Letter: Prop 112 lives
I would’ve thought the opponents of Proposition 112 would lay low after they defeated the safer setback ballot issue, but no, Nina Anderson of Grand Junction has to gloat in her Nov. 19 letter to the editor in the Post Independent.
Anderson had the nerve to state that 112 was “fear-based.” What was all that noise about a collapsing economy if 112 passed? That was all speculative fear. The detrimental health and safety effects of drilling and fracking within 2,500 feet of people is happening right now and verified by medical professionals.
Yes, Ms. Anderson, the oil and gas industry has ebbed and flowed on the Western Slope. Just wait for the big ebb when we finally figure out we can’t keep burning and extracting fossil fuels without destroying our planet’s climate; 112 could be seen as a way of preparing this state for the future.
Once again, Anderson repeats that same totally erroneous claim that 112 was initiated by “out-of-state interests.” I’ve been involved in the setback initiative from the beginning, and all I’ve seen is Coloradans.
I’ll tell you where the “foreigners” came from, Nina. Protect Colorado, the PAC for the industry, led the $40 million charge against 112. The eyes of Texas were upon us.
Actually, I think we did quite well to garner 43 percent in favor on 112, considering the massive ad campaign against it and how deeply entrenched oil and gas is in our economy and politics. As evidence of the adverse health and safety effects and the damage to our climate builds, 112 will be seen as a good first step.
Anderson is right on another point. She shouldn’t hold her breath waiting for “notions like this to be put to bed for good.” With a blue trifecta in Denver, setbacks will arise like the phoenix in the Legislature.
“If there is no struggle, there is no progress.”
—Frederick Douglas, 1857
Fred Malo Jr.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.