Obama Fights Back On Energy…Sorta
It took awhile for the Obama campaign to responde to the RNC’s launch of an ad criticizing Sen. Obama’s energy policy. Frankly, they should’ve taken a bit more time and gotten it right. This isn’t a compelling response:
An Obama campaign spokesman labeled the ad an “attack” and said the energy crisis can be solved only through honest debate.
“There’s a real choice in this election between John McCain’s promise to continue the Bush approach of trying to drill our way out of our energy crisis, which even he admits won’t lower prices this summer, or Barack Obama’s plan to provide meaningful short-term relief for our families and to make a historic investment in alternative energy development that will create millions of new jobs, keep the cost of energy affordable and secure our energy independence once and for all,” Obama spokesman Hari Sevugan said.
Sen. Obama is pretending if he thinks that there can be “short-term relief for our families” without increasing drilling for oil and natural gas. PERIOD. As for Sen. Obama’s position on energy, here’s part of what his website says:
Barack Obama’s Plan
Reduce Carbon Emissions 80 Percent by 2050
Cap and Trade: Obama supports implementation of a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Obama’s cap-and-trade system will require all pollution credits to be auctioned. A 100 percent auction ensures that all polluters pay for every ton of emissions they release, rather than giving these emission rights away to coal and oil companies. Some of the revenue generated by auctioning allowances will be used to support the development of clean energy, to invest in energy efficiency improvements, and to address transition costs, including helping American workers affected by this economic transition.
Confront Deforestation and Promote Carbon Sequestration: Obama will develop domestic incentives that reward forest owners, farmers, and ranchers when they plant trees, restore grasslands, or undertake farming practices that capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Invest in a Clean Energy Future
Invest $150 Billion over 10 Years in Clean Energy: Obama will invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial-scale renewable energy, invest in low-emissions coal plants, and begin the transition to a new digital electricity grid. A principal focus of this fund will be devoted to ensuring that technologies that are developed in the U.S. are rapidly commercialized in the U.S. and deployed around the globe.
Double Energy Research and Development Funding: Obama will double science and research funding for clean energy projects including those that make use of our biomass, solar and wind resources.
Let’s examine Sen. Obama’s approach. He does nothing in the short-term to increase oil production, which means people won’t feel relief at the pump.
It gets worse from there. Sen. Obama boldly proclaims that he’s for a job-killing Cap and Tax bill. Scientifically speaking, the benefits are arguable. Economically speaking, the job-killing tax increase is guaranteed.
Let’s return to Mr. Sevugan’s reply. When did Sen. McCain or President Bush say that drilling wouldn’t lower prices? That’s the goal behind increasing oil production. While it’s true that President Bush and Sen. McCain have made statements to lower expectations, that isn’t the same as saying it wouldn’t help.
The Democrats’ worst nightmare is for them to control the House, Senate & White House while they implement their energy policy. If they got everything they wanted, they’d cripple the economy. If that happened on their watch, the midterms would be a bloodbath for Democrats.
Technorati Tags: Obama, Gas Crisis, Crisis of Choice, Cap And Trade, John McCain, President Bush, Oil Exploration, Oil Production, Election 2008
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
July 7th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Why not just end oil futures speculation? that will give immediate short term relief.
Getting us off the oil teet is much better than drilling in wildlife refuges that are a mere postage stamp in the envelope of alaska. why not drill next to the refuge?? why not slant drill into it if the oil is ONLY there (according to the GOP of course)? why not drill in the 68 million acres that are currently under lease agreements with oil companies?? why not stop our EXPORT of 1.5 million barrels a day?? Why not raise CAFE standards 5MPG across the board?? that would end the need to drill in ANWR anf the continental shelf.
Which state is going to be the one who lets us drill off their coast?? Florida, California, or Texas ?? NONE will give permission because they know a single oil spill on their coast would be devestating to their economy.
July 7th, 2008 at 11:49 am
“why not drill in the 68 million acres that are currently under lease agreements with oil companies”
why does everyone bring this up, show me a map of the areas and I’ll bet you they are in areas where drilling is banned like ANWR, do the oil companies have leases for the land there, the talk about drilling but not letting out leases, could that be because it is already leased.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
“Which state is going to be the one who lets us drill off their coast?? Florida, California, or Texas ?? NONE will give permission because they know a single oil spill on their coast would be devestating to their economy.”
Doesn’t matter what Florida gives permission for… the Chinese will be drilling 60 miles away with Cuba’s blessing. And, if there’s a spill, Florida will pay the price without any of the benefit.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
“why not drill in the 68 million acres that are currently under lease agreements with oil companies”
why does everyone bring this up, show me a map of the areas and I’ll bet you they are in areas where drilling is banned like ANWR, do the oil companies have leases for the land there, the talk about drilling but not letting out leases, could that be because it is already leased.
Comment by Ron K — July 7, 2008 @ 11:49 am
Does Logic enter into your debate at all here??
if the oil companies LEASED the land for OIL exploration and extraction, why would they pay for leases on land that bans oil drilling??
Why give them MORE leases to a wildlife refuge when they can drill in the 68 million acres THEY ALREADY HAVE ??
Why dont they just drill next to AMWR ?? is the vast oil field DIRECTLY under ANWR ONLY??
the GOP side of the debate makes NO SENSE.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Finally someone chimes in with the totally discredited GOP “Cuban Fear” talking point.
Doesn’t matter what Florida gives permission for… the Chinese will be drilling 60 miles away with Cuba’s blessing. And, if there’s a spill, Florida will pay the price without any of the benefit.
Comment by Anneke — July 7, 2008 @ 1:07 pm
Are we now in charge of other sovereign countries oil exploration?? I guess Cuba did not get our blessing to drill on their OWN LAND!!! You do know that they are GOING to drill IN CUBA, not in international waters? Even John Boehner said that rhetoric was BOGUS.
If we reconstituted relations with Cuba, we could be drilling there.
July 7th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
“if the oil companies LEASED the land for OIL exploration and extraction, why would they pay for leases on land that bans oil drilling??”
if they bought the leases before congress/pres decided not to allow drilling they would have payed for it.
July 7th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Taguba: That’s good of you to want to suck up others countries’ natural resources so that we can leave ours untouched. Now I understand the Saudi viewpoint–the U.S. wants energy but doesn’t want to use its own reserves. Why should we exploit our own when we can exploit everyone else’s? Libs make me LOL.
P.S. - Oil companies often purchase leases to promising oil fields in hopes that the technology needed to extract can be developed before the lease expires.
July 8th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
I think the important thing to note here is that Hussein wants to invest MY dollars in “alternative sources”, like there is absolutely no other source of investment and it’s the guvmint’s responsibility to fund anything private industry can’t or won’t.
Obviously, he didn’t take Econ101 or, if he did, flunked it. Either that or he believes the government should be responsible for providing the funding for everything.
And in that case, he either has not read the Constitution, has read it and doesn’t believe it or flunked Constitutional Law in skool.
July 9th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
if they bought the leases before congress/pres decided not to allow drilling they would have payed for it.
Comment by Ron K — July 7, 2008 @ 2:41 pm
If is the key word in that phrase. and they DID not.
July 9th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Anke, we dont have to leave our resources alone, JUST OUR WILDLIFE REFUGES. When the oil companies finish sucking the resources out of their EXISTING 68 million Acres, then we can talk about drilling in Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, and at the bottom of half dome in Yosemite.
When are the Floridians, Californians, or Texas going to fight to board the greed bus to oil spill beach ?? None want more rigs off their coast, even the Republican Governors are against it. the mindless rhetoric of the right continues.
July 9th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Tag - want to try a again, in Utah they have oil shale, the oil companies want to drill, but there are Petroglyph in the area, there is pressure on them not to drill.
July 10th, 2008 at 7:10 am
Let’s see. Major oil slicks when Katrina et al wiped out all the sea rigs a few years ago. Caribou have nearly disappeared from the Alaskan wilderness on the North Slope.
Yes, I can see where those that wish to run my life and my standard of living into the ground fear doing those things that will allow our nation to quit financing terrorism. After all, I can’t see a whole bunch of difference between being destroyed by eco-nazis or being destroyed by islamo-nazis. It’s only a difference of the time taken for the destruction. And they’re both religions of hate.
I’ll bet Tag supports the troops, too.