Ripon Forum


Vol. 48, No. 3

View Print Edition

In this edition

by Lou ZICKAR Twenty years ago this fall, 367 Republican candidates from all around the country gathered on the West Front steps of the U.S. Capitol and signed the Contract with America. At the time, it was an historic moment because it helped give Republicans control of Congress for the first time in four decades.

The Contract with America: Where It All Began

The Contract With America is a story of political perseverance. Its real antecedents were in the formation of the Conservative Opportunity Society in 1983. That group, brought together by Newt Gingrich, had as its mission the transformation of the House Republican Conference and ultimately taking control of the House.

The Contract with America: The Power of a Positive Message

In the months leading up to the 1994 Contract with America, then Republican House Whip Newt Gingrich used the pollster he trusted most to develop the content – himself. Yes, the Gingrich team conducted a handful of focus groups but the bulk of the public opinion input that drove the Contract’s 10 major points […]

The Contract with America: A Model for Campaigning… and Governance

Shortly after more than 350 men and women from around the country joined together to sign the Contract with America, a panicked House challenger phoned me. He had just received a call from the political director of the RNC telling him that embracing the Contract was a sure path to defeat and if he wanted […]

“It gave people something to vote for.” – Q&A with Haley Barbour

When Haley Barbour became Chairman of the Republican National Committee in 1993, the prospects for the GOP’s future looked rather grim. The party was coming off an election that saw it lose the White House for the first time in 12 years, and Democrats were led by a charismatic young President who came to town […]

“A Contract for Today”

When 367 Republicans signed the Contract with America on September 27, 1994, they were not only signing onto a document that would help guide them in their campaigns, they were also signing onto a governing agenda that would help guide the party after the election. At the time, providing such an agenda was important. After […]

Republicans, Energy & the Environment

At a time when Republicans are being criticized for showing indifference toward the environment, it is worth noting that the party has a rich legacy on the issue on which party leaders can build. The GOP’s great conservation legacy began with the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, who set aside the Yosemite Valley for the […]

The President’s Shortsighted Policy on Coal

As the Environmental Protection Agency wages its war on coal, it seems that the U.S. is exporting hypocrisy. With U.S. greenhouse gas emissions plunging due to our abundance of cheap natural gas, the dirty little secret is that coal exports are beginning to boom.

The Red Tape Factory

Since President Obama moved into the White House in 2009, his administration has been churning out spools of red tape. The Environmental Protection Agency is the administration’s biggest red tape factory, issuing more economically significant rules than any other agency and contributing to making energy prices more expensive.

Leading from the Front on Energy

Recent events such as the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and the crisis in Ukraine demonstrate that it is in our national interest to assume global leadership. The idea that “energy independence” would somehow free us from global responsibilities and promote the benefits of isolationism now ring hollow as the […]

States, Not Localities, Should Control Fracking

This past June, the New York State Court of Appeals issued a ruling that could have repercussions in all 50 states. In a 5-2 decision, the Appeals Court ruled the towns of Dryden (in Tompkins County) and Middlefield (in Otsego County) are allowed to ban fracking completely. The way they can do this is through […]

Ripon Profile of Mike Pence

From the September 2014 edition of The Ripon Forum, the Governor of Indiana and presumptive 2016 VP nominee discusses his record in the Hoosier State and the need for Republicans to offer a “positive alternative” to the failed policies of the Democrats.

States, Not Localities, Should Control Fracking

furchtgott-roth_hiresThis past June, the New York State Court of Appeals issued a ruling that could have repercussions in all 50 states. In a 5-2 decision, the Appeals Court ruled the towns of Dryden (in Tompkins County) and Middlefield (in Otsego County) are allowed to ban fracking completely. The way they can do this is through their locally-controlled zoning authority, known as “home rule.”  At first glance, the Court’s decision appears to be the right one.  In accordance with federalism principles, states and localities should have the choice of what activities to allow within their borders.  However, allowing each locality to choose whether to ban fracking can have negative effects on a state’s economy — and the economy of the nation. According to Hudson Institute senior fellow Irwin Stelzer, allowing individual towns to ban fracking “is a bad idea because counties bear the costs and the nation the benefits, from which it should not be deprived. That means, however, that counties should be reimbursed for the costs imposed on them, perhaps by taxes set equal to any of those costs not captured by the landowner via royalties in return for mineral rights.”

At first glance, the Court’s decision appears to be the right one … However, allowing each locality to choose whether to ban fracking can have negative effects on a state’s economy — and the economy of the nation.

Allowing each locality to choose whether to ban fracking has the potential to slow down fracking in those states where it is allowed. First, state governments are usually more stable and, in an industry that requires much foresight and initial investment, a stable regulatory environment is necessary. Second, complying with countless regulations from town to town also has the potential to slow down America’s oil and gas renaissance. Lastly, state governments have more available resources and expertise to properly craft regulations for an industry that is both complex and rapidly advancing. Fracking has proved to be a major source of growth, and towns should be compensated for their costs. People desire the economic benefits that accompany increased oil and gas production and, if the experience of the United States is any indicator, these benefits are extensive. In North Dakota, the GDP grew by 9.7 percent in 2013 — five the overall U.S. rate of 1.8 percent. The state’s unemployment rate is 2.8 percent, far lower than the U.S. rate of 6.2 percent.  Further, fracking has increased the value of land in North Dakota. Since 2008, median sale prices for homes fell nearly 7 percent in the United States. Prices are yet to fully recover. In North Dakota, thanks to the oil boom, home prices increased by 49 percent over that same period. While North Dakota is the leader, benefits from fracking have been seen throughout the United States. Texas had a growth rate of 3.7 percent in 2013, and the growth rate in Colorado was 3.8 percent. The ruling only applies to New York State, but other states could use the legal reasoning as a guideline when deciding similar cases. This is especially true for states with home rule statutes. This would slow the development of their oil and gas resources. New York State could overcome the court ruling and allow fracking statewide by passing legislation that specifically exempts fracking from local zoning decisions. Taking New York State’s political climate into consideration, this is unlikely to happen.

The ruling only applies to New York State, but other states could use the legal reasoning as a guideline when deciding similar cases. This is especially true for states with home rule statutes.

Towns in neighboring Pennsylvania are able to zone fracking out of certain areas, but not ban it in towns entirely. On December 19, 2013 in a 4-2 ruling, state judges struck down some key provisions of Act 13, a law that attempted to stop localities from using zoning powers to control fracking. In Colorado, the Boulder Country District Court ruled on July 24, 2014 that the town of Longmont cannot ban fracking (passed by voters in November 2012) since doing so is not allowed under the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Act. Local interests are not allowed to impede state interests on topics of mutual concern. Similarly, the voter ban in Fort Collins, Colorado was overturned by the District Court of Larimer Country on August 7, 2014. This ballot initiative was passed in November 2013 and put a five-year ban in place. It is important to keep in mind that there is a moratorium on fracking in New York State, one that has been in place since 2008 and will last until at least May 2015. The most recent moratorium extension passed 96 to 37 in the State Assembly this June and, if taken up by the Senate and signed by Governor Cuomo, it extends the moratorium until 2017. Fracking can deliver affordable energy, economic growth, energy security, and job opportunities. Despite the claims of overzealous regulators, this is what most people want. Allowing individual jurisdictions to put up roadblocks would slow development to the detriment of those who need employment and growth. ___________________________________ Diana Furchtgott-Roth is director of Economics21 and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. You can follow her on Twitter here.