From Hoax to Acceptable Policy to Hoax Again
When the energy debate got intense, Speaker Pelosi spoke for the Democrats, calling drilling a hoax on the American people. Just three days ago, when the American people told pollsters in strong majorities that they favored drilling, Democrat Pelosi told Larry King that she’s open to voting on drilling…sorta. It’s a different day and a different tweak of her policy:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday firmly rejected the idea of a House vote solely on the issue of offshore oil drilling, calling it “a hoax on the American people” backed by oil companies.
Instead, she said, she wants Congress to tackle a compromise comprehensive energy plan that would include alternative energy sources and curtailing tax breaks for oil companies.
“You want to drill? We want the royalties for the American people, and we want that to pay for renewable energy resources,” the San Francisco Democrat said in an interview for KQED television’s weekly news show, “This Week in Northern California.” “We want to connect all that together.”
Let’s first stipulate that Democrats aren’t dealing from a position of strength here. They’ve seen the polling. They’ve seen that the majority of independents and conservatives favor drilling. They’ve seen the polling that shows almost 60 percent of the people said that they’d vote for someone who is pro-drilling instead of those that don’t favor drilling.
Let’s further stipulate that most people reject the Democrats’ limited drilling in a couple tiny areas. They want legislation passed that includes robust drilling provisions in it. Not only that but they want real conservation measures in this legislation, conservation that’s based on improved efficiency vehicles, appliances and homes. They want a robust R & D provision in it, too, so that politicians aren’t telling us that the alternative fuel is grain-based ethanol. They want the scientists to figure out something that’s actually efficient.
Ms. Pelosi insists on her provisions. Or does she? I’m betting that her interview was pure bluster, a politician’s equivalent to a poker player’s bluff. I’m betting that alot of her freshmen are telling her that they’re history if Pelosi’s Democratic majority don’t change their position.
Just before last year’s August recess, Harry Reid hinted that Republicans would return from the break chastened and willing to vote for an Iraq supplemental with timetables in it. In September, 2007, Democrats returned chastened. After Gen. Petraeus’ and Crocker’s testimony, Democrats quickly caved on the timetables issue.
This year, here’s how Pelosi’s spokesman Nadeam Elshami shot his mouth off:
“Republicans are too scared to go home to face their constituents after voting against bills to force Big Oil companies to use it or lose it, demand that the president free our oil from the government stockpile and crack down on speculators,” Elshami said. “In a week where Exxon Mobil made the largest quarterly profits by a U.S. corporation, Republicans are staying in Washington to argue that Big Oil deserves more taxpayer lands.”
Something tells me that Mr. Elshami’s version of events didn’t materialize. Instead, I’m betting that it’s Democrats that wish they hadn’t returned to their districts. Instead, I’m betting that it’s Democrats that wish they didn’t have to face their angry constituents all month long.
Pelosi said she wants to end what she called the failed energy policies supported by “two oilmen in the White House,” referring to President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, former oil company executives.
“They want us to do more of the same,” she said. “So they’ve come up with this gimmick, this hoax” that says if drilling is allowed in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and offshore, “it’s going to bring down the price at the pump.”
“Ten years, 2 cents,” Pelosi said, arguing that 10 years would be the time needed to reap a small benefit to most Americans. “Even the president has said it isn’t a quick fix…I can’t allow a hoax to come to the floor.”
Ms. Pelosi’s spin isn’t helping Democrats. She insists that President Bush wants to do more of the same. That’s where most people are. Part of President Bush’s existing policy is to drill. Ms. Pelosi is correct that President Bush and the House and Senate Republicans want more drilling. That’s the point. Increasing domestic energy production is what’s required to drop prices, though a strengthening dollar helps, too.
I’m getting sick of Pelosi’s “10 years, 2 cents” blather. Here’s the key sentence from the Energy Journal’s rejection letter to Prof. Morris Coats:
Although the referees, and I, are in agreement with your basic argument, I regret to say that we will not be able to publish this work. Basically, your main result (the present impact of an anticipated future supply change) is already known to economists (although perhaps not to the Democratic Policy Committee).
Ms. Pelosi and her puppets are insisting that significantly increasing oil production won’t have an impact on energy prices. The economists at the Energy Journal insist otherwise. Personally, I’ll trust an economist who’s studied commodity markets over a spinning politician anytime.
If House and Senate Democrats don’t cave this September, they’ll be toast this November. People are hurting each time they pull into a station. No amount of Democrats’ spin will change what people know: that gas prices are putting people on fixed incomes, whether they’re retired or the single mom who’s just been laid off.
If Ms. Pelosi maintains her belligerent position, she’ll make history by being the only 1 term female Speaker in United States’ history.
Technorati Tags: Gas Crisis, Nancy Pelosi, Drilling, Nadeam Elshami, Harry Reid, Iraq, David Petraeus, Ryan Crocker, Surge, August Recess, Democrats, Election 2008
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog