According to The Canton Repository, U.S. Rep. Renacci, R (OH-16), who is running for re-election this fall against Betty Sutton, D, and who happens to represent the district where I live, "will host a community energy development forum" next week. Snappy title there. Nowhere in the two column plus piece is the word "fracking" used (note: you can go to the newspaper's website about "fraciking" but not fracking to learn more).
There are probably a lot of things I could talk about; e.g., Orwellian use of language (again, the title of the forum); the assurances by Rep. Renacci that "improvements in drilling and extracting oil and gas from shale" haven't made Ohioans safer but "turned Ohio into a 'major player in the domestic energy game' "; newspaper ethics and editing; and others. No, the thing that caught my attention was that a university is hosting the event, yet nobody seems to make any pretense that this is a true, open, and honest discussion of multiple viewpoints (I almost said "opposing positions" but that seems limiting in itself).
Here is the list of participants (the word "panelists" is substituted in the online version of the Rep article):
It's like having hearings on women's reproductive rights and not inviting any women to testify. What is that you say? Really? . . . not a one? OK, bad example.
This really isn't that complicated. You have something that is truly controversial w/ at least enough evidence and testimony to warrant an open and honest debate of a process that is going on in the backyards of many families here in Ohio, and our Congressional Representative is concerned enough that he only invites those who will directly benefit from the ongoing drilling and fracking. In many arenas, they would be disqualified based on a conflict of interest.
But because the forum is taking place at a university, it's even more egregious. From Merriam-Webster:
Come on, Renacci--if you're going to be taken seriously by anybody other than like-minded tea party folk, you need to honor an honest pursuit of truth; invite at least one environmentalist to this open discussion. Just one--is that too much to ask? Or, do you not even care enough to pretend to be fair and balanced?
* * * * *
In other environmental news--
From the Ohio Environmental Council:
There are probably a lot of things I could talk about; e.g., Orwellian use of language (again, the title of the forum); the assurances by Rep. Renacci that "improvements in drilling and extracting oil and gas from shale" haven't made Ohioans safer but "turned Ohio into a 'major player in the domestic energy game' "; newspaper ethics and editing; and others. No, the thing that caught my attention was that a university is hosting the event, yet nobody seems to make any pretense that this is a true, open, and honest discussion of multiple viewpoints (I almost said "opposing positions" but that seems limiting in itself).
Here is the list of participants (the word "panelists" is substituted in the online version of the Rep article):
• Rhonda Reda, executive director of Ohio Oil & Gas Energy Education Program;What's missing? An environmentalist. These folks are all proponents of fracking (hydraulic fracturing, if you prefer); folks who directly benefit from the drilling for oil and gas in Ohio. I don't see anybody there to speak on behalf of the environmental concerns that many have regarding fracking.
• Dr. Robert W. Chase, a professor for Marietta College’s Department of Petroleum Engineering and Geology;
• Dale Arnold, director for energy, utility and local government policy for the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation;
• Jim McKinney, senior vice president and general manager for EnerVest Operating.
It's like having hearings on women's reproductive rights and not inviting any women to testify. What is that you say? Really? . . . not a one? OK, bad example.
This really isn't that complicated. You have something that is truly controversial w/ at least enough evidence and testimony to warrant an open and honest debate of a process that is going on in the backyards of many families here in Ohio, and our Congressional Representative is concerned enough that he only invites those who will directly benefit from the ongoing drilling and fracking. In many arenas, they would be disqualified based on a conflict of interest.
But because the forum is taking place at a university, it's even more egregious. From Merriam-Webster:
Maybe b/c Walsh is a private institution, they're less concerned about public opinion; I don't know. But Renacci was elected to serve the best interests of all his constituents, and whether you agree w/ him on this one or the next one, you don't want the process itself rigged, do you?1 a : the marketplace or public place of an ancient Roman city forming the center of judicial and public business b : a public meeting place for open discussion c : a medium (as a newspaper or online service) of open discussion or expression of ideas
Come on, Renacci--if you're going to be taken seriously by anybody other than like-minded tea party folk, you need to honor an honest pursuit of truth; invite at least one environmentalist to this open discussion. Just one--is that too much to ask? Or, do you not even care enough to pretend to be fair and balanced?
* * * * *
In other environmental news--
From the Ohio Environmental Council:
New Great Lakes "Compact" bill stirs up Statehouse again
In March, OH Representative Lynn Wachtmann (R-Napoleon) introduced legislation to implement the Great Lakes Compact (House Bill 416). On April 25, the House of Representatives passed the legislation on a near party-line vote. The new bill (now HB 473), while better than the previous one, has four significant outstanding flaws that lock anglers, boaters, and swimmers out of the courthouse, while risking dried up walleye spawning areas and toxic algae in streams and Lake Erie. Read more about the bill and how you can help stop it.
No comments:
Post a Comment