Solutions, not talk, needed on energy

With gas prices soaring, Dan Seals and his supporters have tried to attack Congressman Mark Kirk on energy.

Calling Kirk just another Big Oil candidate, Seals tries to contrast himself as a candidate for a "change."

In this case, change would be a switch to alternative energy. In this effort, he has yet again slipped into his vague campaign strategy where he bloviates on an issue that voters are unhappy with and promises a change, but doesn't let them in on how he plans to effect that change.

What is Seals' energy plan? Sure he talks in vague generalities that a move away from oil is the foundation of his energy policy and that alternate energy is the correct path, but he seems to have no plan to put us on that path.

He places great emphasis on convincing voters that he is for something different, though he neglects to enlighten us as to what is that makes him different.

Seals refuses to acknowledge that Kirk has introduced a specific plan of action to quell America's energy problems.

The congressman has shown his dedication to solving the energy crisis in co-sponsoring the Apollo Energy Independence Act of 2008.

Kirk's plan, which recognizes that dependence on oil is a threat to our national security, economic prosperity and environmental sustainability, show Seal's claim that Kirk is in the pocket of energy companies for what it is: an untrue smear.

Kirk knows that a transition to alternative energy is a necessity but cannot be instantaneous. By supporting offshore drilling to account for our immediate energy needs and sponsoring legislation like the Apollo Act that will lead to a transition away from oil in the future, Kirk has provided a specific, realistic plan of action on American energy.

The American public is in love with "change."

But change is not achieved through simply talking about it. Change comes about through hard work and compromise.

Ryne Misso

Northbrook