Romney’s Plan for Drilling on Federal Land
The United States had great choice to make this past month in the Presidential Elections. The decision was to continue on our current path or start on a new one. A major point on the two candidates was on the domestic economic policies. Issues on the domestic economic policies were very different for both tickets in this year’s election. Differences were very clear on each party’s stances on drilling on Federal Land. Romney was very adamant on increasing drilling on Federal Land and also creating the much controversial Keystone XL Pipeline. During Obama’s first term, production of natural gas on the United States Federal Land has decreased from 35% to 21%. Though, his dismay of drilling has come after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in which millions of barrels of oil polluted vast areas in the Gulf of Mexico. This trend will be continuing, unless progress is made to ensure the safety of the environment while drilling. This is a main concern for the government, especially on domestic Federal Land.
The economic policy I am addressing is Romney’s plan to drill on federal oil, to increase domestic fuel production, and most importantly create jobs in this sector. The key point Romney focused on was creating jobs, a huge deciding factor for many citizens. Romney’s policy was to achieve his main goals of creating jobs and cutting the deficit. Some of these jobs would have been created by more drilling and oil-production related construction on Federal Land. The deficit could then be minimized by the gains from these actions. This policy was intended to address citizens who have lost income from the decrease in drilling from the Obama campaign and those searching for new opportunities in domestic oil production.
The geographical areas the Romney campaign targeted were the potential oil rich states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, New York, and parts of the Northern Midwest. The New England region of this...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document