Gilmore is sketchy on drilling details

Republican Senate candidate Jim Gilmore correctly points to the global energy crisis as the most pressing issue facing this country and its leaders.

The topic so dominated the weekend debate between Gilmore and Democrat Mark Warner that a question about the Iraq war in the final minutes of the event served as a startling interruption in the 75-minute oil, coal and solar talk-a-thon.

More startling was Gilmore's post-debate concession that he is unacquainted with the controversy over how offshore territories should be divided among the states.

Sure, that's getting pretty deep in the seaweed, but it's a technical issue that could cost Virginia a lot of money.

Federal maps give Virginia claim to only a small sliver of the Outer Continental Shelf. If the current moratorium on offshore exploration and/or drilling is lifted without changing those boundaries, future royalties that should go to Virginia will be siphoned off to North Carolina and Maryland.

U.S. Rep. Thelma Drake is fully aware of the dilemma and has struggled to revise the maps to no avail. Gilmore would be wise to give her a ring and get up to speed. If Congress were to immediately lift the current moratorium on offshore drilling, as Gilmore has demanded, it is unlikely that other states will be inclined to tamp down their cash flow once the royalty checks start rolling in.

Another issue Gilmore has yet to acknowledge is the negative impact Atlantic Coast drilling could have on the Navy's combat training.

Both Gilmore and Warner will need to modify their positions on energy policy as this nation struggles with the powerful and unpredictable economic maelstrom sparked by tightening oil supplies.

Warner wants to lift the federal moratorium, but he would give states the final say on offshore drilling. Gilmore faults Warner's policy positions as vague and vacillating. Others might properly characterize Warner's approach as cautious and flexible.

In contrast, Gilmore's position is stolid and uncomplicated. "Drill here. Drill now. Pay less." He promises prompt relief at the pump, as if a platoon of oil rigs were being harnessed up to parachute in next week. That's a comforting image for voters already sweating over next winter's heating bills, but they've heard Gilmore's rose-colored promises before.

As a gubernatorial candidate, he promised to end the hated car tax without inflicting hardship on local governments. State legislators and city council members spent years patching up the plaster after that little project morphed into a $1 billion-plus time bomb.

In the energy crisis, the stakes are higher and the consequences of a miscalculation far more serious. When Gilmore asks, "Who do you trust to actually bring you this policy?" voters had better take time to think over their answer.