Senate candidates' energy positions are very similar

WASHINGTON

Had it with high gas prices? Ready for a federal government that will turn offshore drillers loose, give the green light to new nuclear power plants and push for development of wind and solar power?

Jim Gilmore and Mark Warner say they're with you all the way.

While Gilmore has mounted a summer long effort to cast himself as more bullish than Warner on offshore drilling, the state's U.S. Senate candidates have taken strikingly similar positions on what figures to be the most-talked-about issue of the fall campaign.

Both promise to work in Washington for new federal investments in wind and solar power development, along with new technologies to make coal-fired power plants run cleaner. They also want the government to encourage energy conservation, including pushing automakers to develop hydrogen-powered cars and market more gas-electric hybrids.

Both support offshore oil and gas production, blocked in the Atlantic for a quarter-century by presidential and congressional decrees - though Warner now embraces drilling more enthusiastically than he has in the past.

Political analysts say the candidates' stands reflect public opinion. A USA Today/Gallup nationwide poll released in early August found 57 percent of voters said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who supports easing restrictions on drilling.

The poll showed even greater public support for higher fuel mileage standards for automobiles and tax incentives to encourage energy conservation. Sixty-two percent of those polled also said they'd also support price controls on gasoline, a policy no major figure in either party is advocating.

"Energy policy is going to be the defining issue of nearly every campaign," said Jay Timmons, a veteran Virginia Republican operative who now is executive vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers.

Timmons' group is bullish on new energy development, including offshore drilling. He said he sees little difference in the positions staked out by Warner and Gilmore; state voters are "lucky to have two candidates who are focused on energy supplies," he said.

Environmental activists are less enthused about the candidates' stands but agree there's little room between them.

"We're disappointed with any officials that are recommending offshore drilling because we just don't see that as a solution," said Glen Besa, Virginia director of the Sierra Club. "There's no way we can produce enough oil to make a difference."

While outlining similar policies on energy, neither candidate has been particularly forthcoming about details of those policies.

What limits should be placed on tax incentives for alternative energy development? How much should federal authorities loosen the regulations that power companies argue are stifling construction of new nuclear plants? Those questions, and many others, are yet to be addressed.

Instead, the debate thus far has focused on offshore drilling, with Gilmore making "Drill here. Drill now" his campaign mantra and touting it as the first critical step to lower prices.

"Mark Warner's not going to drill for any oil. That's very clear," Gilmore asserted in a mid-August interview. "You cannot have an energy policy without appropriate drilling. He will not do that."

Gilmore argues that given the chance as governor to lower barriers to drilling, Warner refused. The Democrat vetoed legislation in 2005 that would have directed the state's liaison office in Washington to work with Virginians in Congress to lift a moratorium on offshore oil and gas development.

Warner cast the veto as a reaction to legislation that infringed on the governor's power. The liaison office is an executive agency, answerable to the governor, and ought not to be ordered to take a position on legislation in Washington that hadn't even been introduced, he argued.

State Sen. Frank Wagner, a Virginia Beach Republican who sponsored the vetoed bill, credited Warner with taking a hard look at the legislation and giving the measure's sponsor a full opportunity to argue the case on its behalf.

"This is not a partisan issue," Wagner said. His conversations with Warner since the veto "are encouraging," he said, and indicate the Democrat is willing to include drilling as a component of an overall energy policy.

Wagner credits Gilmore with "bringing the issue to the forefront" of the Senate race, suggesting that the GOP attacks have combined with a clear shift in public opinion to push Warner to his current pro-drilling position.

As recently as last spring, Warner outlined an energy policy that supported additional exploration for offshore oil but left open the question of whether any oil found should be brought ashore.

Kevin Hall, a Warner spokesman, acknowledged last week that his boss's position "evolved" during the summer. Warner now supports production, as well as exploration, if state authorities endorse it.

"We're where McCain is and where Obama is on offshore," Hall said, referring to the GOP and Democratic presidential nominees. Republican Sen. John McCain opposed offshore drilling as recently as last spring but switched his position as gas prices soared early this summer.

More recently, Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, who had been a drilling opponent, said he's open to drilling as part of a package of energy measures including conservation and the development of alternatives such as hydrogen and wind power.

Gilmore argues that federal authorities should move to permit offshore drilling even if states involved oppose it. "It's a national security issue," he said in August, and no "crackpot governor" or legislature should be allowed to block it.

Gilmore also favors opening Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, a step opposed by McCain, Obama and Warner but supported by Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the freshly minted Republican nominee for vice president.

Though Gilmore has hammered at the drilling issue for months, "I don't think this issue alone can change public perceptions of Mark Warner," said Quentin Kidd, who teaches political science at Christopher Newport University in Newport News.

Paul Freedman, a University of Virginia political scientist, argued that Gilmore's task may be complicated by recent declines in gas prices, which some polls suggest are dampening public enthusiasm for drilling.

Freedman added that the Republican needs "more than a fairly technical set of differences " to close the double-digit advantage Warner holds in statewide opinion polls.

Dale Eisman, (703) 913-9872, dale.eisman@pilotonline.com