Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Analysis: Reid to change U.S. energy plan
UPI ^ | 01 DECEMBER 2006 | UPI

Posted on 12/01/2006 6:32:44 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist

LAS VEGAS, Dec. 1 (UPI) -- When he takes control of the U.S. Senate in January, Harry Reid's agenda will include moving the country toward energy independence -- a U.S. security issue, he says -- which he blames the Republican Congress and president for hindering.

In an exclusive interview with United Press International in his Las Vegas office, the future Senate Majority Leader said Thursday he's astonished by how much oil the United States consumes and by the lack of attention paid to drawing down the crude habit.

"Think about this: We use 21 million barrels of oil every day," said Reid, D-Nev. "But then to make it even more profane, we import 65 percent of that."

He said voters Nov. 7 decided on the Democratic Party, partly because "energy independence" was part of its platform.

"With the Republican-dominated Congress and the president, we couldn't change it. We offered amendments that were turned down easily. We were voted down on party line basis most every time."

Reid said Congress needs to invest away from fossil fuels and more in solar and wind power, geothermal (generating power from the natural heat deep in the Earth) and biomass (converting plant matter to fuels).

"We can't do it overnight but I think we have to set goals. How about something as simple as reducing the importation of oil by a million barrels a year," Reid said.

"If we could only import 20 million barrels then we could do a number of things. What I hope that we would do is move to alternative energy. Give tax credits over a long period of time, not a year or two, so people could invest in alternative energy. We could certainly do more with conservation that we're not doing."

Of the 7.6 billion barrels of crude and petroleum products the United States consumed in 2005, 3.3 billion barrels was burned in the nation's vehicles, according to the Energy Information Administration, the data arm of the U.S. Energy Department.

Reid says this is a great starting point for reducing U.S. consumption and increasing energy efficiency, and favors raising the bar for fuel economy standards, which the industry is against.

"We really feel that the best way to encourage efficiency is by stimulating the market with incentives," said Wade Newton, communications director for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

"The industry supports putting as many fuel efficient vehicles on the road as soon as possible," not with mandates, but by creating a market of many options and giving consumers tax incentives to purchase efficient vehicles.

Reid says he'd also be open to new nuclear power in the United States. But he's at odds with the industry over what to do with the nuclear waste. Reid wants it kept safe at the nuclear plants as opposed to a proposed repository inside Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

While the Yucca argument is a major one, Trish Conrad, spokeswoman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, said the industry is looking forward to working with the new Congress.

"We know that he has supported nuclear energy in the past," she said.

Without giving exact details, Reid said to expect a tax on oil company profits he deems excessive.

"Yeah, we're going to do a number of things. We believe that there should be a windfall profits tax. See I personally think it's not right that Exxon makes $40 billion a year net profit and we give them subsidies."

He said he's in favor of some domestic oil and gas drilling off the U.S. coast, part of an offshore drilling bill the Senate passed earlier this year (although it's at odds with a House version), but won't allow exploration in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

"ANWR will not happen. I am opposed to it. That was one of the joys of my life was when we defeated that legislative initiative of Sen. (Ted) Stevens (R-Alaska) to drill in ANWR," he said.

"There are things we can do for domestic production but keep in mind we control less than 3 percent of oil in the world," Reid said. "Ninety-seven- plus percent is in Saudi Arabia, Russia, other countries. We can't produce our way out of the problems that we have. It's not improbable, it's impossible.

"We have two years guaranteed and I hope by the end of this Congress we have things that are in motion to cut down our dependence on foreign oil."

Reid said the country has been short-sighted when making decisions on energy, which he said should be looked at as both a security and an economic issue. And he said foresight requires a move away from Bush administration policies; away from the secret energy strategy meetings held by Vice President Dick Cheney in 2001, which created the basis for all energy legislation and policy over the past six years.

"How did we come up with the energy policy that we have? Obviously this is the most oil-friendly administration in the history of our country. They both made their fortunes in oil."


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government
KEYWORDS: energy; oil; reid; us
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-84 last
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
When he takes control of the U.S. Senate in January, Harry Reid's agenda will include moving the country toward energy independence -- a U.S. security issue, he says -- which he blames the Republican Congress and president for hindering.

Well, the honorable senator is half right: We do need to move toward energy independence, so that we aren't giving billions in petrodollars to our rabid enemies. But to lay the blame for our current dependency exclusively at the Republicans' doorstep--or even chiefly there--is a convenient distortion of the facts. The Democrats' refusal to drill in the winter wonderland of ANWR is hardly the result of dispassionate reasoning; it is more closely akin to a religious taboo, albeit one of a distinctly secular variety.

Reid...favors raising the bar for fuel economy standards, which the [automotive] industry is against.

Reasonable people can debate this one. But if new standards are applied to US-manufactured cars alone, there will be an even greater flight to imported cars--at least, to the extent that the two can still be distinguished from each other. (After all, Nissans are built in Smyrna, Tennessee--just a hop, skip, and a jump from where I live--and other "foreign" cars are also routinely built in the US.)

If the new standards are applied across the board, it will probably result in marginally higher prices for new cars--not an automatic disqualifier, but something to be considered, nonetheless.

Either way, the result is likely to be lighter cars--which is to say, more fatality-prone cars, whenever they are involved in accidents.

An honest approach would be one that considers the potential benefits and trade-offs of the proposed policy. Anything less is unworthy of a man who seeks to be a leader.

Without giving exact details, Reid said to expect a tax on oil company profits he deems excessive.

This is sheer demagoguery. Very few people harbor warm and fuzzy feelings toward Big Oil; so there is not much of a downside in rhetorically attacking it. And since President Bush and Vice-President Cheney have past ties--in one way or another--to the oil industry, there could be no better opportunity for a cheap shot. It's a "twofor."

In fact, oil-company profits are not typically "excessive," when compared with other industries. To single out this vital industry for confiscatory taxation is not indicative of a great mind--even by the rather limited standards of the US Senate--since that would no doubt result in less domestic exploration.

Then again, that is something about which most Democrats (including Majority Leader-to be) Harry Reid seem rather unconcerned...

51 posted on 12/01/2006 7:29:16 PM PST by AmericanExceptionalist (Democrats believe in discussing the full spectrum of ideas, all the way from far left to center-left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

The Congress actually did pass an energy bill after Bush prodded them for years. The bill unfortunately contained almost none of the energy policy that our national security desperately needs, but it did recycle tired canards, offer vague platitudes, and distribute train loads of corrupt political pork. Even under nominal Republican control, the Congress utterly failed to confront the daunting problems of our generation and our posterity, failed to make any difficult choices that might generate political animosity, and acted only ambivalent about the seminal issue of our time, Islamofascist terrorism.


52 posted on 12/01/2006 7:32:23 PM PST by dufekin (media-Democrat-terrorist complex: espionage, sedition, propaganda, treason, and surrender)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: All
Dear Harry Ried, are you just dumb or is wrecking the economy your plan for the 2008 Presidential election?

Republicans should let him pass this plan. Then praise him for it, while distancing themselves. Gas prices will skyrocket, and every Soccer Mom will want to string him up my his acorns, and wonder why they gave Democrats a majority.

Sometimes you should get what you wish for.
53 posted on 12/01/2006 7:32:37 PM PST by PA-RIVER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Yes Harry ... raise those CAFE standards on cars and trucks. I can't wait to see the news stories of the American auto plants closing down because we no longer can compete with Honda, Toyota, etc...

I can't wait to see the Asia companies eat what is left of the American auto makers lunch.
And I'm gonna laugh when I see and hear a news story about some whiny auto worker being laid off who voted for the dems, with a look of bewilderment on his face as he still doesn't put 2 and 2 together and figure out who put him in his predicament.
54 posted on 12/01/2006 7:32:38 PM PST by MaDeuce (Do it to them, before they do it to you! (MaDuce = M2HB .50 BMG))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Hey Harry,

I hear Jimmah Carter has a few sweaters he can spare for use by the Whine Wing of the Dem party. You know, the ones hat blocked any attempts at meaningful policy legislation for 6 years.. all in the name of energy independence.

PS.. If you want to champion efforts, quit being such a freakin' hypocrit.


55 posted on 12/01/2006 7:34:21 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ...... Kyl / Cornyn in '08 .... Now is as good as any time for a GOPurge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: an amused spectator
Tax increase.

Democrats have so little imagination.

Must be from smoking entirely too much crack.

56 posted on 12/01/2006 7:37:06 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

as a side note,,

I personally find it ironic that the Senator that sat as the head on a Senate committee investigating the oil-for-food debacle at the UN is also on record as voting against drilling ANWR.

Thanks Norm old boy, but for a vote or two , we would already be on the road towards energy independence to a limited degree.

There is definitely plenty of blame and flame to go around on both sides of the aisle.


57 posted on 12/01/2006 7:39:58 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ...... Kyl / Cornyn in '08 .... Now is as good as any time for a GOPurge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"ANWR will not happen. I am opposed to it. That was one of the joys of my life was when we defeated that legislative initiative of Sen. (Ted) Stevens (R-Alaska) to drill in ANWR," he said.

High school Dingy. Very, very high school.

Grow up!

58 posted on 12/01/2006 7:40:01 PM PST by upchuck (Republicans didn`t lose this time around because they were conservative, but because they WEREN`T!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MaineVoter2002
Why do you fault the President for speaking the truth?

We ARE addicted to oil, there's no way getting around that fact. Would you rather he lied to the public?

It's used in not just automobiles and heating , but for everything else in everyday life practically.
59 posted on 12/01/2006 7:43:47 PM PST by AmeriBrit (Soros and Clinton's for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington = SCREW.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

This "article" had all objectivity of an item I read earlier today about "our wise and kind leader, Kim Jong IL".

This is why the so-called financial advantage for republican campaigns amounts to nought. The outright propaganda coming from the BSM cannot be bought by us at any price.

So much for "journalistic integrity".


60 posted on 12/01/2006 7:47:31 PM PST by prov1813man (While the one you despise and ridicule works to protect you, those you embrace work to destroy you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Events in the ME are going to completely overshadow anything this boob comes up with

The dems are so out of touch it is pathetic

The ME is ready to blow sky high and these fools act like they are in some other time zone warp


61 posted on 12/01/2006 7:54:15 PM PST by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

yes, by all means let's charge headlong into ethanol only. Then in a few decades when then farmland to furnish it becomes a barren wasteland from overuse what's the next scam the enivornmental whackos foist upon the public?


62 posted on 12/01/2006 7:59:23 PM PST by SCHROLL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Right.


63 posted on 12/01/2006 8:02:31 PM PST by cajungirl (no)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
I can disagree with virtually everything that Dingy Harry is proposing to make us more energy independent, but he is being savvy by giving the appearance that he is taking on our energy problem.

Many of us here on FR have wondered time and again why the President, why any Republican, has not come out with a moon landing style directive to make our country energy independent within, say, 10-15 years. It is a subject that resonates with the peeples, not just us political junkies on FR.

Instead of that we got the landing on Mars in 20 years initiative that fell like a lead balloon. Talking about putting a man on Mars during Iraq, during the WOT, during the aftermath of Katrina, during the high energy prices back then, was completely out of touch (as much as I personally would like to see it).

So, Dingy Harry and the Dims are taking over a very important and needed topic. Of course, their recomendations will be ridiculous and will never address the problem, but I just wonder what the h@!@ the Republicans and the President are thinking by not coming up with a bold energy initiative for energy independence for our country and then promoting the crap out of it.

64 posted on 12/01/2006 8:02:53 PM PST by technomage (Protest Voters are ignorant, immature, selfish people who have no capacity for long term thinking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

I have to say my memory is that there was a significant push by the Bush Administration to get a better energy policy going. This is an issue that is just way susceptible to demogogery. Bush says more production and the environmentalists say "Enron", Cheney secret meeting, oil cronies. The price of gas spikes and the Democrats say gouging. We just have a critical shortage of leaders who will speak clearly to the American people about choices we have to make rather than boogie men and environmental disaster.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-06-15-bush-energy_x.htm

The president outlined his four-point plan to reduce high energy prices: Promote conservation; produce and refine more crude oil in the United States; develop alternative sources of energy, such as renewable ethanol or biodiesel; and help other nations, such as China, to become more energy-efficient to reduce global demand for energy. He said it was time for the United States to expand its nuclear power capacity.

"Today, millions of American families and small businesses are hurting because of high gas prices," Bush said at a forum on energy efficiency. "If you're trying to meet a payroll or trying to meet a family budget, even small increases at the pump have a big impact on your bottom line."


By the Way, How does dingy Harry's plan of putting the kabosh on nuclear waste disposal in Nevada fit in to solving our energy woes?


65 posted on 12/01/2006 8:09:07 PM PST by sgtyork (Prove to us that you can enforce the borders first.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

What an incredibly ignorant idiot.


66 posted on 12/01/2006 8:18:57 PM PST by altura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

We will be a third world poverty nation in 2 years if these MF's have their way. 25% unemployment, 25% interest. People dying in the streets.

Bet on it.


67 posted on 12/01/2006 8:22:06 PM PST by lawdude (The dems see Wal-Mart as a bigger threat to the US than muslim terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Huh? What about ANWR? Thought the DEMS put the roadblocks up for that. The most "ethical" congress is full of vultures and snakes.


68 posted on 12/01/2006 8:33:11 PM PST by madison10 (If my people, who are called by My name will humble themselves and pray...I will heal their land.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad_Tom_Rackham

Excellent picture : says it all...


69 posted on 12/01/2006 8:34:29 PM PST by timer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: KingKenrod
Harry is already getting his cut. Go to Edgar online and look at Exxons cash flow statement and see. For the nine months ended September 30th 2006. Exxon made $41.7 billion pre tax of which it paid $16.3 billion in income tax. Less than $5 billion went to the stockholder in the form of dividends less than a third of the governments cut. And good percentage of the dividends went to municipal pension funds which are a major shareholder group. Other shareholders include 401K plans and private pension plans, all of whoses distributions are subject to additional income tax. In addition to the $16.3 billion in income taxes, Exxon also paid $22.9 billion in excise taxes and $31.5 billion in other taxes and duties. By the way, about 70% of EXXONs income in made overseas. A windfall profits tax will only incentive foreign countries to institute their own and reduce what Exxon gives to the US.
70 posted on 12/01/2006 9:00:09 PM PST by LauraleeBraswell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Reid and the scumbag Democrats (along with some scumbag RINOs) have consistently stood in the way of drilling for oil on US property. I guess now it's time for the real Republicans to stand in the way of whatever goofy ideas the scumbags have. Touche.


71 posted on 12/01/2006 9:05:35 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MaineVoter2002; Extremely Extreme Extremist
I'm not convinced that Republican politicians are particularly interested in developing more domestic energy and lessening our subjugation to the Middle East. Any more than the DIMs are.

What I can't fathom is why. Is it deliberate (you know, some sinister motive)? or are they just plain stupid? I lean towards the latter. But how can they be that stupid? Boggles the mind.
72 posted on 12/01/2006 9:07:06 PM PST by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s...you weren't really there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
THank you. Lately it seems like every thread has a Bush Basher front and center. It sickens me.

I guess you didn't get the memo. We hold GW and Rove responsible for the disaster November on 7th.

73 posted on 12/01/2006 9:07:40 PM PST by itsahoot (If the GOP does not do something about immigration, immigration will do something about the GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: an amused spectator
I'm speechless.
So many lies, so little room to rebut...

I'll give you that the little crook is not often truthful, but you have overlooked his main problem...

Harry Reid is dumber than a rock*

*No offense meant to geologists.

74 posted on 12/01/2006 9:08:13 PM PST by harrowup (Eyes had a NassCAR wuntz; bettern' ma first; but not da bestest.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

LOL, I remember those sweaters, "Rafshoonery" it was called at the time, after Gerald Rafshoon, "image consultant" hired by the Carter White House. I saw his name in the production credits at the end of some excreble bit of TV the other night. Rafshoon's name that is, not Carter's. Jimmah is by definition excrement.


75 posted on 12/01/2006 9:20:51 PM PST by skepsel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Old plan = No plan

New plan = No plan

Result? SOS, just worse. More freedoms restricted.


76 posted on 12/01/2006 9:23:23 PM PST by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s...you weren't really there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

After his little speech, he jumped into and SUV, that was part of a seven parade of SUV'S, drove about 1 mile to a little airport got into a twin engine helicopter flew another mile and then got into a 747 for a vacationtrip where he was met by another SUV parade and so on, and so on, and so on.

He could have made it short and simple by saying this is for the common people not the arrogant elected officals who have a different set of rules for themselves.


77 posted on 12/01/2006 9:28:02 PM PST by chiefqc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Son House

All Hollywood celebrities could fly commercial!


78 posted on 12/01/2006 9:38:57 PM PST by lonestar (Me, too--Weinie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: AmeriBrit
Would you rather he lied to the public?

Bush ran on the increase drilling at home/build more refineries platform.

79 posted on 12/02/2006 12:17:55 PM PST by MaineVoter2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: an amused spectator

All the BS and its right back where we started ,more mileage on cars ,the next thing they will say is put on a sweater and turn down the thermostat


80 posted on 12/02/2006 12:22:32 PM PST by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

BUMP


81 posted on 12/02/2006 1:29:52 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Why can't Republicans stand up to Democrats like they do to terrorists?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"ANWR will not happen. I am opposed to it. That was one of the joys of my life was when we defeated that legislative initiative of Sen. (Ted) Stevens (R-Alaska) to drill in ANWR," he said.

He's still in idiot. We should be drilling wherever there are possible oil resources.

82 posted on 12/03/2006 7:16:38 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Mashed potatoes, gravy, and cranberry sauce! Wooooooo-oooooooo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BMC1

There were always blocs of Republicans who would side with these Democrats when the Republicans had the power, whether it was with ANWR or offshore drilling in FL.


83 posted on 12/03/2006 7:19:30 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Mashed potatoes, gravy, and cranberry sauce! Wooooooo-oooooooo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
san francisco is trying to put a tidal power generator near the golden gate bridge.

it has no chance of getting in, already the loonies out there are saying the fish are going to get caught in it.

Some idiots will oppose any attempt on energy progress because of possible harm to [pick a warm and fuzzy animal]. Even if the energy is considered renewable (wind, tidal, hydro, etc.).

84 posted on 12/03/2006 7:26:38 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Mashed potatoes, gravy, and cranberry sauce! Wooooooo-oooooooo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-84 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson