The Spam We Need February 10, 2009
Posted by jdf15 in Congress, Election.Tags: Bipartisanship, Congress, Democrats, House of Representatives, Jim Demint, John McCain, Partisanship, Politics, Pork, Republicans, Senate, Spam, Stimulus, Zach Wamp
add a comment
For at least the next two years, the impotent Republican minority in the House of Representatives will produce nothing but drama and headlines. And the theme of this show will be partisanship. President Obama promised us a new era of bipartisanship, so whenever he supports a Democratic policy, Republicans are crying foul. Disregarding the fact that liberals got “partisan-ed” pretty hard during Bush II years, let’s examine what bipartisanship really means today.
First, “partisan” does not deserve such a negative connotation; it describes how our legislature functions. Two parties with widely differing ideologies will obviously support the solutions they believe will work, as they have for centuries.
When Obama won, the phrase ‘mandate for change’ surfaced – the sense that a clear majority of Americans trusted that this Democratic president had a better platform to fix our country. For Obama to now embrace Republican plans for a stimulus package (mainly tax breaks) would violate the trust of every person who voted for him. Americans elected Democrats into the White House and clear majorities in the House and the Senate. This is not a product of random chance.
2008 election results with states scaled by population. See all the blue?
Worthy or not, Republicans successfully cast themselves as the party of “tax breaks.” And if that is your single, shortsighted priority for our government, it seems clear you should vote Republican. But in November, America did not. So last month, when Obama was asked why there weren’t more Republican ideas in his stimulus plan and he replied “I won,” his response was not only delightfully honest but informative.
Bipartisanship means understanding, respecting, and listening to the opposition. Obama is doing that. Sometimes it means making compromises too, but not on everything. I’m no economist, so let’s try this from a civics perspective: in a democratic republic, citizens vote for the people they think will choose what is best for their country. Because Republican policies and leadership failed us so spectacularly during the last eight years, we voted them out of power. We already tried pure tax breaks – they didn’t work. And there’s a reason Albert Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” So maybe this time our government should actually govern?
But no, Republicans want to give tax breaks another whirl. All 188 of them in the House voted against the stimulus bill (which still passed easily). But they are quite proud of their completely ineffective yet unanimous opposition. They even view it as a victory because Obama spent time meeting with them. Rep. Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.) explained, “if he comes and meets with us like that and it doesn’t have an impact, it begins to hurt his credibility.” …Or alternatively, one could interpret that to mean that Republicans are equally unwilling to compromise on their core beliefs and voted with their party. What’s that called again? Oh yeah, “partisan.” Bipartisanship is a two-way street, not the unilateral acquiescence of a ruling majority.
While Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) proposes a $3.1 trillion tax break “stimulus” alternative, his fellow Republicans oppose the current $838 billion plan as wastefully large. Highlighting minor expenditures (like the efficiency measures I last wrote about), they’ve framed the bill as a giant helping of congressional pork. But this label doesn’t quite fit.
Legislative “pork” is normally funding for projects that benefit only a small constituency, frequently within a single congressperson’s district. Most of the “controversial” stimulus expenditures fund broader objectives, such as anti-smoking campaigns. These seem more like “riders,” unrelated and often contentious provisions attached to a larger, important bill that is likely to pass. But this comparison doesn’t work either, because these expenditures themselves are the bill. That would make the stimulus package some kind of conglomeration of self-propelling riders, or maybe “meta-pork,” but that’s a little confusing.
Given the difficulty of classifying this project and our penchant for labeling legislation as meat, I propose that this bill is most like spam: nobody really knows quite what it is, it’s probably a lot of different things mashed together, and whatever it is, it’s going to be around for a while. It’s not your first choice, but you’d certainly eat it if you were starving.
...yum.
This stimulus spam is not perfect, but our economy is famished. Barring a government-wide “kumbaya” moment, continued debate will accomplish little. I concede that some of the proposed expenditures would not provide short-term economic stimulus and perhaps should be removed, but the Democratic agenda has long been stifled and a crisis is indeed a terrible thing to waste. And it’s worth mentioning that many of the “jobless” investments, like the anti-smoking campaign or computerizing medical records, would surely save money in the long run.
Regardless, the performance of our economy during this administration will be attributed to, or blamed on, Democrats; if we’re shouldering all the risk, we might as well do this our way (if we can get the votes in the Senate). Claims of partisanship are the crutch of an intellectually bankrupt Republican party that has nothing new to offer.
Last week, Sen. John McCain sent an email to his supporters with an anti-stimulus petition. He wrote, “With so much at stake, the last thing we need is partisanship driving our attempts to turn the economy around.” But is partisanship really worse than a prolonged, deeper recession? I don’t think so.
A version of this post ran in The Chronicle at Duke University.
Offshore Drilling: They’re Lying. September 17, 2008
Posted by jdf15 in Offshore Drilling.Tags: ANWR, Gas, Gas Prices, House of Representatives, OCS, Offshore Drilling, Oil
4 comments
Yesterday the House of Representatives passed the “Comprehensive American Energy Security & Consumer Protection Act.” This bill has a lot of good policies in it, such as renewable tax credit extensions, repealing oil company subsidies, and establishing a national renewable energy standard. It also compromises a lot (read: bad policies). The most notable of these is the opening of the outer continental shelf (OCS) to oil companies. In light of this development, I have decided to write my long overdue post on offshore drilling.
Over the last few months, offshore drilling has been all over the media, largely is response to a major propaganda push by the GOP. Republicans would have you believe that science is a political debate, but there are some things that just cannot be spun. In this post, I will attempt to clearly explain why this gimmick will not help our country both to help clear up any uncertainties and, with any luck, to arm you with the facts to help explain this to people you know. Because we need to talk about this – the Republicans certainly are. And they’re winning. So we begin:
1) Domestic drilling cannot lower oil prices. We, the US, represent 25% of world oil demand and <3% of the world’s supply (EIA International Energy Outlook 2004). Oil prices are determined on the global market, and we produce so little that we simply can’t affect prices from the supply side. Gas price fluctuations in response to regional disruptions in refining capabilities (such as we see in the wake of hurricanes) are an exception, but they just raise prices even higher and cannot drop prices below the floor set by the global market. And since OPEC is a cartel, even if we were miraculously able to significantly affect prices, OPEC could just reduce their supply to negate that effect.
We don't have enough oil to drill ourselves out of this problem.
2) Drilling won’t lower gas prices. Even if we were to tap all of our resources, including OCS and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), according to Bush’s own EIA and EPA, drilling would not have a significant impact on prices. We’re talking gas prices lowered by about 4-6 cents/gallon in 2030.
If you listen to what Bush, Gingrich, McConnell, Boehner, and now McCain/Palin, are actually saying, they even admit that increasing supply can’t bring down oil prices. They are saying things like “the market signal will ease pressure on gas prices.” What that translates to is “drilling won’t bring down prices, but we’re hoping people are stupid enough to believe that it will and stop speculating oil futures so high.” Which won’t work for long if at all. They are choosing their words carefully, but even the biggest drilling advocates tacitly admit this is a political gimmick.
3) Drilling is a long-term proposition. This is not at all a short-term idea (I refuse to use the word ‘solution’ in this context). Even if we opened ANWR and the continental shelf tomorrow, oil wouldn’t begin to flow for 10 years and maximum production wouldn’t be achieved until 2027. Only THEN could we get our prices lowered by less than 6 cents/gallon.
4) We don’t have nationalized oil companies. In many other countries, oil companies are government-run. A country taps its own resources and distributes them as the government sees fit. That, for better or for worse, does not happen here. “Our” oil companies are giant, private companies that span the globe and act in the interest of their stockholders. Just because American companies get oil does not mean we do. Does anyone else find it suspicious that the oil companies tell us we just need to increase supply in the same year that American petroleum exports reached a record high?
"Our" oil companies are EXPORTING record amounts of petroleum products. But really, we just need more supply. They swear.
Industry front groups try to set up cost-benefit analyses to show us how much money we save/earn by drilling domestically, but the American people (who do not own stock in Exxon) don’t benefit from US oil company profits. We still pay the same money for the same gas. I’m not endorsing foreign oil, I’m just saying that US oil companies are not our saviors or even our friends. They are just companies trying to make as much money as they can.
5) Big Oil profits from our suffering. With soaring gas prices in recent years, the oil companies have been posting record profits while the American public has struggled. The fanatical support oil companies enjoy from the rank and file Republican is sadly ironic as these companies profit at the expense of regular people and, while they do contribute handsomely to campaigns, do nothing for the everyday people who champion their cause. It really is a testament to the expertise with which the GOP and industry advertising/lobbyists manipulate the public. And to add insult to injury, the Big 5 are spending most of their profits on buying back their own stock. They are spending under 4% of their profits on exploration for new oil and even less on research and development. This makes me pretty angry, but I’ve had people tell me “well, they’re private companies making a profit. Good for them.” Just because I am a Democrat does not mean I automatically begrudge businesses for their success; this is different for one fundamental reason: the oil industry is very heavily subsidized; oil companies receive millions and millions of taxpayer dollars and tax breaks each year. If they are going to continue to be supported by the American people, they must act on our behalf. Their expenditures clearly indicate that they do not.
6) They can increase supply without offshore drilling. There is plenty of oil available to oil companies even without this new bill. There are millions of acres across the country currently available for purchase or not being utilized. Furthermore, there is a great deal of oil still sitting in the ground beneath tapped wells. Conventional drilling techniques by no means empty a reservoir; there are numerous Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOC) techniques that could help us get more oil out of our existing wells right now (for example by injecting steam into the ground to increase pressure in the well and draw oil out of the surrounding rocks). But the industry rarely employs them. Some of these techniques could even sequester carbon underground (click the EOC link above) and help us fight global warming even while we make the most of our current drilling infrastructure. If the oil companies really wanted to increase supply they could; this is a last ditch land grab before Bush leaves office.
So there it is: offshore drilling is not the answer. It just isn’t. There is no substantive debate on the issue. In fact, more drilling isn’t even part of the solution. The “All of the Above” scam the GOP is pushing is terrible for so many reasons it would require its own post. So what IS the solution? A comprehensive strategy of clean energy in conjunction with increased efficiency and conservation. It may not be sexy, but that’s what we have to do. The Natural Resources Defense Council outlines the plan in this fact sheet and the graph below shows how such a plan could actually help us in the short term and dwarf the “benefits” of increased drilling in the long term.
Mother Knows Best August 7, 2008
Posted by jdf15 in Congress, Offshore Drilling.Tags: Boehner, Congress, Energy, House of Representatives, Offshore Drilling, Pelosi, Shadow Session
add a comment
As you may be aware, while most of Congress is away on its August recess, a few Republicans have remained in DC. They are currently engaged in what they have dubbed the “Shadow Session,” lending some credence to the evil-Republican connotation that has been developing of late. Yet these shadows, unlike the election woes their party currently faces, are not of their own creation. Instead, this “session” is actually being held the dark.
Let’s go back to the last Friday to set the scene. The House of Representatives faced a routine vote to adjourn for their recess, but the measure squeaked by on a slim 213-197 margin. Those voting against the congressional summer break wanted to capitalize on the increasing support for offshore drilling, and thought that the House should not take its vacation until they voted on drilling. While saving the merits of offshore drilling for a later post (preview: there aren’t any for you or me), what happened next was somewhat comical. After the vote passed, the vast majority of the members left the building, threw the papers from their briefcases into the air as they ran out onto the Capitol steps, and went back home to their respective districts. However, a few members remained on the floor. These selfless public servants decided to do what they do best – talk.
There was only one small problem with their plan: school was out for summer. I don’t know how many of you have a mother, but if you do you may remember that they like to constantly remind (nag) you about the things you’ve forgotten to do, those little bad habits they are trying to correct. You know, make your bed. Eat your vegetables. Turn out the light when you leave the room. Well House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) not only is a mother, but she clearly had a mother as well, because she did what any good girl does when she leaves her Capitol building for the summer – she turned out the lights. And the C-SPAN cameras.
So now the GOP is all up in arms because Pelosi left them in the dark. In the meantime, they have turned this into an historic PR stunt, and what started as a handful of congressmen and has swelled to a whopping 18 members, all of whom are essentially filibustering their own vacation. It’s a free for all for Republicans trying to get out a message. John McCain (R-AZ) is calling for an emergency session and scolding his colleagues for their inaction (despite being the least active Senator in Congress and the tiny detail that he hasn’t cast a vote in 4 months. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R–OH) is pressuring his fellow R’s to head back to DC – from the golf courses of his native Ohio. Even Newt Gingrich has crawled back onto scene to threaten to shut down the government again if we don’t give our country’s ailing oil companies another hand out. And believe it or not, none of these men have anything nice to say about Ms. Pelosi.
But if the Republicans can twist oversimplified economic principles to support their positions (look for my upcoming post on Offshore Drilling), so can I, and if a shortage of supply is causing high energy prices right now, you could get the same relief of an increased supply by decreasing demand. And what easier way to reduce demand than to turn off unneeded lights as you leave? So what our Shadow Congressmen see as a partisan move to silence their protest, I see as an energy solution that mom would be proud of.
The Capitol is a big building. Nancy is just saving a little energy to reward hard-working Americans with a little relief in their energy bills. Perhaps she should turn off the A/C too.
