Infinite MonkeysWhy, oh, why are the Democrats being so stubborn on the drilling issue? Surely they realize that their own constituents -- working people, commuters -- are suffering from the effects of $4-a-gallon gasoline. And yet House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in her wisdom, insists "We cannot drill our way out of this."
Nobody is arguing that drilling for oil in ANWR or exploring the continental shelf in the Gulf of Mexico or off the coast of California will solve America's energy woes entirely. Not even close. Energy independence is probably a pipe dream. But House Republicans are arguing -- correctly, I think -- that the Democratic leadership needs to come up with a truly viable solution or be held accountable. Remember, the Democrats in 2006 promised "a commonsense plan" for lowering gas prices. And that was when gasoline was a "reasonable" $3.25 or so a gallon. Of course, you follow that link to Pelosi's website and you discover the "plan" was to put the screws to the oil companies. They might as well have vowed to repeal the law of supply and demand.
The Democrats' pig-headed energy policy -- if you can call it a policy -- is bad for the country. Period.
The Wall Street Journal on Thursday cut through the Democrats' cant:
Democrats are going to have to grow up. The oil-rich areas they want to leave untouched are accessible with minimal environmental disturbance, thanks to modern technology. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita flattened terminals across the Gulf of Mexico but didn't cause a single oil spill. As for anticarbon theology, oil will be indispensable over the next half-century and probably longer, like it or not. Airplanes will never fly on woodchips, and you won't be able to charge your car with a windmill for some time, if ever.
Dan Henninger, on the same page, expounds the editorial board's sensible argument:
New world powers are coming online fast, and they need energy. We need to get back in the game.The goal shouldn't be "energy independence," a ridiculous notion in an economically integrated world. It's about admitting the need to strike a balance between the energy and security realities of the here-and-now and the potentialities of the future. Some of our best and brightest want to pursue alternative energy technologies, and they should be encouraged to do so, inside market disciplines. But let's at least stop pretending the rest of the world is going to play along with our environmentalist moralisms.
Yes, the United States needs more nuclear energy, more hydrogen power, more natural gas exploration, and cleaner alternatives to fuels that pollute the air and put America at the mercy of foreign powers. At the same time, as my old friends at Investor's Business Daily note, we're sitting atop at least 118 billion barrels of oil, which is "a bit more than Iraq's estimated reserves." It would be irresponsible not to tap into that resource.
Rather than continue to lamely point the finger at Big Oil, it's about time Americans held Congress to account for exacerbating an eminently solvable problem.
Posted by Ben at June 12, 2008 08:00 PM