RPVNetwork

Grassroots Network of the Republican Party of Virginia

Democrats United in Saying No to Virginia Jobs

A MESSAGE FROM BOB MCDONNELL:

On Friday, I asked the Democratic candidates for Governor a simple question: Would they join me in supporting the creation of thousands of new jobs for Virginians, the addition of hundreds of millions in new revenue for healthcare, transportation and education, and a move towards energy independence?

They all said no.

The issue is simple. Virginia has the opportunity to be the first state on the Eastern Seaboard to lease exploration and development rights for natural gas and oil off of our shores. Exploration would take place in a safe, environmentally-friendly manner, 50 miles off our coastline, far out of sight from our beaches.

Unfortunately, the Governor is working to delay this action and all three Democratic candidates for Governor put their special interests ahead of job-creation and economic development, by saying no to offshore exploration and development.

Offshore energy development is one part of an overall solution to our economic and energy challenges. We need to develop and bring to market renewable energy sources like wind, solar, geothermal, and biodiesel. But during this process, we are still going to need traditional energy sources to keep our economy moving, our houses warm, and our cars on the road.

According to one estimate, there are 130 million barrels of oil and 1.14 trillion cubic feet of natural gas off Virginia's coast. A study by a professor at Old Dominion University, forecasts that natural gas production alone off Virginia’s coast would create 2,578 new jobs, and produce $271 million in state and local revenue. Unfortunately, the Democratic candidates said no to Virginia jobs and yes to the special interests.

If you believe we should say yes to Virginia jobs and economic development, click here to contribute or visit www.BobMcDonnell.com to get involved in my campaign.

Bob McDonnell
------------------------------

News Coverage

Northern Virginia Daily: Virginia is sitting on an economic gold mine just waiting to be unleashed, former Republican Attorney General Bob McDonnell said Friday, challenging his three Democratic opponents to join him in supporting offshore oil exploration.

"As governor of Virginia I will support legislation that will open Virginia's offshore waters, starting at 50 miles off the coast, to environmentally safe exploration and drilling for oil and gas," McDonnell said.

NBC 12: “All three candidates (Terry McAuliffe, Creigh Deeds and Brian Moran) released strong statements in opposition to the letter”

The Washington Post: "I urge the Democratic candidates for governor to put aside their pandering to special interests and do what's right for Virginia families,'' McDonnell said. "Democrats need to stop saying no to new jobs and revenue for Virginia."

WHSV: McDonnell, “Offshore production of natural gas and oil is not the entire solution to our economic and energy challenges, but it is part of the solution and we need to stop with the delays and start making progress.

Views: 33

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Thank you Bob McDonnell for taking this position on the road. We cannot wait until the renewables are fully developed and cost efficient. In this current economic downturn, the number of jobs it would create, in addition to the revenues generated for the state should be attractive to all Virginians not just Republicans. When Gingrich had his "drill here, drill now" program going, the majority of Americans were in favor of drilling for our own oil throughout the country. It is a much needed resource that Virginia is very lucky to have off our shores. I read a week ago or so that Gov. Kaine wrote a letter to Salazar the Energy Czar asking him to speed up Obamas reinstituting the drilling bans. When McDonnell is the Governor, and we claim state soverienty, can we go ahead and sell drilling leases, and begin production, despite what orders are coming out of Washington?

Bob McDonnell was on local talk radio this morning with Joe Thomas, and talked about his drilling position, along with the fact that he favors Virginia adopting State Soverienty legislation. There is an increasing number of states that are adopting this policy, including one state with a Democrat championing the policy for his state. I suspect, with what mandates and rules are swiftly coming out of Obama and the Liberals, that more states will start recognizing the fact that they have been given control over the state in the Constitution, and the Federal Government will increasingly find itself not to be in any position to enforce it's Socialist policies. That day can't come soon enough.
Hey O. P. I'm glad you posted this as the first message on the page, with a picture. Good luck getting these 900 and some members to even pay attention. Every day, I am getting more and more depressed at the obvious lack of any concern whatsoever, to anything, anywhere and anytime to any important issues that concern all of us. The drilling issue should be a major point to all of us. I still question how McDonnell can push this issue, with Federal government mandates, maybe it is something he is pushing just to sound good. Apparently the Republicans don't care. Welcome to the world of "I don't give a crap about anything."
. . . the addition of hundreds of millions in new revenue for healthcare, transportation and education, and a move towards energy independence?

I am all for off-shore drilling, but could Mr. McDonnell (or his representative) please explain the inclusion of health care in the above statement? If the plan is to use this new found revenue for the expansion of social programs -- of which health care is perhaps the most sacred of cows -- then count me out.

We need to drill because it is the right thing to do concerning energy independence. Pandering for support by compromising conservative principles weakens our party and, ultimately, our nation.
If rather than expand these programs, the funds were used to maintain them and lessen the tax bite out our wallets, would you support it?

W. Bradley Hill said:
. . . the addition of hundreds of millions in new revenue for healthcare, transportation and education, and a move towards energy independence?

I am all for off-shore drilling, but could Mr. McDonnell (or his representative) please explain the inclusion of health care in the above statement? If the plan is to use this new found revenue for the expansion of social programs -- of which health care is perhaps the most sacred of cows -- then count me out.

We need to drill because it is the right thing to do concerning energy independence. Pandering for support by compromising conservative principles weakens our party and, ultimately, our nation.
I direct my concerns primarily toward government involvement in health care. Certainly, transportation and related infrastructure is a legitimate government activity. Education, for better or worse, is irreversibly entrenched as a government function. Best to move on to winnable battles.

It bothers me to see Republican support, especially from our gubernatorial leader, for any form of government-sponsored health care. Existing or otherwise. So, Tom, to answer your question specifically: No, I would not support using these funds for the maintenance of this program.

It is my hope that when Mr. McDonnell uses the term "health care" he has in mind something along the lines of more ambulances or other emergency services; however, in the current environment of making health care an entitlement for the entire nation, my antennae go up whenever I hear a politician promote "better" heath care through government means.


Tom Whitmore said:
If rather than expand these programs the funds were used to maintain them and lessen the tax bite out our wallets, would you support it?

W. Bradley Hill said:
. . . the addition of hundreds of millions in new revenue for healthcare, transportation and education, and a move towards energy independence?

I am all for off-shore drilling, but could Mr. McDonnell (or his representative) please explain the inclusion of health care in the above statement? If the plan is to use this new found revenue for the expansion of social programs -- of which health care is perhaps the most sacred of cows -- then count me out.

We need to drill because it is the right thing to do concerning energy independence. Pandering for support by compromising conservative principles weakens our party and, ultimately, our nation.
I agree with you Bradley, the Government be it Fed. or State has no place in Healthcare. There will always be a Medicaid program, and it is a fact wih Obama, he has put money in the Stimulus for states to expand the program. It is anti-Conservative to agree with the expansion, or to promote the program in any way for those except the very very poor it is there to help. It would be interesting to hear McDonnell's explanation of what he means by "healthcare" in his drilling message. Conservatives believe in jobs and opportunities for all, and free market solutions to the healthcare issue, not coming up with a source of income to pay for Government handouts. We have no choice right now with Kaine as Gov. and DNC Chair, but, I would hope that McDonnell would consider cutting off the Federal Government debit card for the state, and would take the state back to a place where the tried and true Conservative solutions would make worrying about what taxes are coming out of my wallet moot.

W. Bradley Hill said:
I direct my concerns primarily toward government involvement in health care. Certainly, transportation and related infrastructure is a legitimate government activity. Education, for better or worse, is irreversibly entrenched as a government function. Best to move on to winnable battles.

It bothers me to see Republican support, especially from our gubernatorial leader, for any form of government-sponsored health care. Existing or otherwise. So, Tom, to answer your question specifically: No, I would not support using these funds for the maintenance of this program.

It is my hope that when Mr. McDonnell uses the term "health care" he has in mind something along the lines of more ambulances or other emergency services; however, in the current environment of making health care an entitlement for the entire nation, my antennae go up whenever I hear a politician promote "better" heath care through government means.


Tom Whitmore said:
If rather than expand these programs the funds were used to maintain them and lessen the tax bite out our wallets, would you support it?

W. Bradley Hill said:
. . . the addition of hundreds of millions in new revenue for healthcare, transportation and education, and a move towards energy independence?

I am all for off-shore drilling, but could Mr. McDonnell (or his representative) please explain the inclusion of health care in the above statement? If the plan is to use this new found revenue for the expansion of social programs -- of which health care is perhaps the most sacred of cows -- then count me out.

We need to drill because it is the right thing to do concerning energy independence. Pandering for support by compromising conservative principles weakens our party and, ultimately, our nation.
Bradley & Sandy, I have received assurances from his campaign, that Bob's mention of Health Care, is strictly related to the already Federally mandated Medicaid Program. This is NOT some new program. Medicaid is the United States health program for eligible individuals and families with low incomes and resources. It is a means-tested program that is jointly funded by the states and federal government, and is managed by the states. My elderly sister in Louisiana is surviving on that program. With the baby boomers getting older, Medicaid will expand greatly, just as Medicare and Social Security are going to be in trouble. But Medicaid is not the only place the revenue can be used, more likely is for Transportation, and education to lessen our overall tax burden. So I think Bob's offshore drilling proposals is one thing that we Must Do.
O.P.

Thanks for the follow-up. I, too, support drilling. Just hate even the mention of the term "health care" to garner support. It sends the wrong message. Would prefer to see McDonnell stand on the merits of a policy that promotes energy independence.
Good Lord O. P., I couldn't agree with you more about supporting the Drill Bob Drill plan. I would jump for joy if it ever came to pass. I am familiar with what Medicaid is, I thankfully have never been in a position to need that Government assistance. As I said above, there will always be some very poor people no matter who is in the White House or Congress, but, I hate to see it expanded because the Socialist wants to sucker people in that may not have otherwise been in that need. The program would not need to be expanded if Obama had 2 living brain cells, appointed competent and honest people to run the Fed., worked on job creation rather than job destruction, but, we know it's all about their power and not the little guys like us. Thank you for that update O. P., I appreciate it very much. Maybe when McDonnell is the Gov, we can claim state soverienty, tell the Feds where to go, and make Virginia that shinning city on the hill.

O. P. Ditch said:
Bradley & Sandy, I have received assurances from his campaign, that Bob's mention of Health Care, is strictly related to the already Federally mandated Medicaid Program. This is NOT some new program. Medicaid is the United States health program for eligible individuals and families with low incomes and resources. It is a means-tested program that is jointly funded by the states and federal government, and is managed by the states. My elderly sister in Louisiana is surviving on that program. With the baby boomers getting older, Medicaid will expand greatly, just as Medicare and Social Security are going to be in trouble. But Medicaid is not the only place the revenue can be used, more likely is for Transportation, and education to lessen our overall tax burden. So I think Bob's offshore drilling proposals is one thing that we Must Do.
BTW O. P.- Can McDonnell still drill off shore if Obama reinstitutes the drilling bans? Would legislating state soverienty give VA the freedom to go ahead with the project?
Sandy, I am not that familiar with the status. But from what people have told me. The process that Obama either reversed, or is going to reverse from the Bush Admin, does NOT cover Virginia. Or it doesn't cover the drilling for Gas. I'm not that read up on it to be sure. Do a google search on "drilling offshore virginia" and you will find a lot of stuff.

Sandy Cope said:
BTW O. P.- Can McDonnell still drill off shore if Obama reinstitutes the drilling bans? Would legislating state soverienty give VA the freedom to go ahead with the project?
The only other thing about his statement that bothers me is that he made a point of saying "Exploration would take place in a safe, environmentally-friendly manner, 50 miles off our coastline, far out of sight from our beaches." In general that is a good statement but the implication is that we would do it in a manner that is unfriendly to the environment. Even the most evil businessman doesn't want the negative publicity brought about by environmental tragedy. We have however seen that "environmentally friendly" can be loosely interpretted and that environmental groups can use that to make exploration unprofitable.

I'm just sayin'

Reply to Discussion

RSS

****************************

 

U.S. DEBT CLOCK

****************************

 


 

 

(sales help fund this site)

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by Tom Whitmore.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service