| Last month the National Republican Congressional Committee advised incumbents to run on personal and local issues and distance themselves from the national Republican brand. But speaking to Iowa Independent recently, Latham asserted that Republicans can win this year's elections by focusing on high gas prices and the "surge" in Iraq.
This press release from Latham's campaign showcases this spin in action by highlighting
Latham's work to lower gas and energy prices for Iowa families.
The sixty second ad reinforces Latham's continued commitment to renewable energy but also discusses the need for Congress to work immediately to increase domestic energy supplies that America controls.
"$4.00 a gallon gas hurts Iowa families," notes Latham in the ad. "And they're frustrated with leaders in Congress for not doing more about it - and they have every right to be."
"I have always been, and will continue to be, a strong supporter of alternative energy research and production, but we need to work for solutions that get Iowans from point A to point B without busting their family budget."
Latham has been working in Congress on legislation aimed at increasing our domestic supply of affordable that will lower gas and energy prices through the increased use of our current resources, to include off-shore drilling and drilling in ANWR.
Will a commitment to more oil drilling save Republican candidates from an otherwise hostile political environment?
The rapid response from Becky Greenwald's campaign (full text here) points out various misleading aspects of Latham's radio ad:
Experts agree that offshore drilling will do nothing to lower gas prices for seven to ten years, and its clear that this ad is a diversion from Latham's votes against opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserves and forcing oil companies to drill on existing leases. (McClatchy, 6/18/08)
"I'm running for Congress because of these sort of shenanigans. Latham is trying to get Iowans to think about leasing 2,000 more acres when 68 million acres already leased are open, untapped and will lower prices. Latham is trying to divert attention from his failure to support immediate relief through opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserves and forcing oil companies to drill on existing leases," said Becky Greenwald, Candidate for Congress in Iowa's 4th District. "Is it too much to ask for leaders to be honest with us?"
Unfortunately, Latham, like George Bush decided to play politics with gas prices. Last week, he voted against a bill that would release 70 million barrels of oil from the strategic oil reserve to bring relief from high gas prices. This bill would bring almost immediate relief to high gas prices. (H. Res. 6578)
And two weeks ago, Latham voted against a bill to force oil companies to drill on existing leases. There are 68 million acres of federal land already leased by oil companies. That is two times the size of the state of Iowa available for energy production that is now sitting idle. (H.R. 615) (emphasis in original)
Like McCain's tv ad bashing Obama last week, Latham's radio ad is wrong to imply that drilling for more oil offshore and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would solve our energy problems. Even the president of the Teamsters Union, which long supported increased oil drilling in the U.S., announced last week that the union had changed its position:
"We are not going to drill our way out of the energy problems we are facing-not here and not in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge," [Teamsters General President Jim] Hoffa told labor and environmental activists at an Oakland, Calif., summit on good jobs and clean air. "We must find a long-term approach that breaks our dependence on foreign oil by investing in the development of alternate energy sources like solar, wind and geothermal power."
But some polls have found widespread support for the Republican position on offshore drilling, right?
Rasmussen's most recent findings suggest that the public is divided on whether more drilling is the answer:
A new Rasmussen Reports national survey, taken last night (Monday), finds that 45% think placing more restrictions on energy speculators is more important, while 42% take the opposite view that allowing offshore oil drilling is more important.
A major partisan divide on the issue, like the split in Congress, is evident, however. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of Republicans say lifting the ban is the highest priority, while 59% of Democrats - and 48% of unaffiliated voters -- say controlling speculators is more important. Only 29% of unaffiliateds say lift the ban first.
Unaffiliated or "no-party" voters have a slim plurality among registered voters in Iowa's fourth district, and there are about 8,000 more Democrats than Republicans in the district.
If Rasmussen's findings are accurate, then Latham may be out of step with his constituents on this issue.
But Latham is clearly convinced that he is on the right side of public opinion. His campaign's press release said the new radio ad is airing statewide. That's a lot more expensive than running the ad only in the main fourth district media markets (Des Moines and Mason City).
Is he trying to raise his profile to pave the way for a gubernatorial bid against Chet Culver in 2010? Whatever his motive, it's a sign of confidence for him to use this issue to introduce himself to Iowans across the state.
Final note: if you reject Latham's misleading spin on energy policy, please donate to Greenwald's campaign to help her respond on the air. She has a lot going for her in this race and a real chance to win this swing district if she raises enough money this summer, especially if the DCCC or EMILY's list get involved. |
