Tom Udall is a strong supporter of the environment, and his New Mexico House voting record provides some tangible proof.
Voted YES on $9.7B for Amtrak improvements and operation thru 2013. (Jun 2008)
Voted YES on increasing AMTRAK funding by adding $214M to $900M. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on barring website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump. (May 2006)
Voted NO on deauthorizing "critical habitat" for endangered species. (Sep 2005)
Voted NO on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects. (Nov 2003)
Rated 95% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes. (Dec 2003)
Tom Udall on the Issues (www.ontheissues.org)
In the traditionally conservative West, can Tom Udall and his cousin Mark Udall really win the Senate seats of vacating Republicans? Carl Hulse of the New York Times wrote an interesting article about this topic. The Udalls come from a long line of conservationists, and with today's high gas prices, their Republican opponents are trying to use this history against them. Steve Pearce correlates consumer woes to the Democrats' resistance to expanding oil drilling. Udall returns the criticism by pointing out Republicans' historical resistance to mpg standards. “We are not opposed to good sound development, but there cannot be carelessness and recklessness in the use of resources,” said Tom Udall. Follow the link below for Hulse's full article.
NYT Article (www.nytimes.com)
Steve Pearce may be trying to convince voters that Tom Udall is partially responsible for the downturn of the US economy, but consumer woes that Americans are suffering from would not be eased by lifting the ban on offshore drilling. According to a Boston Globe report, industry analysts argue that it would be ten years or more before oil companies could even begin exploration for additional domestic oil sources. Even then, the effect upon the economy would be minimal.
Is it fair for Steve Pearce and other republicans to mislead American consumers into believing that drilling offshore and in ANWR are legitimate paths to consumer relief?
Read the full article at the link below.
New offshore drilling not a quick fix, analysts say (www.boston.com)
Tom Udall was (is) an intelligent and effective congressman. Yes, he butted heads with conservatives, but he stuck to his guns. When I lived in New Mexico, I expected him to be a second-generation political hack, riding on the coattails. Instead I saw him as a thoughtful, dedicated statesman. A good senator. Probably one of the best. His political acumen was born in the cauldron of New Mexico politics, which in complexities, is second only to Louisiana.
Yet,even with the greenies, and the "patrons (old Spanish families)," and the Republicans, and the opportunists, the old-time Democrats, new Democrats and even Republicans, Udall has a reputation of fairness, intelligence, and responsibility to his office.
I no longer live in New Mexico, but were I there, I'd certainly be voting for Udall.
Side: Udall In the cauldron of New Mexico
In 2005, charges of plagiarism were leveled against Steve Pearce for a guest column with his name on the byline which appeared in El Defensor Chieftain, the local paper for Socorro, New Mexico. In a letter to the editor, a reader pointed out that the piece was almost identical to an article on the Heritage Foundation's website. Pearce's press secretary, Jim Burns, resigned over the incident, claiming the plagiarism was his fault and occurred without Pearce's knowledge.
Pearce's Apology (www.dchieftain.com)
Tom Udall (D)
One of the clear differences between Tom Udall and Steve Pearce comes in the energy debate. Udall authored an initiative that “requires electric utilities to produce 15% of their electricity from alternative energy sources.” Udall continues to argue for investing in alternative energies like “wind, solar, and geothermal power.”
While Steve Pearce does acknowledge that we need to develop renewable energy, he argues that no renewable energy can “replace our reliance on traditional sources of energy such as oil and natural gas.” Pearce goes further to advocate that Nuclear power is a necessary part of this country’s future and that we should be investing in more new refineries.
Pearce on Energy (peopleforpearce.com)
Tom Udall has a perfect record when it comes to supporting reproductive rights for women. He has a 100% pro-choice score with NARAL (National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League). A few examples of Tom Udall's voting record on this topic:
- In January 2007, he voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines.
- In May 2005, he voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research.
- In April 2005, he voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions.
- In February 2003, he voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research.
- In September 2002, he voted NO on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info.
- In April 2000, he voted NO on banning partial-birth abortions.
Tom Udall's NARAL Record (www.prochoiceamerica.org)
The Human Rights Campaign wholeheartedly endorses Tom Udall because he "supports key HRC legislation such as the fully-inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act and strong hate crimes prevention legislation." His Republican opponent Steve Pearce has never been in HRC's favor, so HRC is actively campaigning for Udall.
Equality Candidates: Tom Udall (democracyengine.com)
In the home state of Los Alamos Laboratories, the need for nuclear weapons directly means jobs. As a result, both candidates have been very careful to argue against any cut in the nuclear weapon budget. Tom Udall recently was the only nay vote against a House Appropriations Subcommittee budget proposal that included cuts in nuclear weapons that would have affected two of New Mexico’s weapons labs.
weapons vote (www.democracyfornewmexico.com)
Tom Udall is a candidate who likes to meet with constituents in order to get firsthand knowledge of their concerns.
Recently, Udall met with citizens in a round table discussion at a local gas station to discuss the rising cost of fuel. Udall spoke of possible solutions including responsible drilling, cracking down on hedge fund speculators and price gouging and adopting stronger fuel efficiency standards. He also talked about a higher gas tax saying it wasn't a feasible solution at this time.
Udall seems genuinely concerned about higher fuel costs and the impact it is having on citizens.
Tom Udall Says He Feels Your Pain (newmexicoindependent.com)
Side: High Fuel Costs
This is really an epic moment in the history of USA, especially New Mexico. Unlike the usual battle that always precedent American elections all over, there will not be an incumbent contesting for another term; in essence, there would be injection of fresh blood owing to the fact the incumbent New Mexico's senator to the Capitol, Republican Senator Pete Domenici has announced his retirement from partisan politics.
There is however this contensious issue that needs to be sorted out and that is what really prompted Domenici not to run again? Is it the fear of defeat (owing to the fact that he lost his comitee chairmanship after Republicans lost control of the Senate in the 2006 Senate election and his on going investigation in the house) or due to health reasons as he claimed?
Side: Real story
Check out this clip of Tom Udall explaining his position on Iraq. In this clip Udall explains that we should not be policing the streets of Baghdad and we need to begin to redeploy our troops within 60 days to refocus our efforts on Afghanistan. Udall voted against the war from the very beginning claiming it was a detour in the war in Afghanistan where our national security issues were at stake. It is going to be hard for Steve Pearce to attack Udall’s record on Iraq since it has not wavered at all since the Iraqi Resolution vote in 2002. Pearce will likely try to move the conversation away from foreign policy and focus on New Mexico’s struggling economy.
That's a great point, y1776. Unlike Udall, Steve Pearce has consistently voted to continue the war, and he attacks his opponents who support leaving Iraq. He voted yes on declaring Iraq part of the War on Terror with no exit date in 2006, and he voted against the redeployment of troops in 2007. He has accused the left of being willing to "do anything to discredit, discount, and disrespect our soldiers." You can see this by watching the video clip of Pearce during the Iraq Troop Surge debate.
Side: Iraq war
Tom Udall has pointed the finger to the Bush Administration for the gas price inflation. He has openly stated that this issue will cause instability the United States. This is all information that anybody who watches the news would be qualified to publicly stated. He has not illustrated what method(s) he would use. What makes him Senate material?
(D) Tom Udall is said to "point the finger" at the oil speculators as well in a recent article in the National Journal. (Also mentioned in other arguments on Pearce's side.) As Shelly mentioned above, Udall has mentioned the Bush Administration as a cause along with Big Oil. This does call Udall's qualifications into question if he does not provide solutions in step with accusations and complaints.
Pointing the Finger Again (adspotlight.nationaljournal.com)
Side: High Fuel Costs
If anyone else was originally confused by the number of Udalls running for a Senate seat in Washington don’t feel too bad. Apparently Tom Udall’s opponent had the same problem. A month ago Pearce fired a press release criticizing Tom Udall for proposing an amendment preventing oil shale leases. This resulted in a great Scooby Doo-like moment where Pearce had to be told that it was Tom Udall’s cousin Mark Udall who actually inked the amendment.
If there is anything that the whole New Mexico should be looking out for, it is the search for that candidate who is proven and with the up-to-the task attitude armed with a brilliant background as far as the available history is all about. This however, is not in support of Pearce. According to Heather Wilson who had previously declared her candidacy in the race, through her campaign organization claimed, "Pearce violated House ethics by urging those he called to contact him through his official, non-campaign phone number or check out his official, non-campaign Web site." If this is really true, can he (Pearce) be entrusted with national responsibilities that the Senate entails?
Legislation in the lower house usually gives an indication of the challenges at the Senate. A feather to Udall's cap is that he has spent far more time in the lower house than Pearce. While Udall has been in the house since 1999, Pearce got to the house in 2003 although we need to ask how far how well?
Academically, it is evident, although argued in some quarters, that Udall is more qualified for the challenges, having had an invigorating time studying, reading and practicing the noble law profession. He was in the famous UK's Cambridge University where he left with a Bachelor of Law degree as a foundational degree while Pearce on his own part, started off with a degree in economics at the New Mexico University. It would be an understatement to state that a good understanding of the law would come handy as a potent tool in the Senate for any would-be-senator serving in the Senate of the United States of America, that Tom Udall has.
In a poll today, Tom Udall is leading Steve Pearce, 49%-41%. The keys to Udall’s lead are in his courtship of Independent, moderate and Hispanic voters. Udall has almost lapped Pearce in his support among Hispanics. Hispanics make up nearly 40% of the state’s voters and traditionally they have been registered as Democrats but in the past have crossed party lines. For example in 2004 George W. was able to court the Hispanic vote in New Mexico since a large percentage stood behind the president in a time of war. One of the biggest issues for Hispanic voters so far has been the Iraq War. As a NPR piece by Jennifer Ludden points out “New Mexico has four military bases. Between active duty and the National Guard, it can seem like just about everyone here has served in the military or has a family member who has.” Tom Udall’s strong position against the Iraq War clearly has given him solid ground in this demographic.
July 31st Poll (www.newsmax.com)
The poll posted on NewsMax.com is reflective of polling conducted June 11-30, 2008. The results were posted Thursday, July 31. Udall indeed leads by a 9 pt margin (with a +/- 4.6 percentage point allowance for error), which leaves a possibility of the gap being reduced to 5 pts. According to the NewsMax.com article, Pearce's voter base is, "the traditional GOP voters: regular church goers and gun owners." If McCain can influence independent and undecided voters between now and November, Pearce may be able to close the gap and make this a closer race than anticipated.
Tom Udall's senate campaign seems to be more effective statewide than conservative Republican Steve Pearce's efforts. Pearce, known more in southern New Mexico than the more populous north, is trailing the northern New Mexico Democrat by a large margin; more than 10 points. Working with Barack Obama's presidential organization, which has opened 18 field offices in the state, Udall's campaign is part of a Democratic Party effort to win all offices statewide. John McCain has only opened one office in New Mexico, and Steve Pearce must campaign statewide without much national help.
Obama's Field Offices Also Help Udall (www.huffingtonpost.com)
Side: Udall Better Organized Than Pearce
According to the HuffingtonPost.com, (R) Steve Pearce has received a considerable amount of money from oil lobbyists, a little over $200,000. Exxon-Mobil revealed on July 31 they had earned a profit for the first six months of 2008 to the tune of $22.57 billion, or $4.25 a share. Udall has an opportunity to spin this fact in his favor in the upcoming televised debates.
Big Oil contributes to candidates. (www.huffingtonpost.com)
Side: Domestic Drilling
Instead of looking for oil in shale or under sheet rock, Udall proposes that New Mexico be a forerunner in the union by actually investing immediately in renewable energy rather than keep drilling. The first place to start, says Udall is by making small incentives at home and in the workplace to make people more energy conscious. New Mexico already drills to contribute to America's oil supply, but Udall insists, this cannot last for much longer.
He authored and led an initiative to require that utilities use at least 15% renewable energy from alternative sources such as solar, geothermal and wind power. From reading his legislation, it seems to me that Udall wants to fix the problem rather than cover them up like Pearce who voted against increasing tax incentives for using alternate energy.
Side: Pearce for progress
Fortunately for voters who are still unsure which candidate to cast their ballots for, Tom Udall and Steve Pearce are radically different on almost every issue. Because of this, voters can easily choose which candidate will better represent his or her interests in the senate. For example, Udall has an strong history of voting in favor of embryonic stem cell research, whereas Pearce is opposed to such measures. On The Issues offers voters a chance to compare candidates side by side on this and many other hot topics. Check out the New Mexico race at the link below.
New Mexico Senate Race (senate.ontheissues.org)
Tom Udall has the voting record to back up his issues. Back in October 2002 he voted NO on authorizing military force in Iraq. His reasoning for voting NO on the Iraq Resolution was specifically because he wanted to finish the fight in Afghanistan and go after those responsible of the terror attack under American skies. Udall has argued for a focused fight against terrorism while also supporting the troops not just with words but by actions. For example, Udall has been working with Congress to get better health care for returning veterans and made it a priority to move to pass the new G.I. Bill that guarantees that every military veteran can afford to go to the college.
Tom Udall has consistently voted in favor of working Americans. Based on his pro-union voting record, he has earned a 100% rating by the AFL-CIO:
~Voted YES on restricting employer interference in union organizing. (Mar 2007)
~Voted YES on increasing minimum wage to $7.25. (Jan 2007)
~Voted NO on end offshore tax havens and promote small business. (Oct 2004)
Steve Pearce, who has a 0% rating from the AFL-CIO, has a much different voting record:
~Voted NO on restricting employer interference in union organizing. (Mar 2007)
~Voted NO on increasing minimum wage to $7.25. (Jan 2007)
~Voted YES on end offshore tax havens and promote small business. (Oct 2004)
You can see more voting records at the link below.
Go Vote (www.govote.com)
Huge political differences exist between the two primary candidates for the open U.S. Senate seat in New Mexico. Environmental Democrat and northern New Mexico Congressman Tom Udall public policy positions show support for a more open society, with abortion and civil rights for all citizens, and government used as a tool to make people's lives better. Southern New Mexico Congressman and Republican oilman Steve Pearce supports converative actions like outlawing abortion and restricting the civil rights of gay people, and using force to promote traditional values. He does not believe govenment should be used to improve the lives of citizens, and he recently opposed health insurance for the state's children. Vote for the future, not the past.
Pearce Too Right Even For Domenici (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: Real Freedom over Tradition
Tom Udall has been endorsed by organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign for his firm stance on equal rights for the GLBT community. He has consistently voted in such a way to promote the rights of all Americans, including a NO vote on defining marriage as one man and one woman, NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage, YES on prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation, and he also voted NO on banning gay adoptions in Washington, DC. You can read more about the endorsement at the link below.
Human Rights Campaign Announces (www.hrc.org)
Going through Udall's official website, he made a statement that "Under the Bush Administration, we have seen gas prices, food prices, health care costs, and the price of a college education increase dramatically. And who is bearing the brunt of all this? New Mexico’s middle class. We need change and we need it now. That’s why I’m running for U.S. Senate. We have to get back to doing what’s right for this country and what’s right for New Mexico." Does he really know what he is going to do as a Senator or is he just pointing accusing fingers to the Bush's administration just like any Tom, Dick and Harry is doing these days?
Tom Udall's economy Page (www.tomudall.com)
Side: High Fuel Costs
A democratic win by Udall will help Baraqck Obama get elected and perform as President. Additionally, just having a strong contest will encourage voters to vote in the election for both Senate and President. There are several key battleground states that could swing the Presidential election. New Mexico, along with Colorado, Virginia and New Hampshire could help. A strong Senate campaign by Udall will help the Democrat, Barack Obama, win a typical Republican state. A win by Udall also enhances the Democratic Senate Majority which will aid a Democratic President in passing legislation.
Democracy for New Mexico (www.democracyfornewmexico.com)
Side: Presidential Election
(R) Steve Pearce is said to be 'on the fence' as to his attendance at the upcoming Republican National Convention in Minnesota, according to a spokesman. NationalJournal.com reports there are a handful of Republican representatives and senators who may not be in attendance at the convention, sighting a variety of reasons including personal engagements, campaign obligations and more. (D) Tom Udall has committed to attend the Democratic Party convention in Denver. Bloggers have already jumped on the news of Pearce's possible absence (http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=1786) as a sign he may not be as loyal to the Republican Party and John McCain as conservatives had hoped.
The enactment of the policies that regulate the health sector is under the supervision of the senate. In a bill that would have provided health benefit to children- the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), Pearce went totally against it. It’s like he would still sustain his positions, especially when it has to do with the health of children which is really an issue that is not debatable- its either you are for or against and Pearce, by his vote, went against it.
Children heath insurance scheme (en.wikipedia.org)
Polls can be misleading and it's important for the reader to determine their validity or lack thereof. In contrast to the recent NewsMax poll discussed above, Udall is strongly favored, leading Pearce 59 percent to 34 percent in a Rasmussen Reports poll conducted July 24.
July 24th Poll (blogs.cqpolitics.com)
Tom Udall is not only fairing well with his own party, he is also enjoying strong support from independents and even some Republicans in New Mexico. According to recent data from Rasmussen Reports, Udall has a 27% lead among non-affiliated voters, and he has the support of 18% of the state's Republicans. That last statistic may go far in explaining Rasmussen's assessment that the Democratic candidate has an 80% change of winning the election and becoming a Senator come November.
Rasmussen Report (www.rasmussenreports.com)
Side: Cross-Party Support
That's a very good point. According to Rasmussen, Udall also has a 66 percent favorable rating among New Mexico voters as well, whereas Pearce's rating only comes in at 46 percent. Since April, Tom Udall has enjoyed a double-digit lead over his opponent in Rasmussen voter polls. See the article below for more.
New Mexico Senate: Udall Still Safely Ahead (www.rasmussenreports.com)
Side: Rasmussen favorability polls
A recently published poll shows the majority of Western U.S. voters (including those in New Mexico) feel urgent action is needed to reduce oil consumption and global warming emissions. (D) Tom Udall strongly supports alternate energy/fuel technologies in step with these voters' concerns. See the poll by visiting the following link:
Western Voter Poll (www.ucsusa.org)
Side: High Fuel Costs
Tom Udall has a rich history of backing the environment and legislation to protect our natural resources and wildlife for future generations. His father, Stewart Udall, served under the Kennedy and Johnson administrations as the Interior Secretary and Tom is the co-founder of the House International Conservation Caucus.
Steve Pearce on the other hand was recently added to the League of Conservative Voters's (LCV) 2008 "Dirty Dozen" list of the twelve worst congressmen up for re-election this year. The organization, which works towards making environmental issues into national priorities, cites Pearce's nearly unanimous voting record against the environment and his large investments in Key Energy.
The Dirty Dozen List (www.lcv.org)
Side: The Dirty Dozen List
The strict conservative views of Steve Pearce are significantly highlighted by his opposition to any effort towards reforming or extending federal or even state-wide healthcare programs. Pearce was one of the fiercest opponents of the SCHIP extension plan of 2007 and has consistently voted against legislation towards making healthcare more accessible to low-income families and children.
Of course, there is evidence that a more socialized medicare program at the federal level presents obstacles with regards to tax payers and the job market, I find it very concerning that these latter two concerns seem to take precedence in the political agenda of Pearce while nearly 100,000 children in New Mexico go without health coverage.
Side: Lack of Healthcare
When the Republicans trash a Democratic candidate as a “liberal,” then you know they have nothing to say about the candidate—or they haven’t done their homework. In the case of New Mexico’s Tom Udall, it’s both. At stake in the 2008 elections is control of the Senate, where the Democrats gained a surprise—but insufficient majority in 2006. This year, with an open seat, New Mexico is crucial. If the Democrats had 60 seats in 2006, funding for the Iraq war would have been cut off; and U.S. troops in Iraq would have begun coming home.
The second most important issue is the economy. According to the Mountain Mail, a small town newspaper in Socorra, New Mexico, the state is second in the nation with the highest percentage of hungry people, and third in the nation in childhood poverty. About 54 percent of New Mexican children are eligible for free or reduced cost meals at school, but have little or no food on weekends. Tom Udall’s speech shone at the Democratic Convention. Opponent Steve Pearce has supported every one of Bush’s economic policies. .
Side: Tom Udall
Some recent good news for the Democratic Senate candidate, Tom Udall - the National Republican Senatorial Committee decided this week to cancel television spots in New Mexico opting rather to focus on senators in North Carolina and New Hampshire.
Nevada Senator John Ensign, the committee's chairman, announced the decision today and hopes that the Republican party can salvage Senate seats in battleground states.
The announcement reflects a lag in funding on the part of Republican senators and Pearce, in particular, is trailing Udall (D) significantly in both campaign finances and the opinion polls.
The cut doesn't bode well for Pearce, who could definitely benefit from the publicity that a string of television ads would offer.
Republican Ad Cuts (www.citizen.com)
Side: Republican Ad Cuts
I agree with you that the candidates need to be stronger advocates for health coverage for Americans, but Udall does have a strong history of voting in favor of this coverage. In fact, he has been given a rating of 89% by the American Public Health Association for his pro public health voting record. Just this year, he voted to override the president's veto on expanding SCHIP to provide health benefits to millions of children in the United States. On the other hand, Steve Pearce supported the veto of the SCHIP expansion bill that would ultimately deny coverage to American children. See the link below for more information.
New Mexico Politics From the Local Perspective (www.nmfbihop.com)
The New Mexico Senate race is one of two which Republican Senator John Ensign of Nevada characterized as polling to the advantage of the Democrat candidate by more than the margin of error according to polls for the National Republican Senatorial Committee which is led by the Nevada Senator. Additionally he characterizes two races as similarly poling in favor of the Republican and six where the race is essentially a toss up as the margin of error is more than the margin of the lead. The implication is clearly that in a year where Republicans are troubled by the burden of an unpopular outgoing administration, so many "pick 'em" races is "so far, so good" for the Republicans.
Side: Tom Udall
Tom Udall (D) is still holding onto his lead over Steve Pearce (R) by a 56 to 41 percent point advantage, according to SurveyUSA. The current point spread has shifted this race in CQ Politics' rating from "Leans Democratic" to "Democrat Favored".
Whatever bounce Pearce did enjoy came during the GOP up-sweep during and after the RNC and the publicity magnet of Gov. Sarah Palin.
Since then, Udall has accepted ads and contributions from independent organizations such as the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund and the League of Conservative Voters.
He has also raised between $6 and $7 million for his campaign (as of July), nearly double what Pearce has saved up. With the economy ranked as the number one issue and voter's frustrations being shifted primarily towards the Bush Administration (ie. a GOP ticket), Udall seems to have an easy road to November (at this point) while Pearce has a lot of work to do to separate himself from the stigmas of his own party.
Udall up and coming (www.cqpolitics.com)
Side: Udall up and coming
In these trying times, with so many urgent calamities facing our nation, it is vital that we remember what is happening to our planet. Global climate change is not an issue to debate only in times of economic stability- it's an urgent crisis that must and will be addressed by the next congress- and on that issue Udall is clearly the candidate of choice. Here's what Udall says about climate change on his web site: "People claim that we can't save our planet and still save our jobs. They think America can't have sustainability and prosperity; I know we can." We, as a nation, must act now- and I am confident that by electing politicians who understand the gravity of the situation, as well as doing what we can locally, we will weather the coming storm.
Udall interview global public media (globalpublicmedia.com)
Side: Tom Udall
Tom Udall (D) has expressed his concerns recently over a proposal by the Valles Caldera National Preserve to charge hunters to hunt elk on public lands in northern New Mexico.
Udall claimed, echoing the viewpoint of the New Mexico Wildlife Federation among other sportsmen, that the proposal "will take away from the already limited number of tags available to those of a moderate income, thus making a portion of the caldera's natural resources available only to an elite few, rather than the general public as was intended in the trust's creation."
In more detail, the proposal is an attempt by the trustees of the Valles Caldera to charge an access fee of around $7,500 for 15 elk permits for archery, muzzle, and rifle hunts. The preserve issues only 77 total permits and the price would include "a stay at the Valles Grande lodge and three catered meals each day" according to the Associated Press.
The primary issue boils down to the nature by which the Valles Caldera will be managed according to the proposal. The preserve is currently managed by the trustees and Jeremy Vesbach, the director of the New Mexico Wildlife Federation, expressed his appreciation for the congressman's concerns and his sympathy for the sportsmens' perspective.
"What we really need is for Congress to change the management structure and do away with this silly idea that New Mexico's Yellowstone needs to be run like a private dude ranch," Vesbach added.
The Valles Caldera (www.signonsandiego.com)
Side: the Valles Caldera
Tom Udall (D) took his campaign to Valencia County last Wednesday and made the pursuit of alternative energy the priority of his campaign for the the Senate seat.
And, while most voters across the nation are concentrating on the economic crisis, Udall proposes clean, alternative energy initiatives as an integral component of regaining our national economic stability.
"We need to reinvest in solar and wind energy in New Mexico. If we concentrate on that, we can grow jobs right here."
Among Udall's own proposals to these ends are his work alongside New Mexico State University to develop a biofuel from algae.
Udall's most poignant moment in the stump speech that may carry more weight in his opposition to Republican candidate Steve Pearce is his opposition to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act.
"The bailout took care of Wall Street. But it didn't take care of Main Street...I've applied one simple rule (while serving in New Mexico). Do what's right for New Mexico and do what's right for our country."
Udall in Valencia (www.news-bulletin.com)
Side: Udall in Valencia
Steve Pearce (R) has no intentions of changing his conservative views. In an interview with KOB-TV/KOB.com, Pearce stated, "This is not something that I do for elections, this is something that I'm compelling others because of my beliefs." Sticking to his conservative roots is something Pearce strongly believes, and the full article can be found at the link below.
According to Congresspedia (SourceWatch.com), Tom Udall has supported the American Immigration Lawyers Association which is admired by Democrats and favors to the left. He does not support conservative supported U.S. Border Control. Udall does not support tightened border security nor does he want state and local governments having the power to investigate and prosecute illegal immigrant cases.
Tom Udall's Transparency (www.sourcewatch.org)
Tom Udall (D) voted No on a bill that would have invested in created a stronger surveillance system along U.S. borders through better technology and increased personnel. The bill would have also reinforced the physical infrastructure of our borders to prevent the influx of illegal immigrants.
In contrast, he voted in favor of a bill that extends the Immigrant Residency rules allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the country for four extra months while they work to establish legal residency.
The disparity between the Republicans and Democrats on the issue of immigration is a very complex and much argued forum. Udall's stance on border control and illegal immigration is pretty cut and dry.
Immigration Stance (www.ontheissues.org)
Side: Immigration Stance
Pearce has received the endorsement of National Right to Life (NRLC) because he "has compiled a 100% pro-life voting record," and Udall is pro-choice. NRLC does not want New Mexico to lose the Republican Senate seat held by pro-life Senator Pete Domenici, who is retiring.
NRLC for Pearce (www.nrlc.org)
According to local NBC affiliate KOB-TV, (R) Steve Pearce has been conservative in his campaign approach thus far due to limited financial resources. KOB reports Pearce carries an account balance of $500,000 while his opponent, (D) Tom Udall, has resources in excess of $3 million dollars. Republican insiders supposedly predict Pearce will 'come out swinging' soon and take on Udall on a variety of issues. Pearce will have his chance, as Udall has recently challenged him to three televised debates.
NBC KOB-TV (kob.com)
Pearce has not only accepted Udall's challenge to hold three televised debates this fall, but he has additionally proposed to have a debate before summer's end. Pearce would like to discuss energy policy and feels the citizens of NM deserve to hear the two candidates debate this issue sooner rather than later. Brian Phillips, a campaign spokesman for Steve Pearce, stated "it really is a disservice to them [the people of NM] that now Congressman Udall refuses to debate us until sometime later in the fall, right before the election."
NBC KOB-TV Follow-up (election.kob.com)
Side: Debate Schedule
Pearce is a man who is not under any pressure to get to the Capitol hill unlike Tom Udall who has another reason to be in the Senate which is to reunite with his family members. His first cousin, congressman Mark Udall, is running for the Colorado Senate seat left open by the retirement of Wayne Allard. Including their double second cousin, sitting Republican Senator Gordon Smith. If they all win, then three members of this political family will serve in the Senate at the same time, what a dream-come-true that will be for Tom Udall and his cousins
Side: Real story
(R) Steve Pearce is under enormous pressure to win New Mexico's soon-to-be vacated seat. According to the Majority Rules Blog (Objective Disclosure: This is a pro-Democratic blog site), the Republican Party is defending 22 seats in the 2008 elections, The Democratic Party is defending 12. Also, the Republicans must win 23 of the total 34 contests in order to regain control of the Senate.
Republicans in Need of Wins (www.majorityrules.org)
For proponents of fiscal conservation and like-minded organizations, these statistics won't sit well. In 2007, Tom Udall received a grade of F from the National Taxpayers Union, and the organization found that Udall supported their interests only 14% of the time in 2006. Similarly he was found to have supported the interests of Americans for Tax Reform only 5% of the time in 2006. Freedom works, an organization that claims to fight "for lower taxes, less government and more economic freedom for all Americans", listed Udall as supporting their interests 12% of the time in 2005 and 8% of the time in 2006. Follow the link below for a breakdown of Udall's voting record by issue as interpreted by interested organizations.
Evaluations of Udall's Voting Record (www.votesmart.org)
Side: Fiscal Conservation
According to a column by Chris Cillizza on the Washington Post's Politics Blog, the NM Senate race may be determined by money rather than a debate over the issues. According to Cillizza's July 18th post, Udall's campaign had $2.9 million at the end of June, while Pearce was left with only $533,000 after a tough primary battle against Rep. Heather Wilson. Cillizza writes, "In a cycle where national Republicans are in no position to come to Pearce's financial rescue this one is looking more and more like a done deal every day."
Cillizza's Post (blog.washingtonpost.com)
Following the legacy of the Udall family that set aside acres of land for the public and for national parks, conservation is a top priority for Tom Udall. However, in a time when such a large percent of New Mexico's citizens are struggling with higher gas prices, Steve Pearce, who once owned an oil field services company, has attacked Tom Udall on his voting record against expanded oil drilling. Udall has since responded by saying, "We are not opposed to good sound development, but there cannot be carelessness and recklessness in the use of resources." In the coming months Pearce will certainly try to frame the issue by saying Udall has consistently voted against expanding New Mexico's economy.
NY Times piece on Udall and conservation (www.nytimes.com)
Due to issues surrounding that "oil field services company", Steve Pearce was determined to be one of the 22 most corrupt members of Congress by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). Pearce failed to report the sale of the company on a financial disclosure form. Additionally Pearce advocated drilling in Otero Mesa while receiving massive campaign contributions from Yates Petroleum, the largest lease holder in Otero Mesa. New Mexico is well represented on CREW's corruption list. Outgoing Sen. Pete V. Domenici, the man whose seat Pearce is vying to fill, made the list, as did Rep. Heather A. Wilson (R).
CREW Corruption Report. (www.citizensforethics.org)
Steve Pearce is supportive of the Iraq War. Pearce's website highlight tactical changes like closing the border, and he argues the instability and genocide that will ensue should we with drawl our troops. One of the items he does not raise is the financial aspect. Will he assist next term's President if Iraq troop with drawl is determined?
Most of Steve Pearce's energy bills are revolving around different fuel methods. Pearce recently sponsored a bill to help Americans bare the financial burden of the natural fuel. To solar panel a house is around $18,000, which is the equivalent of another car, most people cannot afford that. Will the tax benefits be enough for people to convert?
Pearce's energy stance closely follows that of the Bush Administration. This means Pearce is more about relying on foreign oil, finding new oil sources and NOT wanting to pursue alternative energy sources. Pearce has reinforced his stance with his voting record.
Voted NO on tax incentives for energy production and conservation. (Jun 2008)
Voted NO on tax incentives for renewable energy. (Feb 2008)
Voted NO on investing in homegrown biofuel. (Aug 2007)
Voted YES on criminalizing oil cartels like OPEC. (May 2007)
Voted NO on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jan 2007)
Voted NO on keeping moratorium on drilling for oil offshore. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on scheduling permitting for new oil refineries. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on authorizing construction of new oil refineries. (Oct 2005)
Voted YES on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy. (Jun 2004)
Voted YES on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy. (Nov 2003)
Rated 0% by the CAF, indicating opposition to energy independence. (Dec 2006)
Pearce's Energy Stance (www.ontheissues.org)
Congressman Pearce sponsored a bill to offer incentives to military personnel that are ready to retire. The members of the Armed Forces that opt to stay in to receive the incentives will be given non-combat positions. If you were a member of the Armed Forces about to retire, and you would be guarantied to not face anymore combat, would you stay in? How much of an incentive would you need?
It took me a little while to locate the specific legislation (H.R.5868), but I was curious to see what (if any) fine print was in the bill. It appears that the Caleb Martin-Travis Dodson Wounded Warrior Retention Act, sponsored by congressman Pearce, applies only to those soldiers who were wounded in combat. That being said, the personnel who would be eligible for retention under this legislation would not face combat only because they had already been injured and are no longer physically able to fight. What if the primary purpose of the bill is to prevent the military from having to train new, non-combat personnel? H.R.5868 was introduced in April of 2008 and referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel. You can read the bill in its entirety at the link below.
H.R. 5868: Caleb Martin-Travis Dodson Wounded Warrior Retention Act (www.govtrack.us)
To a lot of individuals especially Republicans, Pearce is their favorite choice but his background does not show him off as a saint. For example, he had a short romance with plagiarism, which ultimately led to the resignation of his press secretary. How sure are we that he has nothing to do with and that he is not taking it to the Senate from where the presidential candidates are now emerging?
This is footage of Steve Pearce arguing against H.R. 6515: Drill Responsibly in Leased Lands Act of 2008. The bill was introduced on 7/16/08. Pearce argued against it on 7/17/08, and it failed passage that same day. Pearce argues that the bill is redundant and inhibitory, doubling up on existing procedural rules and creating more red tape that will prevent drilling for domestic oil. Toward the end of his argument, Pearce states "I believe that this bill is not going to increase the amount of domestic energy one bit. I believe it is going to start new processes and delay even by months the process in place right now for the NPRA (National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska)."
Side: Domestic Drilling
If there is anything that would come handy in the forth coming New Mexico Senatorial elections, it would be the experience that the aspirants are armed with. Luckily, they both seem to be on the same pedestal when it comes to age but there seems to be a little difference in terms of experience garnered at the house. Pearce seems to have more experience having been on 2 committees and 4 sub- committees while Udall only served on 2 committees but 3 sub- committees although he was the co- Vice chair of one.
It is true that Steve Pearce has served on more committees than Tom Udall; however, Udall, elected in 1998, has four more years of experience in the House of Representatives than Pearce, who was elected in 2002. To be fair, experience in the legislative process should be judged based on the entirety of a candidate's career, not just which committees he or she has been named to. To get a breakdown of each candidate's biography, see the link below.
Project Vote Smart (www.votesmart.org)
Side: Udall vs Pearce - experience
Talking of personal beliefs, Pearce is a baptist while Tom Udall is a mormon and most Americans believe that the values (true values) of American heritage is deeply rooted in Christianity although this may seem to change in the present context but the past cannot be changed
Side: Real story
The fact that (R) Steve Pearce is a Baptist and a Christian do not necessarily provide him with political favor of the New Mexican voters. While 81 percent of New Mexico's residents are indeed Christian, 19 percent consider themselves 'non-religious' according to the recent census. This is a higher than average percentage of non-religious voters versus other states. It is interesting to note that this same census lists Mormons as a sub-set of an overall faith base: Christian.
Also, it is erroneous what 'most Americans believe', as this race only concerns the residents of the State of New Mexico.
Census Facts (new-mexico.wedding.net)
Side: Real story
Rep. Pearce believes that the answer to affordable gasoline is grounded in Benjamin Franklin’s practical world. In answer to Udall’s complaints about speculation driving up the price Pearce looks to the “reason” for the speculation. “Speculators are just reacting to the current economic climate and Washington's unwillingness to open more oil fields in the U.S.” “Speculators only act on human behavior--they think right now human behavior in the congress says no to any more drilling. It's gonna drive the price up," he said. Pearce isn’t looking to speculation about speculators. He’s looking to the practical answer. All conduct has some rational basis to it. Drill now and the price will go down, even before any oil is recovered.
Eyewitness News. Channel KOB (election.kob.com)
Side: High Fuel Costs
(R) Steve Pearce is absolutely in favor of increased drilling and speculation as an immediate fix to the gasoline price issue concerning many of his New Mexican constituents. "The cure in the short term is to drill in Alaska and off the Florida Coast. ... We can't continue like this," Pearce said in a recent Daily Times article. Pearce's rational is rooted in the fact that something must be done to effect the short term outcome.
Daily Times 7/22 Interview (www.daily-times.com)
Side: High Fuel Costs
If Udall was for drilling in the continental USA, why didn't he vote for drilling while congress was still in office? instead, he decided to go on vacation. Udall is as left as Nancy Pelosi and the rest of of the liberals in congress. Why didn't he confront the senators and representatives that wanted to socialize the oil companies? Please, Udall is just now turning to the right because of the election. Once in office, he will be just as he was before the election.
Pearce recently attacked a tidy misnomered piece of legislation called the "DRILL Act", which is in essence a bill designed to keep regulation up for drilling on American soil so that responsible drilling may take place. Granted, the legislation would put major holds on privately owned oil fields and the 68 million acres federally owned off-shore until safe and properly countered measures had been taken to define the reserve levels and use proper environmental action, but, like anything worth doing, it will take time.
Pearce is in complete opposition of this bill, and blames the congressional majority for stalling drilling and plugging up the economy. His logic states that the economy is in a desperate state and such times call for speedy (if desperate) measures.
Pearce to drill offshore now! (pearce.house.gov)
Side: Drill now
I don't approve of the fact that Udall is one of those in Congress endorsing Obama. Endorsements can reveal a lot about both their givers and their recipients. Pearce may be a neoconservative but I would rather our elected officials be honest about continuing current policies than practice something different from what they preach (the latter being characteristic of Obama). Republicans just need to go back to their roots of favoring limited government both domestically and abroad.
In a May 8, 2008 Q&A;with The Chase, an Eastern New Mexico University independent student publication, Steve Pearce identified the three issues he believes to be the most pressing ones in today's political climate. He listed "the war with radical jihad", the struggling economy, and "a cultural war". He further articulated "cultural war" to mean the country's attempt to determine its values: "Is there a moral standard? Is there a need for a moral standard?" Follow the link for a complete version of the Q&A;.
Q&A;with Pearce (media.www.enmuthechase.com)
According to a recent Rasmussen poll, Tom Udall's lead over Steve Pearce has shrunk considerably.
Udall currently leads Pearce by just 8 points after being up by more than 25 points for the past two months.
Analysts say the sudden change is due to Pearce's support for off-shore drilling and the success of the Republican candidate's attack ads.
New Rasmussen Poll (www.realclearpolitics.com)
Side: Rasmussen favorability polls
Congressman Steve Pearce is a Cheney man. They are so close that in 2004, Dick Cheney and his wife Lynne were in New Mexico campaigning for Pearce. From 2003 to 2007, Pearce voted with Cheney and Bush, 90.8 percent of the time. In his first year in office, 2003, Pearce voted 98% of the time with the White House. That was the year of the Niger Yellow Cake and Weapons of Mass Destruction hoax about Iraq; that was the year of the unnecessary, illegal, and unsubstantiated invasion of Iraq. That was the year of the infamous “Mission Accomplished” in Iraq appearance of George W. Bush on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. Since Bush’s appearance in May, 2003, about 4,000 more U.S. soldiers have died in Iraq. Steve Pearce is no Pete Domenici—he’s a Cheney man. According to the Democratic Party of New Mexico, Steve Pearce was also the only member of the New Mexico Congressional delegation to heartlessly oppose expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program to cover an additional 27,900 uninsured New Mexican kids. Keep Steve Pearce home, keep him out of the Senate.
Side: Steve Pearce
Congressman Udall's credibility could be in trouble if voters know about the Fraternal Order of Police's stances and the fact that he picked up an endorsement from its New Mexico affiliate in June. FOP supports the Real ID Act, which Udall voted against while Pearce voted for it. This results in voters having to choose the lesser of two evils.
It seems that Steve Pearce, despite being down nearly 10 points (51% to 41%) to his Democratic rival, has cut the lead down by more than half and has cut what was once a 32 point lead amongst unaffiliated voters to a mere 9 point difference.
Both Udall and Pearce have agreed to four debates, three of which will occur during the last two weeks of the campaign and one to appear on NBC's "Meet the Press" in October.
To some extent, as gas prices continue to squeeze American finances, Pearce has been riding the rise of approval behind offshore drilling particularly among his stable Republican base but also among many independents and libertarian-minded voters. This pull could prove beneficial to the Republican hopeful as the debates commence and energy taking a higher priority in the American voting conscience.
If Udall declares his support for lifting the ban, Pearce has a head wind in his campaign sails that may carry him over to Senate come November.
Poll Potentials (www.rasmussenreports.com)
Side: Poll Potentials
To follow up this post, Steve Pearce (R) has pulled within seven points of Udall (44% to the Democrat's 51%) according to the most recent Rasmussen report. The swing comes just a week after the RNC where many Republican Senators and hopefuls have picked up a notable pace in their campaigns after the Palin nomination stoked a fire under the previously slow-moving GOP.
And, while Senate Republicans have refused to contribute funding to Pearce's campaign opting instead to support other candidates, the Republican Senator is receiving enough funds from third party organizations, such as Club for Growth, to launch a series of campaign ads that highlight his Senate record and attack Tom Udall's energy and tax policy proposals.
Closing In (kob.com)
Side: Closing In
Apparently, Tom Udall (D) has recently released three television campaign ads that emphasize his "do-it-all" stance on energy policy. The ads express Udall's support for offshore drilling and nuclear power in addition to his former dedication to renewable and alternative energy initiatives.
The Pearce campaign has been quick to jump on the ads' claims in order to point out the Democrat's flip-flop on the energy issue. According to Environment and Energy Daily, the ads "represent something of a message shift for a candidate who is a favorite of environmental groups. Udall has built much of his political profile on being a strong advocate of renewable energy and made that issue one of the key planks of his campaign in its early stage."
However, as election day draws closer and closer, many candidates (particularly Democratic challengers) find themselves compromising their former opposition to lifting the offshore drilling ban or nuclear energy development to better reflect the reported sentiment of the voting public who tend to support any effort to lower gas prices and create an energy independent America.
Out to verify the consistency of his stance against the GOP attack, Udall has gone to extensive efforts to prove his support of three bills behind nuclear energy; a bill (though only ONE - HR 6515) for offshore drilling by domestic oil companies that he favored; and released a disclaimer by way of Marissa Padilla, his spokeswoman, ""Congressman Udall has said these should be looked at on a case-by-case basis. Part of the problem is there haven't been more balanced proposals."
In the game of politics, one of the best strategic moves you can make is push your opposition as far and as long as you can on the defensive side. It seems, according to the quotes in this article, that Pearce has pushed Udall against the wall when it comes to the energy issue.
Energy Defense (peopleforpearce.com)
Side: Energy Defense
Republican Rep. Steve Pearce delivered harsh words for Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson today and severely discredited Paulson's "objectivity in dealing with the current economic crisis", according to a report from The Hill.
Pearce called the Treasury Secretary a "fox in control of the hen house" and cited Paulson's former career as an executive of Goldman Sachs as evidence of his inability to objectively bring this crisis to an effective, productive solution.
Pearce claims, "Paulson was Chief Executive Officer at Goldman Sachs, one of the companies involved in creating the financial crisis. I don't think anyone should be confident that he will hold accountable those who got us into this, nor that he will institute the proper reforms to prevent it from happening again."*
With the market fallouts and bailout taking top priority in all political forums this week, such harsh words and poignant criticisms of the "Washington establishment" play well into the hands of GOP candidates hoping to build a wall between themselves and George W. Bush. This move is becoming more of a necessity for candidates aiming to grab more independent or centrist, fiscally conservative Democratic votes (they are out there) to add to their base.
Harsh Words (thehill.com)
Side: Harsh Words
Congressman Steve Pearce (R) voted against the $700 billion bailout that failed to pass the House today (Monday, September 29th) claiming that the bill failed to adequately protect New Mexico and the nation's taxpayers from having to "to bailout the Wall Street firms that got us in to this crisis."
Pearce is playing the smaller government angle towards the bill and is focusing his legislative efforts on a bill "bill that more closely reflects these principles and truly protects the taxpayer, creates market incentives to create capital and reforms certain investment vehicles so we're not back here faced with the same problem."
The statement released by the Republican congressman, who is campaigning against Democrat Tom Udall, calls for stricter, harsher "accountability for those who created the mess, transparency so investors can make informed decisions, limitations on leveraging so financial institutions are not allowed to overextend, end "naked" short selling, and favor market principles over government intrusion."
Pearce Bailout Statement (www.lcsun-news.com)
Side: Pearce Bailout Statement
Both of New Mexico's Senate hopefuls (who both also currently reside in the House as State Representatives) voted against the bailout plan.
Democrat Tom Udall basing his objection on the fact that the bailout measure (which passed the House last Friday) "is going to end up giving taxpayer money to CEO's with golden parachutes."
Pearce disagreed with the new bailout plan because he fears "We are either going to see tax increases or we are going to see inflation. We'll definitely see the weakening of the dollar because we are going to either have inflation, debt or tax increases."
Their shared objection to the bailout is one hot-button issue over which the New Mexico Senate candidates find their most significant overlap.
The only minor divergence perhaps between the two lies in their alternative plans that they think would have helped the economy.
Udall preserves government influence, though redirects federal initiative away from the mortgage giants and financial markets: "We should have done an economic stimulus package. We should have extended unemployment. We should have done the things that would start picking the economy up again."
Udall, in contrast, opts for less government intervention: ""There are a lot of things that we could have done that are similar to the savings and loans crisis several years ago. I think we should have learned the lessons from there, tried more free market solutions,"* Pearce maintains.
Bailout Objection Explanations (www.krqe.com)
Side: Bailout Objection Explanations
Welcome to CreateDebate
CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy. If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
- Arguments with the highest score are displayed first. Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument. To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
- To vote for an argument, use these icons: You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument. Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change. Yes, you can change your vote.
- Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account. All scores are updated in real-time. To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
- When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument. If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.