Democrats Ignoring Best Way to Create Energy Independence
Earlier this week I received the following from Claire McCaskill, a candidate for U.S. Senate from Missouri:
ST. LOUIS — U.S. Senate Candidate Claire McCaskill will visit Fenton, Cape Girardeau, and New Madrid on Wednesday, July 19th, Macon, Columbia, Osage Beach, and Rolla on Thursday, July 20th, and Marshall, Kansas City, and Nevada on Friday, July 21st. Meeting with local farmers, consumers, and community members, she will discuss her plan to bring down the price of gas at the pump and end our dependence on Middle Eastern oil.
At a time when Missouri families are suffering from record gas prices, Claire believes we need to strive for energy independence. Our addiction to oil poses a threat not only to our pocketbooks, but to America’s national security as we rely on unstable regimes for our oil. A responsible energy plan will protect consumers, encourage alternative fuels, and reduce our reliance on oil through developing renewable sources of energy and improving end-use efficiency. It will also help revitalize Missouri’s rural economies.
“Now more than ever, it is necessary for the United States to get serious about energy independence,” said McCaskill. “Alternative and renewable energy sources offer the greatest hope for our energy security. Investment in these technologies will not only reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil, but also stimulate the Missouri economy since our state is a national leader in ethanol production.”
McCaskill’s plan for energy independence will feature detailed measures to protect consumers from price gouging, promote ethanol, alternative fuels, and renewable energy, increase fuel economy, and improve energy efficiency. When Claire goes to Washington, she will be a Senator on the side of Missouri farmers and consumers, not big oil.
“Bring down the price of gas at the pump?” Is she kidding? The “solutions” are what people want to hear — we’ll grow ethanol so farmers will be happy and everyone can keep driving their Hummer. Vote for us and everything will be just fine. BS! Re-read the above — not a single word about actually reducing the use of energy through increased mass transit or discouraging suburban sprawl. All the “solutions” are simply replacements for oil and perhaps modest improvements to the fuel efficiency of future new cars.
I’m going to vote for McCaskill simply because I believe Jim Talent represents an evil wing of the Republican party. But, I am not voting for her nor for the Democrats. The Democrats don’t want to tell the public the truth anymore than the Republicans do: we use too damn much energy as a society and we cannot afford to continue doing so!
– Steve
I can’t get too excited about this nonsense, because there’s not much risk that they actually will be able to bring down prices at the pump. I think the market is finally going to start enforcing the sustainable behaviors that our politicians have never summoned the nerve to encourage through policy.
(Being a City resident that only has to visit the pump a handful of times annually probably contributes to my disinterest. It seems to also contribute to my irrelevance to state politics.)
McCaskill is the worst type of politican. She is manipulative and lies. There is no way around those facts. I don’t trust one word she says, especialy after seeing her debates with Holden where she took advantage of a man who had both done the best he could in a difficult period and genuninely supoorted the St. Louis metro. It would be a mistake to vote for McCaskill as even if you don’t like Talent at least you know where he stands. That’s not something you can ever say for McCaskill.
[REPLY – No way in hell will I be voting for Talent, just ain’t gunna happen!!!! – SLP]
Thanks, Steve, for continuing to tell the truth, which is that the problem is private transportation, not which fuel we use.
I recently went to a fundraiser for Claire and in all was impressed by her.
I asked Claire about Global Warming and its importance on the coming elections. She went on to talk about lower gas prices. I was disappointed that this was her response. She may be focused on lower gas prices since most Missourians will understand this concept. Mass transit does not mean much to most other than city dwellers. She already has their vote.
Claire will get my vote…not just because she is a Democrat, though because she gets the issues and the insanity of the Bush era. I just hope she puts more thought into Global Warming.
Toe the party line if you choose, but just realize that while Talent isn’t the most verocious defender of STL City, it is very clear that McCaskill will do NOTHING to help STL City, esp. in regards to improving streetscapes, highways, transit, or any number of other urban issues.
I encourage all to take a look at the respective canidates webpages. Take a look at the issues the address and more importantly how they address them. Many may not vote for Talent because of disagrements over social issues, but when it comes down to it, McCaskill is the rural canidate through and through.
debating which canidate is better than the other is like saying green M&M’s taste better than brown M&M’s.
underneath the pretty candy coating, they’re all the SAME underneath.
^That’s a great analogy.
The M&M comment about the candidates is well taken: they’re both going to demagogue this issue for votes. I think a point being lost in this comment debate is that with gas prices rising, the market, rather than politicians will drive change in the direction you hope for, Steve.
Even if we used all the crop land in the US to make ethanol, we would only replace a small fraction of the gasoline that we use. The energy return on energy invested (EROEI) of ethanol is 1.0:1.06 if optimized. That is; for every unit of energy invested you will get 1.06 units back from the ethanol. Oil has an EROEI of 1.0:30 For our high energy society there is NO replacement for oil. No alternatives or combination has the energy density of oil (solar panels do not grow on trees, aluminum for wind mills requires large energy inputs for smelting and hydrogen requires energy to make). Conservation and powering down are the only way to a sustainable society. As it stands, the concept of energy independance in the USA is a red hering issue.
McClaskill always rubbed me the wrong way. She seems like she’s not afraid to play dirty.
But she’s right, I believe the most critical issue facing this country (and the world) right now is energy independence but I also believe that it has (and should have) nothing to do with “protecting the consumer” per se. If anyone needs redirection (not protection) it’s the consumer. I know I’ll get heat for saying this, and I don’t mean it in a spiteful or inconsiderate way, but the consumer of energy is (fourth only to our negligent government, irresponsible energy companies, and the vast majority of the auto industry) one of the greatest culprits in the crime against humanity that has been caused by our excessive consumption of carbon based energy.
Also, her measures are too weak and too obviously in the interest of winning votes and not correcting the problem.
The truth is that we are ALL to blame for the energy crisis on some level. And she’s misinterpreted the “crisis”. The “crisis” is not sky high oil prices. The crisis is the fact of global warming, the very real potential of peak oil, the crippling of society and culture through the vast consumption of land that is sprawl and the resulting massacre of the environment. And I’m not an “environmentalist” whining about the environment for its own sake… I’m whining about it for my sake and everyone I know and everyone you know and everyone they know.
Democrats and Republicans alike need to address the real issues and not cushion them in phrases like “protecting the consumer”. I just wish we’d get a politician who understood the real issus and could be serious about them, cite their sources, and not be afraid to hurt our feelings, scare us, or lose our votes.
On the consumer point, I wish the politicians would call us citizens and not consumers. That is just dangerous terminology.
While the price of fuel is not popular with anyone, the availability of cheap fuel,low energy taxes and a highly subsidized highway network has really done a lot the create the non urban culture that makes us so dependent upon cheap fuel.
A truly honest politician would explain that energy independence does not mean low priced energy.
It may be necessary to keep high priced energy for a decade or more to allow the nation to change its energy culture and infrastructure. As a nation of consumers, we are still purchasing huge pick up trucks and SUV’s. We are still building auto only suburban commercial developments (look at the Metro East developments springing up on interstate interchanges. No mixed use developments there.)
We are still dying to build another bridge across the Mississippi instead of investing in a northern Metro Link alignment to Madison County.
Quite frankly we might consider tolls on every bridge over the Missouri and Mississippi as part of a strategy to encourage a structural shift to a more urban redevelopment. We might consider a fuel tax that keeps fuel prices from dropping if the market price from the world market decreases. These “tax” strategies might create a more consistent carbon fuel price that would make investments in alternative fuels more economically viable.
Alas, no politician will advocate that sort of strategy. Long term, strategic shifts are difficult to achieve in the short term democratic politics of America today. So for that reason, it may be that the Middle East oil monopolists may be able to help us change our culture and economy more that any of our political leaders.
Solution:
1. Congress shall no longer fund any new highway projects, rahter focus on mass transit
2. Suburban sprawl can only be financed by the private sector, or local governments
Problem solved.
The huge federal dollars keep the sprawl going. Local governments could only fund smaller county roads, rahter than large highways. The private sector would turn to urban cities for development, as it would be more profitable due to TIF’s in the City. If the private sector had to fund the infrastructure for sprawl, they would move on.
When one travels 30 miles + per day, thats a problem.
If I owned a Hummer, but only drived 5 miles per day, roughly, to and from work, or only on the weekends, and used mass transit, problem solved.
Suburbs are the reason we have high gas prices.
Government research into new fuels or simply adding price controls will not solve the root problem which is suburbanization.
No one mentions mandatory Net Metering billing practices by electric companies or the fact that Missouri is only one of 15 banjo picking states that doesn’t require it. Most experts agree ( including reps from MO DNR) that this is necessary for the expansion of Alternative energy practices. For example solar panels are part of new construction in many states. Not here !!! Too much money to be made by Ameren. And they want to raise rates. The bile rises to my throat.
Can’t believe Ms. McCaskill called our President a murderer and left people on top of roofs in New Orleans because they were poor and black. She didn’t really say that, did she? I also heard she ‘stands by what she said, and will not apologize’. If that is true, I really don’t want her representing me.
Looked through the ST Louis paper this morning,,,,not a word about it, but an article about the California Governor making a phrase about Latinos (to which they did not apparently object) and he apologized.
Why are you surprised there wasn’t a word about McCaskill’s outrageous comments…the St. Louis Post Dispatch (or Compost Dispatch as many like to say) is a left wing rag. They obviously saw nothing wrong with it or didn’t want to make a big deal of it to damage one of their candidates.
One could say the same thing of McCaskill, that she is willing to let women be raped and the elderly robbed because she is against right to carry. She is your typical anti gun Democrat, a very good reason not to put her in office.
Why are you surprised there wasn’t a word about McCaskill’s outrageous comments…the St. Louis Post Dispatch (or Compost Dispatch as many like to say) is a left wing rag. They obviously saw nothing wrong with it or didn’t want to make a big deal of it to damage one of their candidates.
One could say the same thing of McCaskill, that she is willing to let women be raped and the elderly robbed because she is against right to carry. She is your typical anti gun Democrat, a very good reason not to put her in office.