Last week President Obama announced a lifting of the ban on offshore drilling for oil and gas on the Outer Continental Shelf along portions of the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, as well as off parts of Alaska. Interior Secretary Salazar called it "a new direction in energy policy..."
Who is this announcement directed at? How should the president use it to position the "new energy policy" cited by Secretary Salazar?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/31/AR2010033100024.html?sub=AR&sid=ST2010033100712
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I agree with what is stated in the article, that this announcement is directed at "undecided senators who will determine whether a climate bill succeeds on Capitol Hill this year." It looks like Obama is attempting to engage senators who are on the fence about his energy policies, so that he gain greater support for initiatives slated for release later this year.
Obama should use this announcement to show that he is willing to listen to what his constituents want (i.e. expanding off-shore drilling where it is supported, and limiting or banning it where it is opposed), all while considering drastic measures to decrease dependence on foreign oil. Obama may want to also consider playing up his other energy plans (nuclear energy options, etc.) to shift the focus from off-shore drilling to other (less inflammatory - i.e. wind or solar energy) energy initiatives to illicit more widespread public acceptance.
This decision and its announcement are clearly a political move aimed at gaining the support of moderates in Congress, as Angela points out. It is highly unlikely that new energy legislation will be passed before the midterm elections, and though I think the Democrats will maintain their majorities, they will doubtless lose a few seats in the Senate. This will mean that having Republican support, even that of a few moderate Senators, will be extremely important to getting anything passed.
In terms of framing, the President will never be able to please all masters and accomodate all of the extreme viewpoints around this issue. What he should do is frame his policy as as two-pronged: reducing dependence on foreign oil (which is also a national security issue), while simulataneously increasing R&D investment in cleaner, alternative energies and transmission systems. He can frame this decision as a temporary measure to address dependence that will be phased out as alternative fuels are phased in. I would explain the long term nature of this change while emphasizing the short term gains being made in alternative energy.
As the article points out, this “new direction” in energy policy is aimed to Congress, specifically, the more moderate members and those who have states off the coasts. This new policy is clearly being used as a pawn to move the Administrations’ climate agenda or gain collateral for other policies. This announcement was used to rejuvenate negotiations on climate policy. I think next step for the President is to hold a meeting with his key stakeholders, i.e., members of Congress who will directly affect his climate agenda.
While I agree with the above posts that Obama is appealing to the moderate senators, I do think he needs to consider all of his stakeholders including the more liberal. I don't think that he's in any danger of losing liberal votes to the conservative side, but a third party candidates, such as Nader, could steal enough votes in the next presidential election that Obama could lose in a tight race (similar to Bush v. Gore)
Obama's messaging to the moderate senators is good - Oil for now to get us to the next step of energy independence.
Messaging to the more liberal disappointed groups must be - we're going to do everything in our power to get this climate legislation passed!
I think he might as well not put out extensive communications/messaging to the most conservative politicians/groups. Sending out the message that "Oil has it's benefits" will weaken his environmental stance and thus support.
Also, one other comment - looks like this is not a "new direction" for Obama. It seems like he's perfecting the strategy of doing what you have to in order to get what you want passed. Perhaps after the climate legislation passes, changes to the oil agreements will be made.
I agree with former posters in that Obama is appealing to moderate senators in Congress. This is a strategic move in that is could help "secure a bipartisan climate."
Obama should embrace the fact that this could represent the largest expansion of offshore energy exploration in 50 years. Additionally, he should continue use open,honest, and frequent communications with stakeholders. Scheduled meetings,updates,and press conferences are recommended.
As Senator Judd Gregg points out in the article, the administration is "genuinely trying to approach the energy production issue in a multifacted way." Further, it helps that the policy is consistant with Obamas overall framework for clean-energy development.
A recent national public opinion poll shows that 63 percent of Americans are in favor of broader energy exploration. To garner additional support, the administration should focus their messaging on eliminating or minimizing environmental risks that may be associated with oil and gas drilling.
President Obama’s approval of new offshore drilling is aimed directly at Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill and Democrats who remain undecided about climate change legislation. As the article states, this is somewhat of a political maneuver or bargaining chip the President intends to use to pass his climate change legislation later this year.
It’s also largely a compromise with states, as the article says, allowing drilling near states that support it and barring drilling near states that don’t want it.
After the highly partisan and divisiveness of the debate surrounding the healthcare legislation, this is an interesting symbolic gesture of the Obama administration’s willingness to compromise. It’s a departure from the strong-arm tactics, last minute bargaining, and unyielding nature that characterized healthcare. However, whether it is enough of a departure remains to be seen. As the article says, some in the President’s intended audience are calling this “half-hearted” and the like.
This does allow the Obama administration to position the “new energy policy” and a step forward for America and something that reduces the country’s dependence on foreign oil. This framing already seems to be working well as Pew reports 63% of Americans as supportive of the drilling.
Also – going into the November elections – it creates something for Democrats and Republicans to work together on. Because of healthcare, Republicans are well-positioned to call the most recent decisions make on Capitol Hill “Democrat-made” and wash their hands of them. Being in the position of making Republicans look like they are unwilling to work together on any legislation would become an advantage for Democrats if they can effectively characterize climate change legislation this way. It’s a win-win for the administration – either it passes a piece of its pet legislation with bipartisan support, or it creates a scenario to help Democrats to level what seems to be a tipped political playing field now.
President Obama’s approval of new offshore drilling is aimed directly at Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill and Democrats who remain undecided about climate change legislation. As the article states, this is somewhat of a political maneuver or bargaining chip the President intends to use to pass his climate change legislation later this year.
It’s also largely a compromise with states, as the article says, allowing drilling near states that support it and barring drilling near states that don’t want it.
After the highly partisan and divisiveness of the debate surrounding the healthcare legislation, this is an interesting symbolic gesture of the Obama administration’s willingness to compromise. It’s a departure from the strong-arm tactics, last minute bargaining, and unyielding nature that characterized healthcare. However, whether it is enough of a departure remains to be seen. As the article says, some in the President’s intended audience are calling this “half-hearted” and the like.
This does allow the Obama administration to position the “new energy policy” and a step forward for America and something that reduces the country’s dependence on foreign oil. This framing already seems to be working well as Pew reports 63% of Americans as supportive of the drilling.
Also – going into the November elections – it creates something for Democrats and Republicans to work together on. Because of healthcare, Republicans are well-positioned to call the most recent decisions make on Capitol Hill “Democrat-made” and wash their hands of them. Being in the position of making Republicans look like they are unwilling to work together on any legislation would become an advantage for Democrats if they can effectively characterize climate change legislation this way. It’s a win-win for the administration – either it passes a piece of its pet legislation with bipartisan support, or it creates a scenario to help Democrats to level what seems to be a tipped political playing field now.
OK yes it is aimed at fence hugging members of Congress, but what about those same people seeking re-election in the mid-term elections? I don't know which areas are up but what their voters want could change the tide too, with the Feb. Pew Poll saying over 63% of Americans favor more offshore oil and gas drilling in US waters.
I like Shelly's two-pronged frame, not only for the President to the nation but also for the target seats that might change.
I agree with everyone else, Obama is targeting moderate Members. He is using this new energy policy to show that he is listening to both sides. He wants to get bi-partisan support because the bill probably won't come before the Senate in this Congress and bi-partisan support will be needed since Dems will probably lose some seats.
This new policy needs to show that Obama is looking into all options and not just listening to the left. Obama's image coming off of healthcare is that he doesn't listen to what the right wants and Obama needs to fix that. If he wants to get legislation passed he needs to show that he is willing to compromise. By allowing off shore drilling, Obama is opening up to republicans and showing that he is willing to work with them.
Post a Comment