthemovie.com/index_2.html

[RichlandsAlum 678]

I'm just an outside observer at this point, but I think the GOP leadership is going to be kicking itself after November 2nd. A nominee who actually lives in the district (and there were viable options available) would likely have had a very strong shot at retiring Boucher.

 

Interesting....

[Maroons67 13]

They should have term limits but it will never happen. We the VOTERS are the ones that can limit their terms. Boucher is a career politician that doesn't think that the average person has enough sense to make any decisions on their own. We need to definitely vote him out of office along with all the other incumbents. In other words; 'WE THE PEOPLE' have the power to through the bums out! Remember; they work for us and we should fire each and every one of those idiots.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

Maybe because a certain nearby locality in the 9th is SO opposed to wind energy that they didn't even want the extra taxes a wind farm would generate.

 

I griped about this, too. Tazewell County virtually told BP: "No, we don't want your $10M and yearly profit-sharing revenues. We'd rather be poor and hemorrhage money than have East River Mountain produce sustainable energy."

[Lance 228]

I griped about this, too. Tazewell County virtually told BP: "No, we don't want your $10M and yearly profit-sharing revenues. We'd rather be poor and hemorrhage money than have East River Mountain produce sustainable energy."

 

x2

[Popeye 32]

Eugene,

 

Have not read anything informative yet but as stated earlier coal isn't going away anytime soon. However with cap and trade and the projected restrictions placed on the coal industry by the EPA what you could see here are power rate increases that are not affordable. Boucher did in fact vote for C&T and while he worked to water it down for the coal industry it will in time cripple it. I've found some things on Griffith that may provide some insight.

 

http://www.richmondsunlight.com/legislator/hmgriffith/

shows a few of the things that he has worked on.

 

http://dela.state.va.us/dela/MemBios.nsf/cd9a628e9659025d85256c2900524ab1/776e98aea7644ee5852570d2005e9e6a?OpenDocument

His bio that again lists things that he has worked on or with.

 

Dig more when you have time and make your own decisions. My hope is that you are still in college working toward greater goals.

[RichlandsAlum 678]

I griped about this, too. Tazewell County virtually told BP: "No, we don't want your $10M and yearly profit-sharing revenues. We'd rather be poor and hemorrhage money than have East River Mountain produce sustainable energy."

 

Actually, wind energy isn't the panacea of revenues that its proponents would have us believe. The up front capital requirements are very substantial -- ask T. Boone Pickens.

 

Don't get me wrong. We most definitely need to identify alternative forms of energy. But that's going to require a long-term view with appropriate investment behind it. And candidly, the return on investment is nearly incalculable at this point.

 

Not taking a position on the competence of local leadership in Tazewell County, but the revenue argument is a red herring.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

Actually, wind energy isn't the panacea of revenues that its proponents would have us believe. The up front capital requirements are very substantial -- ask T. Boone Pickens.

 

Don't get me wrong. We most definitely need to identify alternative forms of energy. But that's going to require a long-term view with appropriate investment behind it. And candidly, the return on investment is nearly incalculable at this point.

 

Not taking a position on the competence of local leadership in Tazewell County, but the revenue argument is a red herring.

 

I don't quite see how the denial of BP's alternative wind energy reflecting upon Tazewell County's leadership is a red herring. In fact, I think it places the attention squarely where it needs to be. The BOS had the final say as to whether the windmills would be placed on East River, and the BOS voted it down, 3-2. They squarely are the ones responsible for denying Tazewell County AT LEAST $10M, and likely substantially more. As far in the red as Tazewell County has been in the last couple of years, that borders on idiocy.

 

I'm not saying that the up-front capital requirements aren't substantial, but there's a reason T. Boone Pickens has more money than you and I will make in 1000 lifetimes. That initial capital (most of which would be fronted by BP regardless), would more than make its money back, and the revenues would keep rolling in, year after year after year.

 

And while I agree that it's difficult to place a dollar amount on the ROI, an expert economist should be able to get close, based on similar returns for similar amounts of renewable energy over a similar time frame.

[RichlandsAlum 678]

I don't quite see how the denial of BP's alternative wind energy reflecting upon Tazewell County's leadership is a red herring. In fact, I think it places the attention squarely where it needs to be. The BOS had the final say as to whether the windmills would be placed on East River, and the BOS voted it down, 3-2. They squarely are the ones responsible for denying Tazewell County AT LEAST $10M, and likely substantially more. As far in the red as Tazewell County has been in the last couple of years, that borders on idiocy.

 

I'm not saying that the up-front capital requirements aren't substantial, but there's a reason T. Boone Pickens has more money than you and I will make in 1000 lifetimes. That initial capital (most of which would be fronted by BP regardless), would more than make its money back, and the revenues would keep rolling in, year after year after year.

 

And while I agree that it's difficult to place a dollar amount on the ROI, an expert economist should be able to get close, based on similar returns for similar amounts of renewable energy over a similar time frame.

 

I'm suggesting that the $10 million dollar figure is a red herring, as is any argument about the amount of revenue that windmill farms generate for their host localities. And that's a general observation -- not an insight into the specific situation in Tazewell County. Without much else to support the notion, I think we would both agree that the county isn't in a position to discourage ANY investment at all.

 

Back to the discussion of wind energy....

 

One reason that Pickens keeps his money is that he's very particular about the way he spends it. He ultimately pulled the plug (no pun intended) on his huge project in West Texas because of the enormous capital cost involved. And those turbines only generate revenue when they're turning.

 

Wind energy is a good idea because of its functional contribution to the overall power grid, not because of its financial impact. In fact, it is not even remotely close to being cost effective at the present time. That's close to the point that I wanted to make.

[stu_bean 1,058]

Maybe because a certain nearby locality in the 9th is SO opposed to wind energy that they didn't even want the extra taxes a wind farm would generate.

Don't even get me started on that one. The idiots that so opposed the idea aren't even the ones affected by it. I figured I should be able to go out back where I live and be able to see them where they wanted to place them. I was and still fully support the idea!

 

The problem with it is a money family in Bluefield was able to lobby the board and get what they want. Plus I know for a fact that Mike Hymes originally supported the idea only to turn on it after his reelection and be the deciding vote...

 

Our board is a bunch of idiots. They let money control what they think and do. You were also right about the projects for Russell. The county will not do anything to help benefit the young they are still stuck on their old money ways.

 

When they finally do something like the new technology park, I fear it is too late.

[EH31 2,523]

Eugene,

 

Have not read anything informative yet but as stated earlier coal isn't going away anytime soon. However with cap and trade and the projected restrictions placed on the coal industry by the EPA what you could see here are power rate increases that are not affordable. Boucher did in fact vote for C&T and while he worked to water it down for the coal industry it will in time cripple it. I've found some things on Griffith that may provide some insight.

 

http://www.richmondsunlight.com/legislator/hmgriffith/

shows a few of the things that he has worked on.

 

http://dela.state.va.us/dela/MemBios.nsf/cd9a628e9659025d85256c2900524ab1/776e98aea7644ee5852570d2005e9e6a?OpenDocument

His bio that again lists things that he has worked on or with.

 

Dig more when you have time and make your own decisions. My hope is that you are still in college working toward greater goals.

Thanks for the links.. I'm gonna take time and read those now. It seems to me that this is an important election, so I'm trying to make the right choice.

 

I don't know exactly what I want to do in life, but I am still in college. I'm doing that full time and working 40+ hours a week so that takes up all my time. [/i]

[Gym 10]

I heard that Griffith was behind only 3 points

[bucfan64 309]

I'm just an outside observer at this point, but I think the GOP leadership is going to be kicking itself after November 2nd. A nominee who actually lives in the district (and there were viable options available) would likely have had a very strong shot at retiring Boucher.

 

Interesting....

 

I agree totally!

[Deleted Account 5,203]

I heard that Griffith was behind only 3 points

 

That's able to be overcome. Sabato still has it in the "leaning blue" category, but there's an update expected tomorrow.

[bhs7695 185]

Boucher needs to be retired.

 

http://www.roanoke.com/politics/wb/265170

 

The candidates say they want to protect the coal industry, but what do their records suggest?

 

ERIC BRADY The Roanoke Times

 

BIG STONE GAP -- Two signs found in near parity throughout Southwest Virginia underscore the importance of coal in the midterm 9th Congressional District race.

 

U.S. Rep. Rick Boucher, the 28-year Democratic incumbent, has signs that read that he's "for coal" and "for jobs."

 

The other, placed by the Americans for Prosperity special interest group and often paired with the orange-and-blue campaign signs of the Republican challenger, Morgan Griffith, reads: "Boucher Betrayed Coal."

 

So who is better for coal: Boucher or Griffith, or will independent candidate Jeremiah Heaton get any attention from voters after he spent 45 hours in a coal mine in Maxie in April?

 

That question will play an important role in determining which candidate emerges victorious on Election Day -- and its answer will be determined by 9th District voters.

 

Until then, the answer depends on who's talking -- and the fact it's even being discussed shows just how vulnerable Boucher is in this year's Republican-friendly political atmosphere.

 

Southwest Virginia's coal industry is not the power it once was. Production and employment have declined as the industry has moved its focus more to western states. Still, the coal industry remains a powerful driver in the 9th District: Seven counties rely on it for the core of their economies, and its influence ripples into the rest of Western Virginia.

 

Boucher built his political reputation largely on fighting for coal interests. Even today, older miners and industry retirees retain a certain amount of loyalty to the congressman based largely on that history.

 

But those who don't carry those memories have started to question Boucher's commitment to an industry that has shed jobs and influence over the past two decades.

 

Particularly alarming to them is Boucher's work on and vote in favor of "cap-and-trade" energy legislation last year.

 

Griffith and his supporters argue that the legislation, which places increasingly tight restrictions on the emission of carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases while allowing utilities to purchase allowances for more emissions from a Wall Street-like market, would send electricity rates skyrocketing and kill the coal industry, as well as other sources of so-called "dirty energy."

 

That would drive a nail through the heart of the 9th, which already is growing more slowly than the rest of Virginia.

 

But Boucher and his supporters say his work on the bill was intended to help protect coal and help build its future. It came about as a result of a March 2007 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court allowing the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse gases as pollutants. Boucher said the EPA doesn't have the tools to regulate those gases while protecting the economies of areas like Southwest Virginia, and so it was crucial that Congress step in first.

 

Boucher said he got involved in the legislation after he was asked by coal industry leaders -- including the president of the National Mining Association -- to intervene and soften it from earlier versions.

 

He pushed and won some concessions for coal, including lowered carbon-dioxide reductions and billions of dollars in incentives for the development and implementation of "carbon capture" clean coal technology.

 

Those negotiations carried a price -- in return for adoption of his amendments, Boucher was in turn obligated to vote for a bill that was and still is considered controversial. The bill, which passed the House, is currently stalled in the U.S. Senate.

 

Still, Boucher's negotiations earned him the endorsement of major coal company executives and unions. He's received endorsements from Jim McGlothlin, longtime CEO of United Coal, and Clyde Stacy, CEO of Pioneer Coal. His campaign also has received financial support from political action committees representing Consol, Patriot and Arch Coal, among others.

 

Mining interests have given $27,900 to Boucher's campaign and $10,850 to Griffith's, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

 

The United Mine Workers of America, which claims to represent 4,500 active and retired miners in the 9th, endorsed Boucher, even though it didn't approve of the cap-and-trade bill.

 

"We did not endorse that legislation," said Phil Smith, spokesman for the United Mine Workers of America. "But here's what we did endorse, was Congressman Boucher's efforts to put a tremendous amount of funding for coal in that bill."

 

Others, however, downplayed the union endorsement.

 

Ben Marchi, the Virginia director of Americans for Prosperity -- a third-party group that paid for the "Boucher Betrayed Coal" and "November is Coming" signs found throughout the coalfields -- said union influence in Virginia mines is not nearly as strong as it is across the state line in West Virginia.

 

"Most of the employees in these mines are nonunion anymore," Marchi said. "That's really faded from the powerhouse it was 10 years ago, let alone 20."

 

One of Boucher's biggest challenges among coal miners and other voters is that his explanation for supporting cap-and-trade takes a lot longer than his opponents' need to argue that it will raise electricity rates and fatally damage the coal industry -- longer than a standard TV or radio spot.

 

"It puts the burden on me to provide a complicated explanation to a complex issue and go through about a four-step logical process to persuade people that what I did was the right thing for coal," Boucher said in an interview last week. "It's an easy charge to just write in white letters across a black sign, 'Boucher Betrayed Coal.' It takes me a little while to explain why that's not true."

 

But Griffith said he believes Boucher's stance on cap-and-trade has ruined the congressman's longtime image as a friend of coal.

 

"He's done," Griffith said. "I'm not saying we win the election -- but he no longer has the reputation that he's going to be the guy who defends coal."

 

Residents in the coal towns of Buchanan, Dickenson, Russell and Wise counties have mixed feelings on the issue, but many seem willing to give Boucher the benefit of the doubt.

 

Fred Phillips of Big Stone Gap -- a retired miner with 42 years under his belt and cousin to Virginia Del. Clarence "Bud" Phillips, D-Dickenson County -- said Boucher is still well-liked in the coal mines.

 

Phillips, however, acknowledged that there is some disgruntlement over Boucher's actions the past two years, as well as his ties with President Obama: "The younger coal miners are the ones miffed at him a little bit. But he's solid among the older guys and among the senior citizens."

 

Griffith acknowledged he's heard much the same thing. And he said there's a reason for that:

 

"It's their jobs that are going to be lost, that's why," Griffith said. "The current miners, the folks who need to have a job five, 10, 15 years from now, they're the ones who are really angry about it."

 

Still, on a recent trip to the coalfields, it was hard to find miners -- even younger ones -- who are passionately fired up for Griffith and willing to talk about it.

 

Those who were willing to talk seemed undecided about the race, if they'd even followed it at all. And they -- most people in coal country, it seems -- had a firsthand or secondhand story about interacting with Boucher.

 

Darrell Stanley, a Dickenson County resident working on a loading dock in Haysi, said Boucher helped his father in obtaining medals from World War II, and he credited Boucher for bringing drinkable water to some communities. Stanley said coal is crucial to the 9th District: "It's 90 percent of the jobs. And people say if you don't work in coal you can work for the video store or the grocery store. But if there's no coal, there's no money to pay for those things."

 

But at the same time, Stanley said he knows nothing of Griffith or his platform.

 

Mark Jones, who worked a table at a flea market near Wise, said he doesn't have much faith in politicians from either party at this point. But he's inclined to lean toward Griffith on the coal issue.

 

"Griffith might be slightly better because Boucher is for cap-and-trade," Jones said. "I know he worked to get exceptions for coal in cap-and-trade. But did he help write it? I think he did. And cap-and-trade is just purely stupid."

 

Griffith has pushed hard to make that argument. And he points to West Virginia Democrats running for Congress who have campaigned against cap-and-trade. West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin, who is seeking a seat in the U.S. Senate, even filmed a television ad where he fired a bullet through the cap-and-trade bill.

 

"I can make the case intellectually it's going to kill jobs," Griffith said. "But the fact Democrats just on the other side of the state line are making the same case points out that all this stuff about Boucher saying he saved coal jobs is just not accurate."

 

Heaton opposes cap-and-trade as well.

 

"I think it is going to serve to be the final death knell for manufacturing in the United States," Heaton said. "While I support having clean air and a good environment, until you get all the world partners on the same sheet of music, you're going to tilt the table toward manufacturers leaving the country."

 

Boucher stands by his vote. That he can afford to do so -- pending results on Election Day -- attests to his faith in that hard-fought image as an advocate for coal.

 

Cap-and-trade explained

 

Q: What does this "cap-and-trade" bill do anyway?

 

A: The bill places a steadily shrinking limit -- or "cap" -- on the amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted by power plants (such as coal-fired ones), oil refineries, manufacturers and other sources.

 

Those companies that emit the gases will be given an allowance for emissions that will shrink with the overall cap. If a company wants to emit more than what it's allowed, it can purchase extra allowances from other companies with cap space to spare. Those allowances will be handled through a Wall Street-like market with fluctuating prices based on supply and demand.

 

Advocates argue this cap-and-trade system will create market incentives for "clean energy" sources that don't eat up allowances. Opponents, however, argue the system effectively creates an artificial energy tax that will be spread throughout the economy.

 

Q: What was Boucher's role in writing and passing the bill?

 

A: Boucher serves on the committee that helped write the bill prior to its passage in the House. He takes credit for negotiating a number of concessions for the coal industry:

 

-- Lowered targets for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. The bill's primary sponsor and committee chairman, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., wanted a 20 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2020; Boucher said he got it lowered to 17 percent by the time the bill was passed out of committee.

 

-- Providing electric utilities with 90 percent of the emission allowances they need without charge, instead of selling them at auction rates. Boucher said this was intended to allow utility companies such as American Electric Power Co. to keep their rates affordable.

 

-- The availability of 2 billion tons in carbon offsets to allow producers to invest in agriculture and forestry to meet their emission reduction requirements.

 

-- An acceleration in funding for research of "clean coal" technology. The bill will provide $1 billion annually to research carbon capture and sequestration, which enables coal companies to remove much of the carbon dioxide from their emissions. Boucher said the technology is the only way that coal-fired power plants will be able to meet the bill's goal of reducing carbon dioxide levels 80 percent by 2050.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

Residents in the coal towns of Buchanan, Dickenson, Russell and Wise counties have mixed feelings on the issue, but many seem willing to give Boucher the benefit of the doubt.

 

Darrell Stanley, a Dickenson County resident working on a loading dock in Haysi, said Boucher helped his father in obtaining medals from World War II, and he credited Boucher for bringing drinkable water to some communities. Stanley said coal is crucial to the 9th District: "It's 90 percent of the jobs. And people say if you don't work in coal you can work for the video store or the grocery store. But if there's no coal, there's no money to pay for those things."

 

But at the same time, Stanley said he knows nothing of Griffith or his platform.

 

This is why Boucher will win. People are completely unwilling to see how Boucher's turning his back on the coal industry more and more each year. People are just going to continue to vote Democrat blindly, cycle after cycle after cycle, regardless of how much he's killing their industries and killing their regions. They don't make ANY effort to learn about the other side of the aisle, as shown by Mr. Stanley here. And like Mr. Stanley, they make up laughably wrong facts (like coal being 90% of the industry of SWVA, when it's closer to 25%) to support themselves voting the way they do.

 

Makes me sick.

Edited October 26, 2010 by UVAObserver

[Hacker 82]

Both sides are spewing bile and inaccuracies all over the place. This for me is a clear case of the Democratic status quo candidate against the Republican status quo candidate.

 

I have had watched these two men's careers for many years, and here is what I know. Boucher has worked hard for his district and his staff is second to none in constituent services. They are like a dog on a bone when you come to them with problems involving the Federal government. While this is not talked about a lot, it is one of the important things Congressmen do for the folks they represent. Is he more liberal than the average voter in many of the counties he serves? Yes.

 

Griffith is doing something I find quite interesting. Here is a man with 15 years in the State Senate who is not speaking about his record and his accomplishments. I am curious why. From my interactions with him, I have found him to be arrogant and condescending.

 

As I have argued before here and other places, the problems we have in this country is that too many folks are in lock step to the "party line." There are common sense solutions to the problems we face, but they require civility and compromise. Those two characteristics are sorely lacking.

 

In my case the decision is easy since all politics are local. Having had personal dealings with both men, I am voting for the one who helped me with my IRS problem, and not the one who talked down to me about electricity deregulation.

[plooolt 10]

Everyone keeps going on about coal, but what about abortion.

Take a look at this and then decide which one to vote for.

http://www.ffl9.com/

[wave316 64]

Everyone keeps going on about coal, but what about abortion.

Take a look at this and then decide which one to vote for.

http://www.ffl9.com/

 

Thanks for the post. I downloaded the info, hope to share with others.

[Lance 228]

Everyone keeps going on about coal, but what about abortion.

Take a look at this and then decide which one to vote for.

http://www.ffl9.com/

 

most people don't care about abortion anymore...to be honest...the hard line religious are the majority of the people that continue that fight. That is one that was won in the 80's...the only reason it's even still being talked about on a large scale today and is even relevant to the political spectrum is two things: (1) late term abortions and (2) stem cell research....if not for that you would never see abortion as a blip on the political radar and most of that falls along party lines...the candidates who play the middle would rather dodge that one if possible.

[plooolt 10]

I agree that it isn't ever talked about in politics but that doesn't mean that we can't stand for what is right.

[Lance 228]

I agree that it isn't ever talked about in politics but that doesn't mean that we can't stand for what is right.

 

just saying that's 20 years ago as far as politics are concerned.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

Both sides are spewing bile and inaccuracies all over the place. This for me is a clear case of the Democratic status quo candidate against the Republican status quo candidate.

 

I have had watched these two men's careers for many years, and here is what I know. Boucher has worked hard for his district and his staff is second to none in constituent services. They are like a dog on a bone when you come to them with problems involving the Federal government. While this is not talked about a lot, it is one of the important things Congressmen do for the folks they represent. Is he more liberal than the average voter in many of the counties he serves? Yes.

 

Griffith is doing something I find quite interesting. Here is a man with 15 years in the State Senate who is not speaking about his record and his accomplishments. I am curious why. From my interactions with him, I have found him to be arrogant and condescending.

 

As I have argued before here and other places, the problems we have in this country is that too many folks are in lock step to the "party line." There are common sense solutions to the problems we face, but they require civility and compromise. Those two characteristics are sorely lacking.

 

In my case the decision is easy since all politics are local. Having had personal dealings with both men, I am voting for the one who helped me with my IRS problem, and not the one who talked down to me about electricity deregulation.

 

I have had the opposite experience with Boucher. I once had an appointment with the Big Kahuna himself, as part of a leadership conference to which I was appointed. Not only did he blow off the meeting without first informing the conference, but he placed his "head aide" in his spot. That "head aide" was as incompetent as me performing brain surgery. Knew NOTHING about what was happening in SWVA, and EVERY SINGLE QUESTION I ASKED was answered with an "I don't know" or "I wish I could tell you." Even to the broad questions, like "What is Congressman Boucher's long-term goals for economic growth in SWVA?"

 

George Allen and his staff kept his appointment, and couldn't have been more gracious. Plus, Allen + staff actually did their homework. Really went into detail about job growth in far SWVA, especially Pennington Gap. Like Boucher and his aide, except only the exact opposite.

 

I'm not calling into doubt any of your experiences with Boucher, and wouldn't do that at all. I'm just saying that given what I know, I'd take Griffith, even if he's a "Tucker Max"-level a**hole.