Cranston Mayor Stephen Laffey - challenger to Sen. Lincoln Chafee '75 for the 2006 Republican Senate nomination - recently unveiled an energy policy designed to reduce dependence on foreign oil. But his announcement has fueled less debate over the candidates' positions on high gas and heating oil prices than about the cars they drive.
Laffey's proposal, released earlier this month, calls for higher car fuel efficiency standards and significant tax incentives for renewable energy producers. His plan would also increase tax credits to individuals who purchase hybrid cars - such as the Toyota Prius his opponent drives.
"One candidate walks the walk and drives a fuel-efficient car. It's part of his life," Chafee spokesman Ian Lang said of the senator. "The other candidate merely talks a big game."
According to Chafee representative Stephen Hourahan, Laffey owns a Ford Explorer and a Chevrolet Suburban.
But the Cranston mayor said that with five kids, three dogs and a horse, driving a Prius "doesn't make any sense."
Laffey described the incumbent senator's car choice as a "Marie Antoinette solution" that "doesn't solve anybody's problems."
Although the Clear Act energy bill Chafee co-sponsored in 2003 was defeated, he would support raising auto fuel efficiency standards and has supported tax credits for the use of alternative fuels, Hourahan said.
Chafee voted in June for an energy bill containing more than $2 billion in tax breaks for the energy industry, but he later voted against the final version. According to Hourahan, the senator reversed his decision because the final text no longer proposed high auto fuel efficiency standards and tax incentives for alternative energy sources, but included tax breaks for oil and gas companies.
The senator addressed energy policy this fall by leading an October hearing on oil dependence in the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.
"We're happy to talk about energy because the senator's record (on this issue) is stronger than any of his opponents," Lang said.
But Laffey said that until Chafee enables energy reform himself, his record on the issue would not be strong enough.
"Because of people like Senator Chafee who haven't done anything, Rhode Islanders are going to be paying more money in gas and heating oil this year," Laffey said. "If he had been champion of something, I would think it would change."
While Laffey's opponent argues that his personal choice of automobile is more telling than his campaign promises, Laffey said he believes energy independence is important for both a clean environment and national security. "It is the issue of our times," he said.
After the spike in oil prices and national attention to global warming in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, climate change policy expert and Assistant Professor of International Studies Simone Pulver said Laffey's focus on national energy reform is appropriate, even in the nation's smallest state.
"It's a really timely framing because this is a moment where there is an opportunity for political leadership on energy policy in this country," she said.
But Laffey and Chafee's energy policies would most likely not be a determining factor in the primary outcome, said Professor of Political Science and Public Policy and Director of the Taubman Center for Public Policy Darrell West, because the candidates have very similar, progressive stances on the issue.
Despite their mutual support for alternative energy, both candidates have financial ties to oil companies.
Chafee's personal investments, held in a publicly disclosed blind trust, include anywhere from $300,000 to $600,000 in oil stocks. Lang made no statement as to whether Chafee's investments represented a conflict of interest.
According to the Washington-based Center for Responsive Politics, in recent years Chafee has accepted $6,000 total from oil companies or political organizations representing their interests. Although the contributions include $2,000 from ExxonMobil, Chafee appears toward the bottom of a list ranking members of Congress by their total accepted funding from oil and gas organizations.
Laffey's possible financial ties to oil companies received attention in National Republican Senatorial Committee ads aired throughout October that alleged Laffey had personally profited from offshore oil drilling. Showing images of Laffey's campaign kickoff, the ads stated that Laffey "ran a company selling oil industry stocks on Wall Street. ... The oil companies made a fortune. Steve Laffey made a fortune."
Morgan Keegan, the Tenn-essee-based investment firm Laffey headed before running for mayor, did not specialize in energy investments, but did invest in oil companies as well as a host of other industries, Laffey said. He made no comment as to his personal profit from energy investments.
Regardless of their personal gain from oil stocks, West said neither candidate's financial ties to major oil corporations is likely to become a large issue in the campaign.
"If anything, (they are) taking a position that's different from energy companies," West said.
By adopting a progressive stance on energy policy, West said that Laffey might hope to counteract voters' image of him as a staunch conservative. Laffey has expressed positions on social issues and the war in Iraq that echo Bush administration policies.
"He wants to show he's not running as a Bush clone," West said.
As President Bush's approval rating in Rhode Island drops further - 25 percent approval in the Taubman Center survey in September - West said he expects both candidates to distance themselves from the president in what promises to be a close primary race.
