McCain and Obama's energy opportunity

The differrence is one part acknowledges the economic law of supply and demand while the other party has yet to pass Econ 101.

It is not realistic to expect either candidate to fix a problem the US has known about for at least 35 yrs. Congress and past Presidents have failed us. Senator McCain campaigns on his years of experience, which should be turned on him now for no action to correct a known problem.

I applaud Senator Obama for not pandering to voters with gas tax holidays that Congress will not pass because it is a bad idea. Economist agree that the payoff for drilling offshore will be extremely small and will take 10 to 20 years to have any affect.

John McCain's financial adviser, Phil Gramm, former Texas (oil) senator was the primary force for deregulating futures trading (Enron) and the banking industry (subprime loans). Gramm and his wife received considerable money from lobbyists. Since deciding to run for President again, McCain has aligned himself with Gramm's efforts to make the wealthy richer.

President Bush (Texas oil) and VP Cheney (Halliburtion) have strong ties to oil lobbyists.

No one knows for sure what is happening on the unregulated (dark) markets to accurately determine whether speculation is driving oil prices.

There are many experts arguing both sides, which leaves Congress in a scary position. They have a valid concern that their actions might make things worse.

The substantial increase in oil futures and agricultural commodities seem to correlate with the use of electronic trading. In the past a person had to be on the floor at an exchange or telephone orders. Now traders have computers making decisions and placing trades without the need for a human to press the button. The volume of trading has zoomed with little regulatory oversight.

Until Congress and Presidents stop being controlled by lobbyist and learn from history that in the absence of strong regulation greed will win.

Still waiting for a viable candidate to tell the simole truth: corn-based ethanol is a recipe for environmental and economic disaster.

i am a very ardent supporter
of senator obama. i would challenge him to follow your advice. i could really care less
if some advisor thinks it might create an advantage for the other side. we need to work on this oil problem now and not defer tomorrow for another six months.

a solution: cyclonepower.com

I'm waiting for the candidate who promises a major nuclear program. Major funding for research immediately. 300% increase in the number of nuclear power stations in three years. We need real solutions - not rhetoric.

It is more than political infighting that has "derailed attempts to lessen the nation's oil dependence over the past few decades". Humans are inherently poor at planning for the future. Not surprising, since we evolved as a species to respond to immediate stimuli, not imagined (they are all imagined until they occur) events in the far distant future. Because of this, it is even more important, as Obama understands, for strong leadership to guide this country toward solutions and away from political muck. Energy dependence, global warming, terrorism are all wicked problems that require innovative solutions, not political spin.

How many times has a president called members of the opposition party to the Oval Office to sell them on his proposed budget or legislation? More likely, he calls in his own party for a pre-game pep rally, priming them to "take the field" and defeat the opposing team/party.
The partisanship of this country's politics is an artificially created duality, rising directly out of the two-party system. The majority of people in this country fall in the middle of the liberal/conservative bell curve. And even then, every person falls along a spectrum for each issue. In reality, there is no red/blue divide. This is something that is perpetuated by politicians and a media that is incapable of looking at the nuances of the issues.

In order to achieve innovative solutions to the wicked problems facing this country (and in many cases this world), the next president needs to step out of the stagnant politics of the last quarter century and earn the respect of all parties and citizens. It is time to "roll up our sleeves" and get busy. The next president should spend his four years in office working to improve this country and the fate of the world, instead of trying to get re-elected or protect his party. Shareholders don't expect the CEO to spend his or her time at the helm trying to stay at the helm. They expect success and inspiration. A president that offers straight talk and inspiration will be re-elected, even without spending four years campaigning for the next election.

Stop the Enron-like exploitation in the middleman market—
the Bubble that destroyed America

Global Responsibility

Drill off shore in America
--if it is safe to drill off shore everywhere else, then it is safe to drill off shore here.

as soon as we go for an alternative for foreign oil, and we are serious the price of oil comes down and we cease our efforts it will never stop so give it up and just keep paying

Oil prices are causing consumer pain.
It is profitable to address consumer pain.
Thus, the markets, not government, will move to address and resolve them, likely with imported technology such as electric cars.

By the way, it helps to remember that there are much better, less corrupt places to live than the USA, which itself is more company than country, more market
than main street.

Think of the USA for what it truly is, as a marketplace to be exploited, and angle to live somewhere else when you are done with your exploiting.

Our current energy problem is the result of our current energy policy which is brought to you by the GOP. We can't afford more of the McSame policies from McCain, a guy who admits that he knows NOTHING about economics or energy policy.

Here's some "straight-talk" from Mr Maverick on economics:
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVVIw7oZEyk&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/5/234655/6658

-

I really wonder why neither side is focusing on some of the less invasive forms of energy that are coming of age.
There is a company in Tampa FL that is not only getting energy but is opening some interesting possibilites for the formerly discredited "cold fusion"
There is a company in Canada that is marketing an electrical generator that will generate "free" electricity from a magnetic field for industrial applications.
Why are we not investigating this? It seems to me that magnetic engine cars are within reach although admittedly I am no engineer.

Obama would have us do nothing on energy. He's against all domestic production, including offshore and new, clean nuclear plants. The man is a luddite because his democrat masters tell him he must be according to their political philosophy NIMBY.

I found your editorial very thoughtful.

We do need an energy program, but I am concerned when we look to the federal government for the solution,

I am a physician that has practiced from the beginning of medicare. During this time, I have seen medicine go from excellence to mediocrity.

Alexis Tocqueville in his brilliant analysis of "Democracy in America" written in 1840, warned against "centralization of administration" [i.e. federal bureaucracy]. Therefore, a federal energy bureau may be inefficient at best.

The alternative would be a program similar to the space program which was a success.

We need less government mot more government. The american people have the ability -- They only need encouragement from the government.

Sincerely,

William J. Durick, M.D.

As long as Democrats block new domestic energy sources in the U.S. -- drilling for oil, new refineries, nuclear plants and clean burning coal power plants -- America will continue to be dependent upon Muslim Arab oil billionaires and assorted anti-American dictators. Does Obama have the courage to break with his extreme leftist minders to call for expansion of those proven and plentiful energy supplies or will he continue to mouth the fiction that a country can conserve itself into prosperity? I'm afraid the answer is a resounding NO!

Good article.

Sadly we all suffer from a worsening oil situation because our US. Politicians do not understanding the severity of our oil problems as they constantly jockey for political advantage.

Meanwhile the US continues its suffers as most of our population seems to not notice the origin of the oil problem.

The high cost of oil is due to world demand increasing faster than world supply. It’s just that simple. The democrats are really lost.

Someday oil will run out. Unfortunately no one knows when that will actually occur, but every day the world gets closer to the end of oil.

Oil trades in dollars and the supply of dollars are high in Asia due to our imbalance in trade. So now those dollars are spent on fuel for new Asian cars and their growing economies. A massive sum of dollars are flowing into the gulf countries that use them to buy US assets. Clearly the US is being weakened.

Moreover, the easy-to-develop oil fields are in obvious decline and deep-ocean potential oil sources are becoming more expenses to develop where the financial risk is great. Rigs are in short supply as are the service industries to maintain and operate them. The delay time to get new fields on line will take a decade or longer. So there is no short-term solution to the oil problem other than conservation. Mandate 55 MPH as the maximum speed as in the 1970s.

Certainly a new energy source is needed. It’s not corn-to-ethanol that consumes and inflated our food supply while at best just trades one fuel source (oil & gas) for another. It’s make-work and it is not even green. Other biofuels are also worthless distractions. Solar may work although the energy input is high vs the lifetime. Wind power looks good if we get DC transmission lines throughout the US. Nuclear needs to make up the difference and with type 4 reactors we can have hydrogen production for fertilizer, oil cracking and fuel cells in addition to electricity. We must conserve natural gas as it works well in private heating. Stop building gas-fired power plants as it wastes this resource.

Who can do all this when the government still thinks corn-to-ethanol is the green way to energy independence when it is neither and under continued government subsidy.

Rube, McCain has called for the expansion of nuclear power, but your 3 year time limit for construction is unrealistic.

Jim - actually in 1980's the oil and natural gas industry was deregulated which led to increased supplies and thus lower prices. One of the drivers of the economic prosperity we enjoyed over the past 25 years.

MJ - McCain has come out against ethanol subsidies while BO is in the pocket of ADM - large agri-business

On the heels of McCain's admission that his support of President Bush's proposal to open up the US coastline to offshore drilling would have ZERO short term effect on gas prices and would only give Americans a "psychological benefit" (read: voters think it sounds nice), here's another doozy.
http://weneedobama.blogspot.com/2008/06/mccain-admits-offshore-drilling-is-bs.html

McCain pledged that America would have "strategic independence" from foreign oil by 2025.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15995.html

Doesn't that sound nice? Do you have any idea what that means? Neither do I.

McCain's mysterious new phrase sounds an awful lot like McCain a couple months ago:

"My friends", I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East that will — that will then prevent us — that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East.
http://www.eschatonblog.com/2008_04_27_archive.html#7256313083903416620

If "strategic independence by 2025" is the same as "eliminat[ing] our dependence on foreign oil", here's the big problem with that):

[T]here isn’t an energy expert in the world — not one — who thinks we can "eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East." It’s a child’s fantasy, but McCain spouts this stuff as if solving our problems really were just that easy. It reminds me of his solution to the fighting in Iraq: "One of the things I would do if I were President would be to sit the Shiites and the Sunnis down and say, ‘Stop the bs.’"
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_05/013655.php

McCain, you are tiring me out this week. Can you come up with any energy proposal isn't a lie, distortion or an ineffectual pander?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/25/14419/9838/246/541817

Jeff,

You must have missed your Sunday RNC talking points bulletin. Obama has been for exploring nuclear power as a comprehensive energy program geared towards reducing green house gas emissions.

Terry,

McCain was at the bottom of his class and isn't very smart but he never would have graduated without passing Econ 101. You do realize that Barack graduated magna cum laude from Harvard right?

The Democrats want higher taxes on the oil companies as a way to reduce gas prices? How exactly does that work? How does that bring down the price of a barrel of oil? How does that bring down the price at the pump?
Drill here, drill now. Get coal here, get it now. Build more nuclear power plants and do it now. Build more refineries and build them now. Continue to develop alternative technologies and do it now. Prices will fall, and they will fall now IF these things are done ASAP.

As long as Democrats block new domestic energy sources in the U.S. -- drilling for oil, new refineries, nuclear plants and clean burning coal power plants -- America will continue to be dependent upon Muslim Arab oil billionaires and assorted anti-American dictators. Does Obama have the courage to break with his extreme leftist minders to call for expansion of those proven and plentiful energy supplies or will he continue to mouth the fiction that a country can conserve itself into prosperity? I'm afraid the answer is a resounding NO!

Posted by: Garrison | July 6, 2008 4:18 PM

Even your own Prez candidate, John McBush, has admitted that his off shore drilling proposal is nothing more than a sham to try and rescue his failing presidential hopes.
There's not enough oil off shore or in Anwar to last more than a couple of years and that oil would go on the world market to the highest bidder anyway. The Big Oil companies that the Republicans are in bed with already have miles of offshore leases that they aren't drilling on because they know the price of drilling there isn't worth the few drops of oil that are out there.

This is typical Republic Party propaganda, they run our country in the ground by feeding on our oil dependence and killing any alternative energy exploration bills and then when we start going broke because their Big Oil pals are raping us at the gas pump they claim that everything would be fine if only the Dems would let the Big Oil companies drill some more, make more profit from us and continue our addiction to all things oil. The Republican Party is similar to a snake oil salesman/drug dealer and I can't tell you how happy it's going to make me this fall when the Repuglicans lose both houses of Congress and the White House.
Enjoy your time in the minority Repugs, you earned it!

Bubba - Yes I am aware of Obama's pedigree. As a honors student from Harvard, maybe he should understand if you do not increase supply (e.g., thru domestic drilling) and worldwide demand keeps increasing (China and India economy), that prices will continue to rise. I think a young man graduating from Harvard would know that.

Also, he could explainhow a 54% income/payroll tax will create economic growth and jobs.

A huge difference between graduating from the USNA and Harvard is the character of the individual. I'll take the character of the Academy grad any day of the year.

Bubba,
There's nothing funnier than listening to GOoPer Terri shilling for the elitist Republic Party and their pals in the Big Oil business.

The contortions trickledown boy puts himself through just to make it seem like the GOP energy policy, (the one that has destroyed our economy), is somehow good for us and needs to be continued just so him and his doughy Republican $$$ buddies can continue screwing the middle/lower class Americans would be hilarious if it wasn't so pathetic.

That loud thud sound you hear on Jan 20, 2009 is going to be Terri falling off his pile of money.

McSame as Bush = John E
Look at me Mom! Copy and paste, copy and paste, copy and paste...

Johnny the Potty Mouth - nice post and no profanity this time. Go get 'em little Chicago Catholic School Girl.

The Thud will be after Obama and all his fellow Marxists stealing my pile of money.

Yet no one has yet to tell me how a 54% tax rate will stimulate the economy and grow jobs.

BTW - FITZ is giving you a good run for the money in the Village Idiot category.

The outer = MJ

McCain should explain to America exactly why he thinks promising four more years of Bush's failed economic agenda would be a good idea.
If you like the Bush Economy you'll love John McCain's Economic plans:
-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43HkmMGvL7w
-

Bubba, why are people so hung up on Obama's Harvard experience, it counts as "0" when it comes to running this country. We need someone with political experience and a record of being there when it counted. Not voting Present! We need someone who can react on a moments notice to any crises that may arise. You don't get that by going to Harvard, you get that to fighting in a war and facing the enemy, not some college professor. College gives you knowledge, it doesn't give you common sense.

Both McCain and Obama know the energy problem is beyond repair. We have ruined the earth and its going to get worse. They both need to own up to the reality, the earth is beyond control of man and all his so called intellect.

Perhaps The Swamp missed the article their NY Times source Nelson Schwartz wrote for Fortune Magazine. The money lines:

"...blaming Big Oil for high gas prices is a little like blaming McDonald's for obesity. (Yes, I know that also makes for effective politics.)

Because while those profits might seem outrageous - ExxonMobil earned over $36 billion last year - Big Oil makes its money by pumping oil out of the ground, not refining and selling it as gasoline. Of Exxon's mammoth haul, only a tiny fraction came from making and selling gas in the U.S.

The idea that prices are set by Big Oil, not the traders at the NYMEX and other global bourses, is a misconception that seems to come into vogue whenever energy prices start making new highs. "