HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » The Issues - Where Do You...

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:47 AM

 

The Issues - Where Do You and Your Candidate Stand on Fracking?

As it becomes more difficult to extract gas from the ground, oil companies are turning more and more to processes like fracking.

Fracking is the injection of a high pressure mixture of water and chemicals into shale to crack the shale to release the trapped gas. (1)

Fracking uses extremely large amounts of fresh water plus a secret mixture of chemicals.

“Fracking requires between two and five million gallons of local freshwater per well - up to 100 times more than traditional extraction methods. “ (1)

While fracking may be beneficial to oil company profits, it's extremely bad for the environment. Water is one of the most important resources we have and fracking is contaminating billions of gallons, rendering it unfit for normal human use.

The chemicals used include carcinogens and toxins like, lead, uranium, mercury, ethylene glycol, radium, methanol, hydrochloric acid, formaldehyde, and over 500 more types. (2)

And what happens to the billions of gallons of contaminated fresh water? Great question.

While oil company profits are rising, peoples around the world are protesting the effect of fracking on their environments.

“PHILADELPHIA -- Demonstrators in the United States and other countries protested Saturday against the natural gas drilling process known as fracking that they say threatens public health and the environment.” (3)

So where do the candidates stand on this process of fracking our environment?

Hillary Clinton is a strong proponent of fracking. While working for the taxpayers as Secretary of State, she used the power of the US of A to convince foreign governments to begin or increase their use of fracking in spite of the protesting peoples in those countries.

“Clinton urged Bulgarian officials to give fracking another chance. According to Borissov, she agreed to help fly in the "best specialists on these new technologies to present the benefits to the Bulgarian people." But resistance only grew. The following month in neighboring Romania, thousands of people gathered to protest another Chevron fracking project, and Romania's parliament began weighing its own shale gas moratorium. Again Clinton intervened, dispatching her special envoy for energy in Eurasia, Richard Morningstar, to push back against the fracking bans.” (3)

So while peoples in countries around the world are protesting the destruction of their fresh water, Secretary Clinton was using our tax dollars to help Haliburton, Chevron, and other oil giants convince governments to use the environmentally damaging process of fracking.

While some try to say that Clinton and Senator Sanders are close on most issues, the fricking fracking issue shows that they are miles apart.

"I'm very proud that the state of Vermont banned fracking. I hope communities all over California, and all over America do the same."
Senator Bernie Sanders (4)


Oil companies are using the fracking process around the world to increase their profits while destroying the freshwater supplies of the people. And where are they going to dump their billions of gallons of toxic waste water? Probably not in their own backyard.

(1) http://www.cleanwateraction.org/page/fracking-process

(2) http://dangersoffracking.com/

(3) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/22/global-protests-fracking-globalfrackdown_n_1905034.html

(4) http://www.betterworld.net/quotes/bernie12.htm

45 replies, 2292 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 45 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Issues - Where Do You and Your Candidate Stand on Fracking? (Original post)
rhett o rick Aug 2015 OP
cali Aug 2015 #1
RoccoR5955 Aug 2015 #23
Puzzledtraveller Aug 2015 #34
RoccoR5955 Aug 2015 #39
Le Taz Hot Aug 2015 #2
bvf Aug 2015 #3
jeff47 Aug 2015 #4
Jim Lane Aug 2015 #5
sabrina 1 Aug 2015 #8
dorkzilla Aug 2015 #12
sabrina 1 Aug 2015 #16
RoccoR5955 Aug 2015 #25
sabrina 1 Aug 2015 #30
Elmer S. E. Dump Aug 2015 #28
sabrina 1 Aug 2015 #31
rhett o rick Aug 2015 #33
FSogol Aug 2015 #14
CharlotteVale Aug 2015 #6
hifiguy Aug 2015 #32
beam me up scottie Aug 2015 #7
Doctor_J Aug 2015 #9
L0oniX Aug 2015 #13
RoccoR5955 Aug 2015 #26
abelenkpe Aug 2015 #10
SoapBox Aug 2015 #11
blackspade Aug 2015 #15
sabrina 1 Aug 2015 #17
blackspade Aug 2015 #18
rhett o rick Aug 2015 #20
Zorra Aug 2015 #19
LondonReign2 Aug 2015 #21
artislife Aug 2015 #22
MyNameGoesHere Aug 2015 #24
rhett o rick Aug 2015 #27
MyNameGoesHere Aug 2015 #29
Armstead Aug 2015 #35
reddread Aug 2015 #36
LWolf Aug 2015 #37
rhett o rick Aug 2015 #38
LondonReign2 Aug 2015 #40
rhett o rick Sep 2015 #41
Uncle Joe Sep 2015 #42
Scuba Sep 2015 #43
davidpdx Sep 2015 #44
rhett o rick Sep 2015 #45

Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:50 AM

1. Hillary is champion for fracking interests!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #1)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:13 PM

23. Why not.

 

They help fund her campaign, while robbing the environment, and making the future impossible for generations to come.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #23)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 05:50 PM

34. She would say its

part of her position on job creation and infrastructure investment!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #34)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:54 PM

39. Would that be

 

the creation of HER job?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:56 AM

2. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 11:07 AM

3. K&R!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 11:24 AM

4. Look at this terrible right-wing talking point attack!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 11:58 AM

5. Governor O’Malley imposed a moratorium on fracking in Maryland in 2011.

 

To read more about his environmental record, see this article from Grist magazine: "Martin O’Malley, long-shot presidential hopeful, is a real climate hawk".

A difference between O'Malley and Sanders is that O'Malley has been a governor. That's both a strength and a weakness. The advantage for O'Malley is that he can point to more progressive accomplishments. He had the powers of an executive, with a generally friendly legislature, while Sanders was merely one Senatorial vote out of a hundred. Sanders didn't impose a fracking moratorium, because of course he couldn't.

The disadvantage for O'Malley is that he had to get involved in the messy sausage-making of crafting state policies. This sometimes resulted in his making decisions that accepted compromises or otherwise provided a basis for attack. Fracking is a case in point. From that same Grist article:

O’Malley is leaving office with a mixed, or at least nuanced, record on fracking. Western Maryland, just south of Pennsylvania, has natural gas deposits that are recoverable by fracking, but they have yet to be exploited. O’Malley imposed a moratorium on fracking in Maryland in 2011. But he’s about to be succeeded by Republican Larry Hogan, an enthusiastic fracking proponent. So after the November election, O’Malley announced that he will unveil regulations this month that will allow fracking under limited circumstances, following the best practices of other states and imposing additional, stricter rules to curb air and water contamination and restrict where drilling can take place.

For some environmentalists, O’Malley’s willingness to allow fracking at all is their one disappointment in his record. “I would prefer that O’Malley would come out in favor of a ban on fracking in Maryland,” says Tidwell. But others say O’Malley is making a shrewd move. With rules in place before Hogan comes in, Hogan may find it more politically difficult to repeal them than he would have to simply not write any himself. “The fact that we have a governor-elect who wants to move forward on fracking means we want to get some protections in place as soon as possible,” Karla Raettig, executive director of the Maryland League of Conservation Voters, told The Washington Post.


To me, O'Malley's maneuver makes sense. Nevertheless, I can see how activists, like the one quoted in this excerpt, could criticize it.

It's worth noting that that activist, Mike Tidwell, while disagreeing with O'Malley on the fracking strategy, is generally laudatory about him. Same article:

O’Malley is the rare elected official who seems genuinely motivated to address climate change. “I deal with a lot of politicians in my work as a climate advocate,” says Mike Tidwell, director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “Martin O’Malley, more than any politician I know, really loses sleep over climate change. He is deeply concerned about climate change and his actions over the last eight years reveal that. He’s pushed the envelope more than anyone I’ve seen. He’s the kind of politician where his staff comes in and says, ‘Here’s what we propose to do,’ and most politicians would say, ‘Let’s cut that down a little,’ and Martin O’Malley regularly says, ‘We can’t do better than that? Push a little harder?’”


Incidentally, the growing anti-fracking sentiment is evident in Maryland. The Republican Governor was unable to block legislation earlier this year that wrote O'Malley's moratorium into law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #5)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:06 PM

8. Good for him. NY also banned fracking, which surprised many people here as Cuomo seemed to be

for it.

Bernie too is against it and VT won't allow it.

Hopefully more states will end it. We know now for sure that it is the cause of small earthquakes, according to scientists and they are now researching whether it is the cause of larger quakes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #8)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:54 PM

12. Yep, color me shocked on that one but i think

Howie Hawkins and Zephyr Teachout had a lot to do with Cuomo’s flip on that issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dorkzilla (Reply #12)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:01 PM

16. I think you are right. I remember eg, when DU's H20 Man was trying to get an interview

with Cuomo over fracking and Cuomo wouldn't meet with protesters at all.

I think they huge resistance of NYers all over the state, plus Zephyr Teachout who really gave him a challenge in that race, did have something to do with it.

I hope Zephyr runs for Congress. Or the Senate, against Schumer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dorkzilla (Reply #12)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:18 PM

25. I think that is incorrect

 

I think that the record number of feedback documents had something to do with it. They had to push the decision back twice, so that they could trudge through the comments. There were literally millions of comments. It was originally 30 days, but it got extended twice. Then there were the meetings, of which I went to two, and both times mentioned things that they had not thought of.
I don't think that it was Hawkins or Teachout that had much to do with the NY ban on fracking. I do believe that it was WE THE PEOPLE, united against it. And you know what they say, don't you? Well here's a reminder: The people united shall NEVER be defeated!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #25)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 03:06 PM

30. Thanks, I remember the pushback. Cuomo was up for reelection and probably knew

what would happen if he went ahead with fracking. I was afraid that it would happen anyhow, after the election. But was very surprised when he banned it. In a good way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #8)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:45 PM

28. And massive, destructive sinkholes!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Elmer S. E. Dump (Reply #28)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 03:22 PM

31. Yes, and with CA in such a serious drought, it's insane to allow Fracking there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #31)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 04:42 PM

33. Profits Uber Alles. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #5)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:57 PM

14. It was the right maneuver. Hogan's admin has been unable to start fracking because O'malley tied

their hands. Without O'Malley's regulations, fracking would have begun on day 1 of the Hogan debacle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:01 PM

6. K&R. No way to spin this one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CharlotteVale (Reply #6)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 03:28 PM

32. But it WILL be spun

 

by the Usual Suspects. Count on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:03 PM

7. Well done, rhett o rick!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:07 PM

9. Issues? I prefer to base my vote on popularity, polls, and gender

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #9)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:56 PM

13. Nailed it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #9)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:19 PM

26. You mean hair has nothing to do with it?

 

Shame on you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:36 PM

10. Wish CA would ban fracking nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:40 PM

11. K & R!

Go Bernie!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:59 PM

15. What about Chaffee, Webb, and (maybe) Biden?



Edit: O'Malley answered!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blackspade (Reply #15)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:02 PM

17. O'Malley is against it. Don't know about the others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #17)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:03 PM

18. I just saw that! Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blackspade (Reply #15)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:10 PM

20. Only those against it will answer. Others might be ashamed of their corporate friendly stands. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:08 PM

19. When elected POTUS, I suspect Bernie will issue an EO banning fracking

nationwide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:10 PM

21. Kick

According to Hillary SuperPAC training, we should avoid talking about the issues

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:13 PM

22. Why does it matter?

 

It only ruins ground water...



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:14 PM

24. Well Clinton should have told her boss not to push that

agenda. Or she could have resigned in protest to the Obama fracking interests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MyNameGoesHere (Reply #24)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:26 PM

27. I think that part of the reason he hired her is because they have very similar agendas.

 

One wouldn't have guessed they had similar agendas when Obama was pretending to be a progressive in 2007.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #27)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 02:09 PM

29. Politics is full of pretenders

even ones that say that socialism or some form thereof can coexist within a capitalist framework. Never happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 05:51 PM

35. As far away from it as possible

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 07:20 PM

36. and people want Jerry Brown to run...

 

You can have him, but he will be fracking offshore in marine sanctuaries ASAP.
if not already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:34 PM

37. I am strongly opposed to fracking.

So is my candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:39 PM

38. If Clinton supporters support her position on fracking, why don't they come forward and give

 

their best argument? That was rhetorical. They have no argument. The best I can guess is that they are ambivalent about fracking and will follow H.Clinton regardless of what she stands for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #38)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:55 PM

40. They are smart enough to know that any policy discussion is a losing proposition

for Hillary. Sad, isn't it? A candidate whose superPAC trains her supporters how to avoid discussing issues?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LondonReign2 (Reply #40)

Tue Sep 1, 2015, 12:20 AM

41. They don't have to be trained. They follow personalities and don't care about issues. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Tue Sep 1, 2015, 03:51 AM

42. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, rhett o rick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Tue Sep 1, 2015, 07:29 AM

43. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Tue Sep 1, 2015, 07:33 AM

44. I'm against fracking

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Tue Sep 1, 2015, 10:50 AM

45. I am disappointed not to see the Clinton side of this issue. She obviously thinks fracking is very

 

important. But why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread