Just before our nation celebrated Independence Day, I tried to put some perspective on economic growth and job creation through Texas’ ability to grow its economy despite the Great Recession. Governor Rick Perry’s stewardship of Texas over the course of the last decade has seen the Republic of Texas grow into the second largest economy in the country. Texas has added a net of “more than 1 million” new jobs in the past decade. Approximately 40% of all the new jobs created nationwide since the so-called end of the recession have been in Texas. The reason for all this economic expansion and job creation stems from an environment that is business-friendly, pro-growth, keeps taxes low, and is “diversified” in “oil and high-tech.”
With a record like that to campaign on, it’s understandable that President Barack Obama’s campaign would fire a “preemptive broadside at Perry” as America’s longest serving Governor enters the Presidential contest. And it comes as little surprise that Obama’s campaign mouthpiece, David Axelrod, would attempt to undercut Perry’s record on economic growth and job creation. What is surprising, to me at least, is how the campaign chose to chip away at Perry’s record.
Axelrod: “There’s a specific reason that Texas has done so well, and that’s because the oil industry has done so well in the last few years.” (Top Obama Aide Fires Preemptive Broadside At Perry,” AFP, 8/12/11)
Let’s not argue with Axelrod here, let’s just think about this for one minute and let it marinade: because of the oil industry, Texas has done well over the course of the past few years. Does this statement not strike you as odd, coming from Team Obama? Think about it. Isn’t that statement an admission that domestic oil production is of financial benefit to America in the form of jobs and economic growth, not to mention less dependence on foreign sources of oil?
This is a peculiar line of attack. At the same time Texas has been booming “because of the oil industry,” the Obama Administration has done everything in its power to stifle American energy exploration and production. Examples are abundant: the Obama Administration authorized $2.84 billion in financing for the expansion and upgrade of an oil refinery in Cartagena, Columbia, but doesn’t want expansion here in America; the Obama Administration committed $2 billion to a Brazilian-owned oil company to drill for oil in Brazil, but doesn’t want any new drilling here at home; the Obama Administration enacted an offshore drilling moratorium; and sought to slow-down “expedited environmental review of oil and gas drilling on federal land” (which was just thrown out by a federal judge).
Is it not strange to dismiss the record of an opponent by arguing on the one hand that a state is booming because of the oil industry, and then on the other hand do everything you can to stifle that same industry which you are crediting for job growth and economic expansion?
Perhaps this is an “in the weeds” argument that will be lost on most people, but I think it shows just how bankrupt the Obama Administration and his campaign are on how to create jobs and grow the economy by crediting an industry that Obama has done nothing but try to suffocate.
ThinkFY's full feed