In some states, energy trumps the economy in election 2012

When it comes to the presidential election, energy plays a major role in states like North Dakota and West Virginia. Ohio and Pennsylvania are also swayed by energy issues.

Vicki Smith/AP/File
A truck passes a political sign in a yard in Dellslow, W.Va., last month. One of the few states to lost jobs over the past year, largely tied to coal mining, West Virginia has moved decisively into the Romney column for Tuesday's election.

If economics will be the deciding factor in Tuesday's presidential election, then how do you explain North Dakota and West Virginia?

North Dakota saw the biggest increase in jobs among the states over the past year: 5.6 percent. West Virginia saw the biggest decrease (along with New Mexico): -1.3 percent. Yet, both are solidly in the Romney camp.

The reason is energy. Both states are big energy producers – oil and gas in North Dakota; coal in West Virginia. And both fear more regulation from a second-term Obama administration.

Coal companies and workers in West Virginia already complain loudly that rules from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are destroying jobs in the mines. Of course, the surge of gas production from shale also plays a role in undercutting coal.

Meanwhile, that surge of shale-based energy is fueling North Dakota's boom. THe boom's continuation depends in part on whether or not the federal government cracks down on the controversial and expensive "fracking" methods energy companies use to extract the oil and gas.

So voters in North Dakota seem more comfortable with the hands-off approach espoused by Mr. Romney than the "green" energy policy of Mr. Obama.

Other energy-producing states – such as Pennsylvania and Ohio – have a counterbalancing force: large bases of consumers whose primary concern is fuel prices, especially for gasoline. There, the advantage of late seems to be swinging to Obama.

The average price for a gallon of regular gasoline has fallen nearly 21 cents a gallon in the past two weeks – the biggest drop in four years, according to the Lundberg Survey. While some conspiracy theorists see a connection, it's likely world oil markets, rather than the president, are responsible for that decline.

Energy – and the environment – might have played another intriguing election role had hurricane Sandy struck elsewhere. As it was, it only grazed battleground states New Hampshire and Virginia and left hotly contested Florida untouched.

The strongest link between hurricanes and global warming is rising sea levels. By slamming into New York and New Jersey with its huge surge, the superstorm was a powerful reminder of the destructive power of those rising oceans.

But those states are already solidly in the Obama camp. So Sandy's political impact may be limited to keeping voters from the ballot box rather than changing their minds about global warming.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.