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

Skip to comments.

Commendation, Not Condemnation-How Congress should have greeted President Bush's oil policy
FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | May 09, 2008 | Paul M. Weyrich

Posted on 05/09/2008 5:22:51 AM PDT by SJackson

Last week President George W. Bush held a press conference on the current state of the economy and the high cost of energy. In it he made several important points. First, he noted that one reason gas prices are increasing is that global supply has not kept pace with the growing demand worldwide. Members of Congress, he noted, “have been vocal about foreign governments increasing their oil production; yet Congress has been just as vocal in opposition to efforts to expand our production here at home. They repeatedly blocked environmentally safe exploration in ANWR. The Department of Energy estimates that ANWR could allow America to produce about a million additional barrels of oil every day, which translates to about 27 millions of gallons of gasoline and diesel every day. That would be about a 20% increase of oil…and it would likely mean lower gas prices.” Senator Charles E. Schumer’s (D-NY) response: “Unless the [Bush] Administration gets [the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries] OPEC to increase oil supply, American consumers are going to be in for a scorching summer of $4 gasoline with no relief in sight.” Apparently Senator Schumer expects President Bush to bully other countries into relieving our economic problems. This is wise foreign policy advice if ever there was some. And if foreign governments do not want to help us we should not expect Congress to do anything about it. After all, why alleviate needless financial hardship when some Senators can use it as a political weapon?

Another factor contributing to the high cost of energy is that America’s refining capacity has been stagnant for 30 years, the last time a new refinery was built. Like ANWR exploration, Congress repeatedly has blocked efforts to build more refineries and expand capacity. It has done the same with the use of nuclear energy. Congress also is “considering bills to raise taxes on domestic energy production, impose new and costly mandates on producers, and demand dramatic emissions cuts that would shut down coal plants, and increase reliance on expensive natural gas,” as President Bush stated.

Finally, there is no end in sight for Federal subsidies to multi-millionaire farmers. These subsidies, as this column has noted before, cost American taxpayers millions of dollars a year, are wasteful, and generally hinder the development of more productive farmland and the planting of market-driven crops. Yet Congress shows no inclination to cut subsidies from the current Farm Bill. By paying farms to plant specific crops regardless of the demand for those crops or allowing their fields to lie fallow, these subsidies unintentionally raise the price of other commodities that could be planted instead. President Bush was correct to note that Congressional support for farm subsidies will do little other than contribute to the rising prices of food.

President Bush should be commended for giving this speech. He was correct to remind Americans that if we want to lower the cost of energy we must be willing to use our own resources, whether they are natural or those we can build, rather than rely upon others to provide for our needs. After all, isn’t self-reliance part of the American spirit. We should not rely on foreign governments, many of which are volatile, to supply our energy needs, nor should our large farmers rely on Federal Government handouts to prop up their financially lucrative businesses.

Throughout this economic downturn it has seemed as if Congress, the Federal Reserve and other government agencies have reacted to the crisis rather than thought of productive ways in which they could lead on the issue. It is wise for the President to begin to exert some leadership on this issue. Hopefully he will maintain a spotlight on this issue and pressure Congress to initiate some constructive change, not implement more regulation and taxes.


TOPICS: Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: 110th; bush; energy; weyrich

1 posted on 05/09/2008 5:22:51 AM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Yeah but they did make the use of incandescent light bulbs illegal. How will we light our caves?? Hard to say since their energy policy is matchless.

PUN INTENDED!

2 posted on 05/09/2008 5:33:48 AM PDT by Young Werther (Julius Caesar (Quae Cum Ita Sunt. Since these things are so.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Sometimes I wonder if Bush isn’t just a little happy the democrats took over, since when he DID push good policies the republicans in congress turned tail and ran like scared rabbits.

At least this way he has someone to work against.

But mostly, I just get upset that in many cases this President knows what is right, and clearly says what should be done, but then NOTHING happens. It’s all words.


3 posted on 05/09/2008 5:33:57 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Senator Charles E. Schumer’s (D-NY) response: “Unless the [Bush] Administration gets [the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries] OPEC to increase oil supply, American consumers are going to be in for a scorching summer of $4 gasoline with no relief in sight.”

Typical thinking from one of the dumbest people in Congress...perhaps second only to Queen Pelosi.

Oh, BTW Chuckie, gas was a dollar a gallon cheaper when you Dems took over Congress, so why is it Bush's fault this time?

4 posted on 05/09/2008 5:35:43 AM PDT by econjack (Some people are as dumb as soup.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

There is much hope here if someone in the Republican party has the smarts to run with it. Forget McCain, it is the rest of the ticket we have to worry about. I’m willing to bet that a large percentage of the country will grasp what the President is saying here. All that’s left to do is point out that it is Nancy’s & Harry’s party and policies that are preventing a fix to the problem. If the 2006 election was about the Republican’s failure to act, then is should be equally easy to make 2008 a referendum on Harry and Nancy.


5 posted on 05/09/2008 5:40:16 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (Who Would Montgomery Brewster Choose?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: econjack

Chuckie and his man, Bill Clinton, voted against drilling in ANWAR during the Clinton years. Congress passed the bill without Chuck’s support and we could have started then, in the 90’s, drilling for oil. Bill Clinton vetoed the bill. Now we are at $4 a gallon. Thank you Bill. All those who complain about the gas prices, look at Chuck and Bill. They are the culprits.


6 posted on 05/09/2008 5:47:43 AM PDT by rtbwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

He can advocate anything he wants but without congressional approval he’s just PISSING in the wind.


7 posted on 05/09/2008 5:48:29 AM PDT by snowman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: snowman1

Here’s a great idea. Why don’t we all stay home on election day because our candidate is a moderate. Let’s allow the leftwing to take over our country and raise gas prices to 8 bucks a gallon so they will have enough money to put extra cops on the streets and have midnight basketball. /sarcasm


8 posted on 05/09/2008 5:54:29 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Shouldn't the libs love a Hunter Thompson ticket in 08?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Throughout this economic downturn it has seemed as if Congress, the Federal Reserve and other government agencies have reacted to the crisis rather than thought of productive ways in which they could lead on the issue.

Socialists/Collectivists (including OPEC) are NEVER part of any solution. They are the problem.

9 posted on 05/09/2008 6:41:30 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: econjack

Chuckie and Pelosi ARE the dumbest in Congress. Especially on energy policy. These two live day and night, I think, trying to figure out how to enrich trial lawyers.


10 posted on 05/09/2008 10:51:24 AM PDT by AFPhys ((.Praying for President Bush, our troops, their families, and all my American neighbors..))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

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