The Political Voices of Women

Roundup: Election Politics of Offshore Oil Drilling — by Catherine Morgan (cross-posted at The Care2 Election Blog)

Yesterday was my first post in a series on the gas crisis and offshore drilling. For that reason, I decided today’s political blog roundup will focus on the different opinions and reactions from around the blogosphere on this issue. We have some for drilling, and some against it. Let me know what you think in comments.

I’ll start with my personal opinion/theory regarding the relationship between high gas prices and the recent announcement by Bush/McCain to lift a ban on offshore drilling…

With regards to the gas & oil crisis — Does anyone else get the feeling we have been manipulated and duped AGAIN by the Bush administration? It’s all starting to feel really familiar.

1. Scare the American people (in this case with increasing gas prices).
2. Appear to be doing everything you can to get to the bottom of the crisis (go to OPEC, hold hearings, etc.)
3. Just when there appears to be nothing anyone can do…The Bush administration comes to the rescue and announces a plan to lift the ban on offshore oil drilling, because it’s the only way to help the American people and lower the price of gas.

Sound familiar?

What came first? The crisis or the solution?

I think with closer inspection (most likely after there is nothing anyone can do to change the outcome) – Revelations will come to light, that the Bush administration manipulated the “speculators” to cause an unnecessary but dramatic rise in gas/oil prices…For the ultimate purpose of lifting the ban on offshore drilling, and giving the brass ring to the oil companies.

Additionally, this is going to be the GOP “ace” in the hole, and “the perfect storm” for facilitating a third Bush presidency. I imagine it will go something like this…

The Democrats want to continue making you pay high gas prices during a weak economy…But the Republicans want to help you keep more of your hard earned money….bla, bla, bla.

The trouble is…there is no evidence that offshore drilling will help in the short or even long term. But that is not the “spin” you will be hearing from Bush/McCain. What at first appeared to me as a campaign killer for McCain, could actually be part of a carefully orchestrated campaign winner. Give McCain the experience, the Iraq war, and now the illusion of helping the economy (the number one issue of the American people). I shutter to think.

So, that’s what I think. However, not everyone agrees with me.

Shocking!

Well, not really.

But, I do want to take a look at all sides of this issue. Admittedly, mine is a very visceral reaction to the news of possible offshore drilling.

Let’s take a look at what other bloggers are saying about this. We’ll start with my good friend, Kay B. Day, from Covering Florida and Right Commentary, who has a totally different opinion from mine.

Earlier in the week I reached out to a couple of people to see what their take was on offshore drilling, and she was kind enough to send me her thoughts in an email. Although I don’t completely agree with her on this one…I must admit, she has a much more thought-out response to it. Here it is…

Lookit, Congress (both parties) has known this crisis would come. At least since 1992 when congressional hearings began to be held about climate changes. And then when real global warming science ended up thoroughly botched in the hands of media, a frenzy ensued, complete with the UN screaming for the US to reduce emissions while other countries don’t (as in China who basically said ‘you’ve had your turn and now it’s ours.’)

Meanwhile, good news. All the aid we sent China and India over the years resulted in success (for once!) The result is an emerging middle class who, no surprise, reacts much like the West to consumerism. Then countries like Venezuela nationalized the oil, removing private corporations and giving the properties to the government (just like Cuba so long ago.) And of course production fell. Even where we can get oil, there is unrest and tribal conflict, further impeding product movement.

Concurrently, due to the power of marketing and branding, Americans fell in love with SUVs and other gas guzzlers. Also concurrently, the Middle East continued to go bananas and Iran emerged as a major player and the dollar fell and whammo. Speculators entered, because oil was now an even hotter commodity. Back at the farm, the man-made global warming theorists cried doomsday and began to see a valid legislative response. Speculators got even more excited because oil was now a sizzling commodity. As all these events played out, Congress fiddled just like Nero (Dems and Repubs). Through at least two 8-year terms under Clinton then Bush. And bear in mind we haven’t built any new refineries in years and much of the land under lease for drilling must go through an exhaustive environmental process, which is as it should be. While all these events boil, we are somewhat justified in our concerns about increasing our nuclear facilities.

The result: a quagmire. You have a commodity that everyone needs. Demand goes up, price goes up. Gold’s done the same thing.

Now have the Repubs made it a campaign issue? You bet. But frankly, the Dems did too, by embracing some of Al Gore’s theories that even the scientists who came up with the research dispute. The difference is the Dems followed Gore’s GW alarmist scenarios, pushing green. Is that good? Sure it is. But does that fuel speculation even more? Yes it does because developing alternative forms of energy takes time.

Note: I am not saying the earth isn’t warming. I am saying the results are inconclusive when it comes to whether it’s induced by man and whether we can really do anything about it with the emissions approach. Frankly, I don’t think we’re planning in the right way. And the fellow who did the original research that started the whole ball rolling agrees. You will never hear this from mainstream media. Why? Because a whole new energy industry has sprung up. Is that good? Yes. We need to be energy independent. But the truth is both political parties have politicized this issue, just each in their own relevant ways. What you’re hearing from Bush is basically the truth about drilling. He wasn’t crazy enough to bring it up before, because he’s been on the hot seat over the war and he is at odds with a congress controlled by the opposing party. You won’t hear it from Obama because he has to take the alternative energy approach.

What’s my bottom line: both parties have delayed the inevitable too long as have we, the US people. Now we’re paying the price. And let me tell you. If we start drilling the price will go down. You can bank on it. The very thought of that will impact. Why do you think the Saudis have defied OPEC to produce more? Writing’s on the wall for them too.

Through two presidents, I have criticized both parties, not so much either prez as the congress. Because for 16 long years, our congressmen have let us down time and again and that has simply not changed.

Gosh. Sorry that’s so long, but that’s my take on it. Admittedly, my take is more an industry-centric take because I have several folks in industries related to commodities. BTB, not only gas has been affected this way. If you know anyone in an industry reliant on copper, ask ‘em how easy that is to get right now.

Thanks Kay.

Now, let’s see what other bloggers are saying…

Robert Reich’s Blog…

First, the crude oil market is global. Oil companies sell all over the world. The price of crude is established by global supply and demand. So even if 3 million additional barrels a day could be extruded from lands and seabeds of the United States (that sum is the most optimistic figure, after all exploration is done), that sum is tiny compared to 86 million barrels now produced around the world. In other words, even under the best circumstances, the price to American consumers would hardly budge.

*Also check out the over 40 comments on Robert’s blog.

Peter from the Switchboard…

We can’t drill our way to lower fuel prices. As I’ve said before, efficiency is the fastest, and cheapest, way to lower fuel costs and combat global warming.

Joe Sudbay at AMERICAblog…

2030 isn’t quite the “short term.” If we had a national energy strategy, we should be able to develop alternative sources of energy and much, much better fuel efficiency by then.

*Also see 28 comments.

Sabrina from Life’s A Beach…

I got an email from the surfrider foundation today…

and I can’t BELIEVE this recent move by our government to ruin our seas! Yes, I realize gas prices are high, but I honestly don’t believe offshore drilling is the answer.

It would just break my heart to go anywhere on the coast and see it ruined with refineries and whatnot, and see the sea life compromised…and all because of the greed for oil!

On Our Offshore Drilling Phobia…

It’s not an either/or proposition. We need to be doing it all, wind, solar, bio-fuels, nuclear, clean coal, and good-old fashioned fossil fuels, wherever we can get our hands on it. And of course do it as safely and ecologically sensitively as possible. But the more expensive alternatives on all these fronts will only pursued by the markets when prices are high.

None of it is going to happen very quickly, regardless of the choices we make, and no, it won’t make an immediate dent in oil prices that would make us all happy. But turning this ship around will take a lot of time (pardon the pun). So we need to get on with it, balancing pragmatism and our ideal wishes.

This is from The Next Right…

The American Family Association sent out an alert to its massive list and got 400,000 letters sent to Congress for more oil drilling. Why is this important? In presentations, I often cite the AFA’s monster list as the biggest on the Right. And in my years on their list, I’ve never seen them focus on anything other than social issues. Their focus on oil is a big, big deal.

And Jerome Armstrong is waving Democrats off this issue, with a telling anecdote about Charlie Crist’s rather abrupt about-face on offshore drilling.

This is from Ido’s Blog…

I think that America, and pretty much the rest of the world at some point, needs to face the fact that oil is a dwindling natural resource and we need to look forward towards the future to a world without oil…or where oil has a vastly reduced role. This will be painful, yes, but it can be done. Brazil has done it with ethanol from sugar cane (which I have recently read about and I’m pretty impressed) and we can do it as well — whether it’s from solar, wind, biofuels or a mixture of all three.

Looking forward to an uncertain future is scary… it’s much easier to look back at what you know rather than forward into the unknown. However, it’s that forward vision that has made this country great and we need to be leaders in this effort if we are ever to break the stranglehold that OPEC has on us.

Wayne at unEARTHED talks about what offshore drilling means to him…

So I ask myself, what’s the real agenda here? Besides the obvious get-McCain-elected agenda?

Profits, of course. But in terms of policy, my guess is the Arctic. These guys have talked about the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge this week. But they know Americans are attached to the Refuge and so that idea won’t play. Besides, ANWR is onshore. I think offshore + ANWR = the Arctic Ocean.

This is from Brandon at Roanoke Red Zone…

The Democrats are flipping out over the increasing pressure to allows states to drill off their shores. I just watched an interview with the Chief Financial Officer of Florida (D) Alex Sink. She was particularly exercised over Gov. Crist’s willingness to have Florida open to offshore drilling. Her argument was that Floridians long ago decided to keep it’s waters free of drilling in order to preserve their tourist industry. HELLO! Lady, you aren’t going to have a tourist industry because no one will be able to fly or drive to your great state. Unbelievable! Great move by Crist–keep it up.

Josh Painter at Conservative Superiority says…

Yes, it’s still “the economy, stupid” and especially pump prices for gasoline and diesel, not to mention the high costs the airlines are incurring for jet fuel. The GOP seems to be waking up to what conservatives already knew. Make energy your number one issue and offer doable solutions to the problems of energy security and high prices.

The Democrats, meanwhile, have sentenced themselves to doing hard time in Al Gore’s lockbox, and they’ve entrusted the key to the Sierra Club. Couldn’t happen to a more deserving bunch of people, one which has consistently put its own selfish political interests ahead of America’s security and her citizens’ bank accounts.

So, there you have it. What do you think?