Check this out, from Walberg's office:



“Congress needs to get serious on energy policy in 2008”

http://walberg.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=81375


Another year is upon us, and it is my hope that you and your family will find new opportunities and many blessings in 2008.



This week, soon after the ball dropped and folks returned back to work, news broke that the price of oil reached a record high of over $100 per barrel. To put this in perspective, it is important to remember that a barrel of oil cost less than $30 in December 2003.



Gas prices are above three dollars across south-central Michigan and have risen since the summer, causing families on a budget to cringe every time they travel to the pump. Uncertainty about the cost of filling up makes it hard for families to plan for the year ahead.



All of these factors make it crystal clear to me that 2008 is the year Congress needs to finally get serious about an energy plan that truly lowers prices at the pump, reduces our dependence on Middle Eastern oil and makes real progress towards energy independence.



America uses about a quarter of the world's oil supply to keep our economy moving, but we only produce about 40 percent of what we use. Our country’s reliance on Middle Eastern oil also means we send large amounts of money overseas to countries that generally do not share our interests, putting our national security at risk.



We need to break this dependence by diversifying our energy supply through American alternative energy sources and an increase in domestic energy production. Congress, with help from the private sector, can help foster an energy revolution by encouraging investment in alternative fuels and renewable sources of energy.



Policies such as a twenty-three year moratorium on exploring and developing off-shore production of clean and green natural gas need to be lifted. Natural gas provides twenty-three percent of our nation’s energy, yet America is the only developed nation that prohibits off-shore production and exploration of this clean-burning resource, and Americans are paying higher electricity and heating prices because of this. I have co-sponsored legislation to lift this unreasonable prohibition.



America needs further investment in carbon-free nuclear power, and we need to begin establishing ourselves again as a leader in commercial nuclear power and clean-coal technology. Congress can take a leading role in facilitating this development and similar investment in cellulosic ethanol, solar, wind and other sources of alternative energy.



Last year, I introduced legislation in the House that would create a 2% national standard for bio-diesel fuel. 55 billion gallons of diesel were consumed in 2005, and a 2% standard would create a 1.1 billion gallon market for clean-burning, home-grown, bio-diesel. Bio-diesel has higher oxygen content, is cleaner burning and has high energy content, and passing my bill is one modest step Congress can take right away.



To move toward energy independence, we also must increase our American energy production in environmentally sensitive ways. We need an energy policy that encourages conservation and allows exploration in Alaska, the Outer Continental Shelf and the Gulf of Mexico. By bolstering our own domestic production, we can increase American supply and bring down the prices of heating our homes and filling up our vehicles, while providing incentives for conservation, such as green building construction.



As you know, entrepreneurs and American innovation are more likely to solve America’s energy and environmental problems than Washington bureaucrats. We can solve our energy and environmental issues quicker and at a lower cost with innovation and new technology instead of government regulation and heavy-handed mandates.



One of my top initiatives in 2008 is to get my colleagues in Congress serious about our future energy needs. I will continue to work for an energy policy that will result in more American energy production and reduced energy costs for American families, farmers and small businesses.
 

Now for my commentary:

Someone should ask him where drilling for oil in the Great Lakes fits into his plan.

His energy plan, with the important difference on drilling in Alaska and the Great Lakes, looks a lot like Joe Schwarz's plan, which Walberg dismissed in 2006 as that of a liberal.

Never forget that Walberg proposed only one solution of drilling in ANWR and constantly pretended that was the only thing we needed to do to fix the gas prices. Well, at least Walberg is learning something down there in DC.

He has drifted a hell of a long way from his primary pledges and this website has not taken him to task for his lies and deceit.
 

How did this change from his campaign position on energy?

From his campaign website, just cache it:

Reduce Foreign Oil Imports

Tim supports the development of alternative sources of energy and drilling for oil in Alaska to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil imports.

Sounds like the same to me...
 

Well, Jeebus on a popcicle stick: Did anyone read Timmy's LTTE in the Telegram today?

I hope someone with a gift of political awareness and writing skills will rebut this list of prevarications.