THANKS FOR THE CHOICE, DEMS: "Safe Drilling Now" Libous (R) vs "Safe Drilling Now" Orzel

"Choice":

"Safe Drilling Now" Libous (R)
vs "Safe Drilling Now" Orzell (D)?

What the frack are you thinking, Democratic leadership?
Or better, whose money are you taking?

Every knows the NUMBER ONE issue in Libous' district is GAS DRILLING.
The PEOPLE of this area are overwhelmingly AGAINST Drilling .

So the Democratic "leadership" tells Matt Ryan
(outstanding candidate on this issue) not to run. WHY?

Instead they put forward Orzel?

http://www.pressconnects.com/article/20120517/NEWS01/205170460/Orzel-announces-second-run-Senate-seat

Well, where does he stand on this issue?
http://johnorzel.com/platform/

READ IT!

QUOTE: The potential drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale has emerged as a major issue in the coming elections. It should be of major concern. Two "sides" have emerged : those who insist that drilling will never take place and those who insist that drilling will never result in pollution.

I don't agree with either position. Drilling will occur and pollution will as well.

Aside from all of the "fringe benefits" ( jobs, economic growth, individual wealth, funds for municipal and county governments ) that drilling could bring, we need the gas. We continue to be addicted to the burning of fossil fuels, natural gas included. However safe the track record of hydrofracking may be, (Wait, did he say "SAFE!!??") the potential exists for mishaps to occur resulting in the pollution of the environment, especially aquifers.

Aside from the environmental risks ( pollution of the air, land and water) that drilling may involve, we need the gas. However vocal and ardent opposition to drilling may be for environmental reasons, it is simply unfair to insist that landowners not be permitted to pursue profits, even wealth, from the leasing of and drilling on their lands.

We have lost our focus and taken our eye off of the ball. If there is a potential "enemy" here, it is not property owners or environmentalists. That prospective "enemy" is the companies leasing and drilling properties in the Marcellus shale. It was a wise move for property owners to join coalitions. There is strength in numbers. We need to join together in refocusing our attentions and concerns where they belong. These drilling companies have legions of lawyers who "know every trick in the book", every loophole in environmental regulation and law, and who will attempt to maximize their profits.

Many argue that there is no comparison between what happened in the Gulf of Mexico and gas drilling in the Marcellus shale; the first for petroleum under the sea, the second for gas under the land. If there is no comparison, there is at least an object lesson to be learned. The Gulf crisis was no accident. There is extensive regulation governing oil drilling off shore. It simply was not enforced,. Red flags were going up all over but too often ignored. What good is the regulation if it is not enforced?
I strongly advocate that:

1. The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) be permitted to complete its studies and recommendations for safe drilling in the Marcellus Shale.

2. No arbitrary road blocks or moratoriums be enacted to delay or impede the process.

3. Strict, fair and comprehensive regulations be adopted that will minimize potential risks to residents, property, and the environment.

4. Continuous and comprehensive enforcement of regulations with punitive fines and the "pulling of permits" if need be.

5. Swift, full and fair compensation for losses suffered or incurred from the drilling process.

If we work together and proceed with caution, education and attention we can all benefit from the development of the Marcellus Shale.

ENDQUOTE.

How do we "compensate" people for the loss of their water?
How much money?

People, help me out here.
I'm seeing double over this.

Is it too late to ask Matt Ryan to run as an Independent or a Green?