What would Coleman do?

His Web site says, “Norm is an accomplished juggler.” If you don’t believe that, sit in for a while on his ANWR act.

“I am hoping that he will continue to live by the pledge he made when he was running,” says Rebecca Rom, chair of the local chapter of the national Alaska Coalition and partner in the Twin Cities law firm Faegre & Benson. “It was a very unequivocal pledge, repeated often, and it was on his campaign Web site.”
The pledge was to oppose opening the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. ANWR opponents say that claims about “environmentally sensitive” drilling are bogus, and that ANWR would be unlikely to produce any more oil than the United States can guzzle in about six months. “We will never be able to drill our way to energy security,” says Jay Heeter, organizer for the Alaska Coalition. “Just by inflating our tires properly, we could save more oil than we’d get from the refuge.”

Back in March, when it was part of the budget bill, Senator Coleman did vote against drilling ANWR. The Alaska Coalition thanked him by commissioning a billboard at University Avenue near the KSTP tower. It featured a head-and-shoulders shot of a snarling polar bear, and a more modest head shot of a smiling Senator Coleman.
But the ANWR proposal wasn’t dead. The Bush administration and their friends in the oil industry would still love to get into ANWR, and they would love to have Coleman’s support. Now the proposal is back, and for the Senator the balls are in the air again. He says he would consider voting for ANWR if the same bill includes loan guarantees for building a coal gasification electric generating plant in Hoyt Lakes, on the iron range. Proponents claim it would provide 600 jobs.

It sounds like something that could play as a big coup for Coleman, a perfect example of how he would like to present himself: the can-do politician in contrast to the passionate dreamer he replaced. The symbolism is stark: a whole bunch of real blue-collar jobs plunked down right in the still beating heart of the DFL, not 20 miles from where the plane went down. What better way to silence those who will never forgive Norm for not being Wellstone, and even letting slip before a Washington gathering that he considered himself a 99 percent improvement over the icon?

But while Wellstone wore his heart and his vote on his sleeve, with Senator Coleman you never know about either one. Some skeptics think he’s been looking for a way to vote for ANWR and please the Bush crowd that got him elected without totally damaging himself in the eyes of the more well-heeled environmentalists who might support him, and he might have found it here.

But several sources familiar with Senate politics on this issue said the “horse trade” might be a ruse. The reason: supporters of drilling are pretty sure they would need 60 votes to end a filibuster if ANWR ends up in the bill, and they probably don’t have it, even with Coleman.

“I think he knows that he has the ability to influence whether or not ANWR is even in the energy bill,” says Rom of the Alaska Coalition. “He is not going to be faced with a choice if he doesn’t want to be.”

The Alaska Coalition characterized the billboard as a thank-you. But maybe it was more of a hope, or perhaps an attempt at a shackle. Coleman was already hedging on ANWR by the time of the budget bill vote this spring. He said then if he could trade it for assistance to Minnesota’s renewable energy initiatives—things like biodiesel, ethanol, and wind—he might do it.

“In Washington-speak, that is saying my vote is for sale,” says one lobbyist, “but that’s the way the game is played. It’s not the way Wellstone played it, but 99 other senators did.

“What is really disheartening,” he says, “is that Coleman is signaling he’s willing to trade the bad ANWR oil project for a bad coal project in Minnesota, one that has nothing to do with the renewable energy stuff he originally talked about. It would actually undercut alternative energy in Minnesota. And you can put as much industry spin on it as you want. It’s still coal, still adding to pollution, and it does nothing about global warming.”

The electricity it produced would also be expensive, according to DFL state representative Jean Wagenius. “My guess is at least three times the cost of electricity coming from new wind generators,” she says. “Some people say, ‘Oh, wind is subsidized.’ This thing is hugely subsidized already, and they are talking about more.”

The subsidy includes an unprecedented right of eminent domain to acquire land for transmission lines. “It’s stunning,” says Wagenius.

If it happens, she adds, some people in the Twin Cities northern suburbs could get a nasty surprise.

What is it about Norm’s juggling that is so off-putting? If only he could own up to a little larceny and self-interest in his act, like the great one, W.C. Fields. Instead with Norm it’s endless self-congratulation for helping “the folks,” and always with one finger to the wind.

It will be interesting to see how he handles the Iraq issue. With issues like ANWR, vouchers, abortion, or the Trent Lott affair (where he held off on withdrawing support for the powerful senate majority leader until a half hour before he resigned), he’s had to juggle oranges. With Iraq, it could soon be bowling balls. At some point he might have to contemplate putting some distance between himself and the administration that blessed him, perhaps even jumping ship when the moment is ripe. If anybody can do it, Norm can. If George Bush knows what’s good for him, he’ll watch his back.

The energy bill, with or without loan guarantees for a Hoyt Lakes plant, could come out of conference for a vote as early as this week, although some reports have said negotiations are bogged down and it might not happen until January.