Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Gas-tax argument fuels Udall-Schaffer fireworks

By Lynn Bartels, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published August 16, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

Related Links

More Elections

More stories »

The two leading Senate candidates continued their did- not, did-so fight over gasoline taxes during a debate Friday before north metro business and government leaders.

Republican Bob Schaffer said Democrat Mark Udall wants to increase the gas tax by 50 cents a gallon - which Udall said wasn't true.

Udall countered that only one candidate in the race has actually voted to increase gas taxes and that is Schaffer.

The debate before the Metro North Chamber of Commerce featured the usual topics - energy, the war, transportation.

But a post-debate interview afterward provided fireworks for the two campaigns. Schaffer, a former oil and gas executive, was asked about Udall's support of taking tax credits from oil and gas companies and giving them to renewable-energy ventures.

"The margin of profit of the energy industry in America today is 8 percent, which is modest compared to insurance companies or banks or other industries," Schaffer said.

He also said that energy prices are so high "the federal government is raking in a bunch of cash right now on the backs of energy producers."

Udall's campaign issued a blistering press release: "Bob Schaffer: Standing strong for the struggling, impoverished oil companies."

"The bottom line is that Bob Schaffer would rather let Colorado families and businesses continue to suffer than see a dime taken away from the oil companies," said Udall campaign spokeswoman Tara Trujillo.

"It couldn't be a clearer display of his true priorities."

Schaffer's campaign manager, Dick Wadhams, hotly countered that if Udall were truly concerned about energy and $4-a-gallon gasoline he wouldn't have "blown" off his congressional duties to stay in Colorado last month for district work and a campaign fundraiser.

Udall missed the initial vote on whether Congress should adjourn for the summer. He earlier said he wanted to stay in Washington and work on an energy policy.

Wadhams demanded that Udall reveal which donors he met with.

Schaffer travels the state with a red, 32-inch steel gas pump that he sets in front of voters before he begins his pitch.

"The guy I'm running against actually proposed a 50-cents- per-gallon tax increase," he told voters in the San Luis Valley last month.

Udall's campaign contends the charge is false, and another indication of Schaffer's game plan.

"They're being dishonest about Mark Udall's record and Bob Schaffer's record because they know they have to deceive the voters to have a chance to win," said Udall's campaign manager, Mike Melanson.

Friday's debate was the candidates' second face-off in two days. They debate again at 4 p.m. today at Sacred Heart Church in Colorado Springs.

Green Party candidate Bob Kinsey, who also participated in Friday's forum, repeatedly ripped the Bush administration and the war in Iraq.

"We need to impeach these guys who have run a war . . . with a credit card from China," Kinsey said.

Afterward, Dalrie Berg, 81, of Westminster, supported Schaffer before the debate and nothing he heard changed his mind.

"He supports commerce. (Udall) supports unions," Berg said.

Thornton City Council member Jan Bach backs Udall, but was frustrated that none of the candidates talked about a plan to "directly improve the lives of the people."

The race to replace retiring U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Loveland, is one of the most closely watched battles in the nation.

Udall, of Eldorado Springs, was first elected to Congress in 1998. Schaffer, of Fort Collins, served three terms in Congress before stepping down in 2002.

bartels@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5327

Back and forth

The high cost of gasoline is the hot-button issue in the U.S. Senate race between Republican Bob Schaffer and Democrat Mark Udall. Schaffer claims Udall in 2002 proposed a hefty gas-tax increase. Udall says that's untrue, and Schaffer actually voted to increase the tax.

* What Udall said

A publication called the Foster Natural Gas Report reported that at a meeting in Washington, an energy consultant asked, "If there were a bill to raise gasoline taxes by 50 cents a gallon, would you support it and vote for it?"

Congressman Udall replied: "If there were ever 217 other members of the House willing to face the firing squad, yes. This country is not ready for that approach."

* Schaffer on Friday

"I disagree with Mr. Udall's suggestion and promise that he would vote for a 50-cent- per-gallon new federal gas-tax increase. I think that is bad for our economy."

* Udall's response

"I never advocated for, nor have I voted for, a 50-cent gas tax. The only person sitting on this stage who has actually voted for a gas-tax increase is Congressman Schaffer."

* Schaffer's vote

As a state senator, Schaffer in 1989 voted for a bill that increased the state gasoline tax incrementally, from 18 cents a gallon to 20 cents a gallon and then to 22 cents a gallon, effective Jan. 1, 1991. That tax costs Coloradans an average of $70.5 million a year, the state reports.

Comments

  • August 16, 2008

    8:12 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    JohnSmith2 writes:

    Tax and Lie Bob Schaffer, always on the lookout for the little guy like poor ExxonMobile and starving kids like ConocoPhillips and Royal Dutch Shell., while standing up to evil consumers by raising their gas tax.

    Stick it to 'em, Bob! That Iraq war widow with two kids who just lost her only source of income due to outsourcing clearly has more money than she knows what to do with. Thanks for taking it away and giving it to state government so they can do really important things like putting the ten commandments in every classroom!

  • August 16, 2008

    2:06 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    HopiMedicineMan writes:

    Udall, the oilman, has neither been able to solve the problem, nor give appropriate leadership, to the waste management problems of his own community, Eldorado Springs, if he indeed lives there. Eldorado Springs is a hippie community in Boulder County left over from the Rainbow Family days. How can we expect a man who can't clean his own lodge to clean up the energy problem.

  • August 16, 2008

    2:43 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    solar_satellite writes:

    Nothing could be stupider than to elect a former oil company executive and lobbyist to the Senate. Republicans have given tax dollars to the oil industry at a time when it enjoys fantastic profits. Republicans are the irresponsible spenders -- W is a piker compared to the Great Disinfomer, Reagan; he doubled the national debt, while W's war has apparently cost a paltry $600,000,000,000 we didn't have. Reagan left office in 1984; haven't voters yet figured out which party is responsible for mortgaging our future (and for no return, either)? No fiscally conservative voter has any business voting Republican.

    No amount of domestic drilling will bring the price of gasoline down; we have only 2% of the world's proven reserves of oil, and our production of oil peaked ~40 years ago. We import a greater percentage of our oil now than we did during the Gas Crisis of 1973, and demand from the developing world, especially China, guarantees that oil will increase steadily in price. Voters cannot imagine the kinds of changes we will have to make, and desperately want to be told something else; Schaffer is only too happy to oblige. Bloggers here exceed even his stupidity and urge us to develop shale oil, despite there being no prospects for doing so economically, much less in an environmentally acceptable manner.

    We must bite the bullet and institute an immediate program to put single commuters (who on average drive only twenty miles per day) into appropriate vehicles, i.e. small, plug-in hybrids, and to make the roads safe for them. If voters persist in their ignorant determination to open up our coasts and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, we will damage those resources (does anyone remember the Exxon Valdez; has anyone stepped in tar on an otherwise pristine Florida beach?) and be no closer to a solution for our need for transportation. The crisis in the cost of transportation fuels is upon us and will soon grow worse; this is what came of despising the principled, intelligent leadership of President Carter thirty-five years ago. We still haven't faced this (or most of our other serious problems), and if voters' response to Schaffers' lies is any indication, we will continue to ignore reality until our system collapses.

    P.S. Look at what has already been achieved to see what is now posssible:

    http://www.canadiandriver.com/article...
    http://aptera.com/

  • August 16, 2008

    6:08 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    HopiMedicineMan writes:

    I hope you're right Solar. We need to run our vehicles on
    dandelions. We've enriched a region of barbarians without enriching our own barbarians. Of course I think Udall, as tame, civilized and environmental as he is, he's not the one. We need a crazy German to tear this thing open. We need to drill now.