Offshore Drilling

I’m sure by now you’ve seen Paris Hilton’s response to John McCain’s attack ad:

Well, The Christian Science Monitor decided to take a look at the Hilton Energy Plan.

Joseph Romm, a former Clinton energy adviser and the blogger for Climate Progress, estimates that offshore drilling would net “under 100,000 barrels a day in supply sometime after 2020 — some one-thousandth of total supply.”

And, despite its assertions, McCain’s campaign actually knows better. In June, senior McCain campaign adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin acknowledged to the LA Times that “new offshore drilling would have no immediate effect on supplies or prices.” He should have added that it will have no real long-term effect, either.

Seems like this just keep coming up doesn’t it?  Let me emphasize it one more time just to make sure the point is made:

Offshore Drilling will not have an effect on oil prices.

Despite what John McCain may say, Offshore Drilling is a scam.  It’s a way for Republicans to claim they are providing a solution, without really addressing the problem.  It sounds good, but does nothing.  Don’t believe their lies.

Delivered today in Youngstown, Ohio.

We meet at a moment when this country is facing a set of challenges unlike any we’ve ever known. Right now, our brave men and women in uniform are fighting two different wars while terrorists plot their next attack. Our changing climate is putting our planet in peril and our security at risk. And our economy is in turmoil, with more and more of our families struggling with rising costs, falling incomes and lost jobs.

So we know that this election could be the most important of our lifetime. We know that the choices we make in November and over the next few years will shape the next decade, if not the century. And central to each of these challenges is the question of what we will do about our addiction to foreign oil. 

Without a doubt, this addiction is one of the most urgent threats we’ve ever faced – from the gas prices that are wiping out your paychecks and straining businesses, to the jobs that are disappearing from this state; from the instability and terror bred in the Middle East, to the rising oceans, record drought and spreading famine that could engulf our planet. 

[click to continue...]

I‘m watching MSNBC and David Shuster asks if Obama is just playing politics as usual because he’s attacking McCain on energy.

So, is Obama supposed to just do nothing?  He’s not allowed to point out the differences between himself and McCain?  Give me a break.  Obama calling out John McCain for McCain’s bullshit energy solutions (offshore drilling is a good example), is not Obama playing politics as usual.  It’s Obama telling the truth to voters and trying to take our country towards real energy independence.

Barack Obama’s well known campaign message is “Yes We Can.”  John McCain, however, seems to be saying “No We Can’t.”  Why can’t we?  Well, because McCain has no plans.  The McCain campaign is seriously lacking in the planning department.

Analysts caution that both McCain and Barack Obama have produced policy pronouncements that are just as much election documents as workable proposals; after all, that is what presidential candidates do. But when it comes to the metric of paper produced, McCain trails Obama in spelling out the nitty-gritty.

“The Obama people are much more detailed,” said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a bipartisan advocacy group dedicated to balancing the budget.

That’s just what we need, a president with no plan.  Let’s say, for example that you want to know McCain’s plan for Social Security.  Good luck figuring that out.  The Wall Street Journal noticed that John McCain himself doesn’t seem to be quite sure:

On Sunday, he said on national television that to solve Social Security “everything’s on the table,” which of course means raising payroll taxes. On July 7 in Denver he said: “Senator Obama will raise your taxes. I won’t.”

This isn’t a flip-flop. It’s a sex-change operation.

He got back to the subject Tuesday in Reno, Nev. Reporters asked about the Sunday tax comments. Mr. McCain replied, “The worst thing you could do is raise people’s payroll taxes, my God!” Then he was asked about working with Democrats to fix Social Security, and he repeated, “everything has to be on the table.” But how can . . .? Oh never mind.

Yesterday he was in Aurora, Colo., to wit: “On Social Security, he [Sen. Obama] wants to raise Social Security taxes. I am opposed to raising taxes on Social Security. I want to fix the system without raising taxes.”

Great, let’s elect the guy who has no idea what he’s going to do when he gets into office.

Oh but I forgot!  McCain does have a plan for our energy crisis.  He’s going to make sure we drill offshore.  What are economists saying about that plan?

When McCain has focused on domestic policy, it has generally been to offer headline-grabbing plans, such as his proposal for a gas tax holiday and his claim that allowing offshore drilling could have an immediate effect on gas prices, both of which were almost universally derided by economists across the ideological spectrum. [The Politico]

And Paul Krugman says:

Most criticism of John McCain’s decision to follow the Bush administration’s lead and embrace offshore drilling as the answer to high gas prices has focused on the accusation that it’s junk economics — which it is.

A McCain campaign ad says that gas prices are high right now because “some in Washington are still saying no to drilling in America.” That’s just plain dishonest: the U.S. government’s own Energy Information Administration says that removing restrictions on offshore drilling wouldn’t lead to any additional domestic oil production until 2017, and that even at its peak the extra production would have an “insignificant” impact on oil prices.

What’s even more important than Mr. McCain’s bad economics, however, is what his reversal on this issue — he was against offshore drilling before he was for it — says about his priorities.

How are so many people even considering voting for this guy?

Here are the top five reasons why I am voting for Barack Obama:

1. The Economy - In 2009 the United States is projected to have a deficit of more than $480 BILLION.  Our national debt is quickly climbing to $10 TRILLION.  Republicans have run our economy into the ground with their irresponsible fiscal policies, and our children (and their children) will pay the price.  It is no easy task to pay off $10 trillion dollars in debt.  As if our nation’s cash flow problems weren’t enough to be concerned about, the American people aren’t doing so great these days either.  With gas at $4 a gallon, and many foods at all time high prices, many American families are struggling to get by.  Jobs are being lost, and not being replaced.  Paul Krugman posted a graph of employment growth for each president back to Dwight Eisenhower.  Notice the clear difference between the Democrats and the Republicans.  The Republican Party has proven time and time again that they are not good stewards of the economy.  It’s time to go with a Democrat.
2. The Iraq War - The Iraq War was a mistake from day one.  Saddam Hussein was a terrible human being, but he posed little threat to the United States.  He had no weapons of mass destruction; he was surrounded by nations that despised him and would contain him (Israel, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Turkey, Iran - not to mention the American patrolled no fly zones).  Furthermore, Saddam had no role whatsoever in the planning, funding, or execution of the 9/11 attacks.  Yes, the Iraqi people are better off without Saddam Hussein.  But Iraq distracted us from the war we should have been fighting.  It is still distracting us from the war we should be fighting.  The Iraqi government and military can step up and take control of their nation.  It’s time for the United States to withdraw and refocus it’s military efforts where they are most needed.  Barack Obama supports withdrawal in 16 months so that we can do just that.  Which of course brings me to reason 3.
3. The War in Afghanistan - Obama recognizes that Afghanistan is the central front in the War on Terror.  He advocates sending at least an additional two brigades to Afghanistan.  We should have had these extra troops there in the first place.  It is well documented that Osama bin Laden was in Tora Bora when we bombed it, but slipped out through the mountain passes.  We did not have enough troops to adequately secure the area to assure his death or capture.  This is a mistake that will not be made a second time if Barack Obama is president.  On September 11th, 2001 Al Qaeda, on the orders of Osama bin Laden, attacked the United States and killed more than 3,000 people.  in the 7 years since the Bush Administration has failed to capture or kill bin Laden.  It’s clear that Republican priorities are flawed, but John McCain wants to continue those policies.  Barack Obama will capture kill Osama bin Laden because his foreign policy will be focused on Afghanistan and dismantling terror networks, rather than foolish and costly preemptive wars.
4. Health Care - The health care system in the United States is a mess.  Despite spending far more on health care than any other industrialized nation, Americans often receive worse care.  American life expectancy and infant mortality rates have fallen behind other modernized nations.  A major part of the problem is that the lack of quality, affordable health care means that our system focuses on curing an illness rather than preventing it in the first place.  Barack Obama has a health care plan that will give access to quality, affordable health care to every single American.  John McCain does not.  If your health is important to you, the choice in this election is clear.
5. Energy - Our economy and our planet are both in peril and a major reason is our dependence on fossil fuels.  Not only is this an economic and ecological problem, but it is also a national security problem.  We cannot rely on foreign sources of energy and maintain our position as the worlds only superpower.  John McCain’s solution is to drill offshore, drill in Alaska, and drill everywhere else we can put an oil well.  But we can’t drill our way out of this problem.  Barack Obama’s energy plan will guide our nation to energy independence with the use of clean, renewable sources of energy such as wind and solar.

Posted By: Nick

 
Senator Diane Feinstain (D-CA) writes in the LATimes today about Offshore Drilling.  I find myself frequently disagreeing with Feinstein so it’s refreshing to have her on the right side of this issue.

There is no quick fix to $4.50-a-gallon gas, no way to provide instant relief to consumers we know are hurting. Yet President Bush and others continue to push the false promise of offshore oil drilling.

Just this week, the president lifted the executive order banning drilling that George H.W. Bush put in place in 1990. And he’s asked Congress to lift its own moratorium on oil exploration on the outer continental shelf — which includes coastal waters as close as three miles from shore.

This would be a terrible mistake. It would put our nation’s precious coastlines in jeopardy and wouldn’t begin to fix the underlying energy-supply problem. And it surely wouldn’t ease gas prices any time in the near future.

Correct so far.  Offshore Drilling is a Republican scam.  It’s a fake solution to the oil issue, designed to get easy votes.  Feinstein then points out the fun fact that many people aren’t aware of:

Meantime, energy companies haven’t fully utilized their existing permits to drill on another 68 million acres of federal lands and waters. Exploiting these areas probably could double U.S. oil production and increase natural gas production by 75%.

You see, the oil companies have access to millions of acres, but they don’t want to deal with them.  If they did, we’d have a substantial increase in oil production, even more than offshore drilling would provide.  Why aren’t they drilling where they have access already?

Feinstein points out the fundamental truth to our situation:

We cannot drill our way out of the energy problem. Our nation doesn’t need smooth talk and rosy scenarios. We need a clear-eyed view of our energy situation….

Changing our nation’s fuel consumption pattern is an enormous endeavor. It will take years. But this is the reality we face. And there’s no time to waste.

I’m glad she’s taking the lead on this issue and pushing for some real solutions instead of feel-good measures that will only worsen our situation in the long run.  Great job Senator Feinstein!

Posted By: Nick

 
OK, maybe not everyone.  But President Bush held a press conference about the economy and Barack Obama gave a speech about Iraq to follow up on his Op-Ed from yesterday.

The President said the economy really isn’t that bad and any problems we do have are the Democrats fault.  Thanks for informing us George.  And then he offered up this wonderful insight:

Bush acknowledged it could take years before opening the Outer Continental Shelf to oil drilling would result in increased U.S. production. But, he said, at least it would put the nation on the right track toward reducing its reliance on imported oil.

Brilliant.  What is it?  6 more months of this guy?  Ugh….

Obama is still talking as I write this, but since the campaign releases advanced copies of the speech (and it’s basically just saying what his NYTimes Op-Ed said) we already know what it’s all about.

“This war distracts us from every threat that we face and so many opportunities we could seize. This war diminishes our security, our standing in the world, our military, our economy, and the resources that we need to confront the challenges of the 21st century….”

“By any measure, our single-minded and open-ended focus on Iraq is not a sound strategy for keeping America safe,” Obama will say, according to excerpts of his prepared remarks.

I’m sure the McCain campaign has an opinion on some (all?) of these issues, but who really cares, right?

Posted By: Nick

 
So Politico has this story up about how the Democrats in the Senate are just about ready to capitulate on offshore drilling.  This is so incredibly stupid on so many levels and serves as a good example of what’s wrong with the Democratic Party.  In my previous post I mentioned that we should cut Obama some slack for compromising here and there if it’ll get him elected.  I don’t want that to be confused with compromising EVERYWHERE and especially on issues like this that Democrats can win by taking the intelligent position.

Offshore drilling is bad policy:

The Environment: This is actually not the biggest reason that offshore drilling is dumb.  But it is a factor in the whole picture.  Oil spills are extremely harmful to the environment and very costly (both in terms of cleanup and in terms of lost tourism dollars for the affected areas).  While technology has improved and spills are less likely, the risk is still there, and the consequences are very harmful.  Oh, and don’t forget the whole global warming thing.  More oil means more warming.

Oil Prices: This is the big issue.  The argument is that if we increase the supply of oil (by drilling offshore), prices will go down.  Basic supply and demand.  Pretty simple logic right?  Except for the fact that drilling offshore will not lower oil prices.  Most estimates are that it will take anywhere from 10-20 years before any oil is coming in from new oil rigs.  In the meantime, we continue our current situation of ever-increasing oil prices.  Furthermore, the amount of oil that will be produced is such a minor increase in world supply that prices will barely change.  Basically it’ll save you a few cents/gallon for gas.  The whole issue is a Republican attempt to sell something that sounds great (More Oil!  Cheaper Gas!) to help their election chances.

Alternative (Green) Energy: Finally, increased oil production only serves to make us less likely to invest in alternative fuels.  None of us like paying $4/gallon for gas (it’s actually closer to $5/gallon here in CA), but the benefit of expensive oil is that it creates incentive to research and develop alternative energy sources.  If we drill offshore, drill in ANWR, convince OPEC to massively increase production, and somehow get oil prices back to a more reasonable level (not likely even if all of that occurs), then suddenly it’s not a good investment to spend money researching alternatives.  It merely prolongs our problem.

National Security: This is an issue that isn’t brought up as much as it should be.  Our military runs on oil.  Other than the nuclear reactors that power our submarines and aircraft carriers, pretty much anything else that moves, moves because of oil.  If oil runs out (or we can’t afford it), then we effectively have no military.  We need alternatives ASAP.  This is something that I would think both parties could understand and work to resolve, but few people are talking about it.

We need to break our addiction from oil and we need to do it now.  Drilling for oil offshore is not a solution, it’s a political stunt that will severely harm our nation in a number of ways.  Democrats need to take the lead on this issue; they need to explain why it’s bad policy, and then they need to offer a clear and intelligent energy plan as an alternative.  Democrats can win on this issue, but only if they have the courage to lead.

UPDATE: Speaker Pelosi does the right thing and strongly condemns Offshore Drilling.

“This call for drilling in areas that are protected is a hoax, it’s an absolute hoax on the part of the Republicans and this administration” Pelosi said at her weekly press conference. “It’s a decoy to punt your attention away from the fact that their policies have produced $4-a-gallon gasoline.”

Good to see someone in the Democratic Leadership taking the right position on this issue.  Too bad Harry Reid won’t do the same.