Energy Honesty (Not)

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee – as well as most Democrats – believes passionately that the American people are idiots.

How else to explain their most recent ad (they took credit for the "content" of said ad, despite the utter lack of content) and for their absurd energy policies.

Let’s start with certain basics: if the demand for a particular product increases, so will its price. If government artificially constricts supply, prices will increase. These are immutable economic laws, not subject to political amendment or repeal. And they apply to oil in spades.

And let’s be absolutely clear: Leftists HATE oil. They’re absolutely delighted about high prices and only wish that the continue to skyrocket. For decades, they have pursued policies – assertedly in support of the environment – intended to constrict supplies and drive up prices. An honest leftist admits it; alas, honest leftist – outside of university faculties – are rare birds and, in politics, vanishingly rare, for the simple reason that their policies are often wildly unpopular, when fully understood.

And, so, we find Barack Obama desperately backpedaling on guns, on trade, even on Iraq, because he knows that the people reject the sort of extremism he espoused to prevail over his equally radical primary adversary. Pandering to Moveon may work in March, but it’s a recipe for getting 40% of the vote in November.

Which brings us back to oil. America, alone in the world, refuses to exploit its natural resources. It must puzzle the Russians mightily, as they strive mightily to develop their oil fields in Siberia, that America refuses to exploit its resources in similar areas in Alaska, based upon the wholly ridiculous notion that it might tick off a few caribou. Cuba and China must be laughing, as they prepare to exploit oil resources not far from Florida, that Democrats in Congress refuse to permit American companies to do the same thing. Britain and Norway, as they drill in the North Sea, must chuckle to themselves that the most technologically advanced nation in the world quakes with fear at the small risk associated with ocean drilling. And Brazil must be positively giddy, as they prepare to do the same.

And, all the while, our good buddies in the Middle East laugh all the way to the bank, raking in tens of billions a month from Americans, while are oil resources stay in the ground.

All because Democrats are simply too fastidious to dig holes in the ground.

But, now, because their policies had the entirely predictable result – indeed, the very result they intended – and produced huge price increases, the Left is in a panic. Surprisingly, people actually hate high gas prices and have begun to realize that they’re the Democrats’ fault. And, so, fearful that the people seem to be catching on, the Democrats are casting about for someone on whom to fix the blame.

They settled on speculators and oil companies.

Yup. Right. Those nasty folks who buy and sell commodities futures must be the cause. Or, alternatively, the companies that actually bring the (mostly foreign) oil to us. They’re making a lot of money selling gas (not nearly as much as government, but there’s no such thing as a windfall tax) and that, of course, must be Bad.

So, the Left’s solution? Slap a big tax on oil companies and stop futures trading.

That’ll work, for sure. Tax increases ALWAYS produce lower prices, right?

There are two ways to reduce prices: reduce demand and/or increase supplies. Period.

Demand can be addressed in numerous ways, most of which the Democrats refuse to consider. For example, for years now, a bill has been pending in the Legislature to exempt high mileage vehicles from the sales tax, a huge benefit to those wishing to do the environmentally responsible thing. Indeed, the present sponsor is none other than Linda Stender; one might think that her Party, if only for the crass purpose of advancing her congressional campaign, might post a proposal which is both taxpayer and environmentally friendly (an astonishing rarity). But, no. That would mean a revenue loss. The Left will happily spend taxpayer money on such products, through government, but will not forego revenue for the same purpose.

Too, although championing alternative fuels, the Democrats have done nothing to reverse the inane tariff on imported ethanol. Although biofuels have been revealed as deeply problematic – the recent run up in food prices is the entirely predictable result of using corn for fuel rather than for food – if Brazil and other nations blessed with the right climate to grow sugar use it for fuel and wish to sell it to us, why, pray tell, do we discourage that?

But the Left wants it both ways: it wants high oil prices and to evade the wrath of the public over high gas prices. Ergo their tactic of pinning the blame on the oil companies for the problems leftist "environmental" policies produced.

Let’s be clear: for the foreseeable future, oil will be a necessary commodity. While the price will certainly increase (hopefully slowly, to permit economic adjustment, rather than suddenly as it has recently) over time as demand waxes and supplies wane, that is no warrant to refuse to employ the supplies we already have. Leaving tens, if not hundreds of billions of barrels of oil in the ground massively increases prices and dependency upon foreign sources. The fault for that rests squarely on the shoulders of the political Left.

If the Left had the courage of its convictions, it would state, outright: "Oil is bad. Higher prices encourage people to use more environmentally friendly fuels and to use less of them, which is good. We FAVOR high oil prices and hope they go higher. If you want lower prices, vote Republican, because they’ll drill off our coasts, in Alaska, or wherever else it might be found. We won’t because we think it’s a bad idea. Make your electoral choices accordingly."

Conservatives, contrariwise, say: "we think high oil prices are bad and hurt the economy. We’re not going to wean ourselves from oil tomorrow, although it’s a salutary goal to stop sending money overseas to despots and tyrants. The best way to do that is to responsibly develop all domestic sources, which will help reduce prices at home and leave us less dependent upon evil folks for our energy. (Oh, and we like atomic power, too, and aren’t opposed to damming up rivers, like they are)."

And if the electorate feels that it’s best served by higher energy prices, it would vote for Democrats. If not, it would vote for Republicans. Simple.

But it will not do for the Democrats to attempt to flee from the intended consequences of their own policies. Simple honesty may be in short supply, but I thought this was the year for the politics of "change". The first "change" should be treat the electorate like adults and take the consequences of your own policy positions.