Printed letters, May 29, 2013
Why is President Obama’s administration doing everything it can to stymie oil shale production in this country?
Apparently it was not bad enough to bow to special interest groups taking most of the land for oil shale development off the table, but now it looks as if they are intent on changing the royalty rates, making it even harder for oil shale operations to get off the ground.
The rates were set up as they are in recognition that oil shale projects require more upfront investment than regular oil and gas operations. Hiking those rates, as it seems the administration wants to do in amendments that it is making to oil shale regulations, serves only to further discourage oil shale research and development.
I would like to know what else is contained in these proposed rule changes. If recent history is any clue, royalty rate increases are just the beginning.
Oil shale opponents like to repeat the mantra of the industry being “not viable,” and always “ten years away.” If the government had taken the same approach to the electronics industry that it does to oil shale, the laptop and cell phone would still only be pipe dreams.
With all of the talk we hear coming out of Washington about how the Obama administration is going to fix the economy, discouraging domestic industry sure seems to be an odd way of going about it.
People of northwest Colorado need more time on BLM plan
Kudos to the Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado for asking for additional time to evaluate proposed new changes to oil shale regulations that could have a huge impact on northwestern Colorado.
While the current administration seems to regard oil shale as little more than an annoyance to try to brush aside (like other forms of energy development that the president doesn’t understand or agree with), to those of us who live in rural northwestern Colorado it is kind of a big deal. Oil shale is an immense resource, and its development could be an economic renaissance for our region. Unfortunately, Obama’s BLM has done all that it can to prevent the industry from taking hold. It appears that the recently released new regulations for oil shale development are following the same track and offering even more cheap shots at the industry in an attempt to keep it down.
Whatever the extent of the new regulations, the people of northwest Colorado, who would be most affected, deserve to have enough of an opportunity to review the documents and figure out just how they will impact the local economy and the future of our communities. Haven’t we all just about had enough of Washington D.C. and the environmentalist lobby making our decisions for us?
Where is Grant’s morality for Nathan Dunlap’s victims?
On Dec. 14, 1993, Marge Kohlberg, 50, Colleen O’Connor, 17, Benjamin Grant, 17, and Sylvia Crowell, 19, were shot in the head and killed while they were working at a Chuck E. Cheese restaurant by Nathan Dunlap for $1,591. Bobby Stephens, whom Dunlap shot at pointblank range in the face in the same incident, positively identified Dunlap. With a mountain of other evidence confirming he was the killer, Dunlap was found guilty by an Adams County jury and sentenced to death May 17, 1996.
The Colorado Supreme Court has upheld his conviction and sentence three times, and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear his case last month. “In the final analysis, it is the horror of the crime itself that looms large in our (decision),” Justice Rebecca Kourlis wrote. “Dunlap killed four people and seriously wounded a fifth. He did it without provocation or cause, but rather with a brutal contempt for human life.”
Before we can have a discussion on morality with poor, old Bill Grant, it is important to remember why Dunlap finds himself in his current situation.
Grant would like to give the impression of the superior morality of Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber compared to Texas Gov. Rick Perry. Kitzhaber has placed a moratorium on the death penalty in Oregon, and Texas has executed 235 people in the last 11 years. I am sure that Grant thinks that Gov. John Hickenlooper’s “temporary reprieve” for Dunlap is a win for death-penalty opponents.
Hickenlooper said that “such a level of punishment really does demand perfection.” I think that all Hickenlooper has shown is his weakness in his inability to confront evil in our society. He wants to push the decision off onto someone else.
Where is Grant’s morality for Marge, Colleen, Benjamin, Sylvia and Bobby? Where is his morality for their families or an outraged community? Is perfection possible?
Coverage of broken sprinklers petty in wake of tornado news
Just two days after the Oklahoma tornado, in which thousands have lost everything — their homes, their community and, for some, their lives — The Daily Sentinel ran a story with a picture of a guy with a broken sprinkler angry about living next to a teen shelter.
Can’t you feel the love and compassion? New low, Daily Sentinel.