Nancy's Cynical Summer - The Speaker's Energy Obstructionism

[The Bare Knuckled Pundit]

While American families continue to struggle with record high oil and gas prices, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi cynically plays politics with national energy policy. Responding to rising rhetorical pressure from House Republicans calling for increased drilling in ANWAR and the Outer Continental Shelf, the California Democrat has colluded with vulnerable party colleagues in the House in a surreptitious exercise in political good cop/bad cop.

Encouraging vulnerable and freshman Democratic House members to display their independence on the energy issue if it benefits them politically, Pelosi has positioned herself to take the burn on behalf of her party with her dogged refusal to allow a vote on what is a growing national consensus calling for expanded oil and gas drilling.

And why has the Speaker set herself up to be the lightning rod in the political storm over energy? Simple - the numbers are on her side; both in her home district and nationally. Moreover, she sleeps soundly at night, secure in the knowledge her San Fransican constituents has the same contemptuous view of Middle America she currently displays.

Accordingly, biding their time for what they believe will be Democratic domination of both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue as well as both houses of Congress; Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership sees no need to compromise with Republicans and have opted instead to wait until a new president and Congress is sworn in.

Based on their anticipated victories in the upcoming election, they believe they will be able to pass a comprehensive energy bill that stays true to the Democratic principals of limited drilling, increased funding for alternative energy and a windfall profits tax on big oil.

“The reality is we will have a new president in three months, and what Bush and the Republicans are trying to do amounts to a land grab for the oil companies. I don’t think we have to give in at all pre-election — we have many more options postelection,” Martin Kady II and Patrick O’Conner quoted one senior House Democratic aide involved with party strategy in a piece at Politico.com.

In the interim, the Democrats’ unconscionable and cynical ploy will cost American families billions of dollars as record oil and gas prices continue to create inflationary ripples throughout the economy. Worse still, struggling to stay afloat amidst recessionary conditions, many may find themselves overwhelmed by what are projected to be record heating oil and natural gas prices this coming winter.

With cost of living increases failing to keep pace with the inflationary impact of the rise in these critical commodity prices, the elderly and those on fixed incomes in the Northeast feel particularly exposed in the face of what may be the hardships of a harsh winter; both meteorologically and financially.

Instead of providing political cover for her party compatriots, what Speaker Pelosi has done is cast a pall over them. At this point, one cannot help but view pro-drilling Democratic candidates with a high degree of suspicion, if not outright contempt. This includes the supposed compromise of Senate Democrats in the so-called Gang of Ten.

However, what the cynically Machiavellian tactics of the Speaker have produced is a rare opportunity for Senator Barack Obama.

Putting his political capital where his mouth is, Senator Obama should immediately choose leadership over partisanship and condemn the Speaker’s tactics for what they are; reprehensible partisan political gain at the expense of American families and businesses. This would be a true demonstration of leadership as well as a tangible and historic example of the change the junior Senator from Illinois has so eloquently spoken of.

The time has come for the Senator’s deeds to equal his lofty rhetoric. Let him firmly grasp the mantle of leadership before him and clearly put nation before party. In the process he will become the legendary figure so many already mistakenly believe him to be.

The time for change has indeed come, faithful readers. And clearly that change is needed in the leadership of the House. Stay tuned for further updates as events warrant and the cynicism grows.

[mundame]

Based on their anticipated victories in the upcoming election, they believe they will be able to pass a comprehensive energy bill that stays true to the Democratic principals of limited drilling, increased funding for alternative energy and a windfall profits tax on big oil.



Most interesting piece, BKP.

I have been interested in the surprisingly open Dem claim that they are letting gas prices rise to force America off foreign oil, to force a platform shift.

I am a student of WWI, when coal was deserted for oil (Iraqi oil!) --- British navy leading the way. That was a platform shift and it took a big war.

If that were doable, and what they are actually up to, that would be good. I don't view our sending all our money to our worst enemies as viable for our nation.

However, RSR has me persuaded that this is the same as the promise to get us out of the Iraq War, which Pelosi and Reid promptly abandoned, favoring stasis so they could assure themselves of a Dem sweep of all branches of government in November ------ or soon after.

That is, that they don't mean it.

I'm too disillusioned to keep the faith, so I'll be more interested in what they do AFTER the election.

[The Bare Knuckled Pundit]

Most interesting piece, BKP.

I have been interested in the surprisingly open Dem claim that they are letting gas prices rise to force America off foreign oil, to force a platform shift.

I am a student of WWI, when coal was deserted for oil (Iraqi oil!) --- British navy leading the way. That was a platform shift and it took a big war.

If that were doable, and what they are actually up to, that would be good. I don't view our sending all our money to our worst enemies as viable for our nation.

However, RSR has me persuaded that this is the same as the promise to get us out of the Iraq War, which Pelosi and Reid promptly abandoned, favoring stasis so they could assure themselves of a Dem sweep of all branches of government in November ------ or soon after.

That is, that they don't mean it.

I'm too disillusioned to keep the faith, so I'll be more interested in what they do AFTER the election.


Very astute and insightful observations; both historically and politically.

People tend to overlook the connection between oil imports, the value of the dollar and the cost of those imports. As we import more, the value of the dollar declines; as the value of the dollar declines, the cost of those imports increases. As the costs of imports increase, the value of the dollar declines and so on and so on and so on. A vicious cycle, indeed.

Accordingly, anything we can do to reduce our imports, or at least reduce the percentage of our daily energy use as the economy and the population grows, is a positive move.

[mundame]

People tend to overlook the connection between oil imports, the value of the dollar and the cost of those imports. As we import more, the value of the dollar declines; as the value of the dollar declines, the cost of those imports increases. As the costs of imports increase, the value of the dollar declines and so on and so on and so on. A vicious cycle, indeed.



Can you expand a little on why you think the falling dollar is promoted by our importing of oil?

Because my impression from the financial papers and programs is that oil is certainly increasing in price because of the dollar falling --- that is, oil is real and valuable and the dollar is paper, so like gold, anything real will increase in value as the dollar falls. Okay. But I thought the general consensus was that the government (Bush, Paulson) has for some years now been letting the dollar fall as a way to depreciate ourselves out of our foreign debt and also promote exports and a better trade balance. Lately that has gotten somewhat out of control and the public has been taxed by the inflation hitting oil in particular.

That's my understanding of it: that once the fall in the dollar is stopped (if it can be stopped), oil will not rise further, at least assuming other factors hold constant (that is, no war).

[The Bare Knuckled Pundit]

Can you expand a little on why you think the falling dollar is promoted by our importing of oil?

Because my impression from the financial papers and programs is that oil is certainly increasing in price because of the dollar falling --- that is, oil is real and valuable and the dollar is paper, so like gold, anything real will increase in value as the dollar falls. Okay. But I thought the general consensus was that the government (Bush, Paulson) has for some years now been letting the dollar fall as a way to depreciate ourselves out of our foreign debt and also promote exports and a better trade balance. Lately that has gotten somewhat out of control and the public has been taxed by the inflation hitting oil in particular.

That's my understanding of it: that once the fall in the dollar is stopped (if it can be stopped), oil will not rise further, at least assuming other factors hold constant (that is, no war).

Oil imports are part of the greater trade imbalance. Accordingly, it adds to the decline in the value of dollar.

While it is by no means the sole factor, it is a significant part. Were we importing oil to manufacture goods for export, its impact would not be nearly so significant. However, the vast majority of our daily oil use is consumned in transportation, not manufacturing. So the economically exportable derivatives of that imported oil are are minimal in offsetting the costs associated with it.

And yes, the Administration, the Fed and Congress all bear significant responsibility for the dollar's dizzying decline. In the process, we all pay the price at the pump and increasingly the grocery store.

[mundame]

Were we importing oil to manufacture goods for export, its impact would not be nearly so significant. However, the vast majority of our daily oil use is consumned in transportation, not manufacturing.


Interesting point: oil is not a part of productivity increases. But given our geography, it's essential.

[Classact]

The Democratic Party is firmly in the control of the far left and the far left has chosen Obama to forward their agenda. Their energy agenda is very clear, choose winners of alternative energy... wind, solar and ethanol while keeping oil prices high so these alternatives can compete. Create laws punishing profits from oil that "give" to alternatives, if the punishment causes prices of gas to go up then punish them more so the public will be forced to use the less expensive alternatives.

The above is the Democratic position on energy period but it is a self destruct agenda because the House of Representatives is up for a vote every two years and the public will revolt to higher gas prices regardless how many checks you send them because such an agenda will flow to all aspects of life from food, heating, electricity and transportation. The very nature of the Democratic Party is to "help" the little guy so they will increase cost of living for all of those on the government dime, welfare, social security recipients, government retirees and so on... taxes must go up to cover the new expenses at federal level but more importantly at state and local area to run basic government. The high cost of living will force any alternative energy initiative to be outsourced to a country that has lower costs leaving the population to deal with taxes and higher costs for every aspect of life. Because most American jobs rely mainly on the service industry unemployment will rise since no one will be able to afford the services.

The only way the Democrats can win is if they fight drilling and president Bush or the Republicans in congress force off shore drilling. They can do this because the moratorium expires 30 Sept. and congress has to fund the government... Bush or/and Republicans can force off shore drilling ban being lifted! However if this is accomplished as the only aspect of energy policy in congress the prices of oil may drop drastically allowing the Democrats to move on away from the energy worries and win the election. If that happens then they win a super majority in congress and with Obama in the Presidency they enact environmental law that prohibits off shore drilling and they are back to their agenda until the election of the House in 2010.

[mundame]

The Democratic Party is firmly in the control of the far left and the far left has chosen Obama to forward their agenda. Their energy agenda is very clear, choose winners of alternative energy... wind, solar and ethanol while keeping oil prices high so these alternatives can compete. Create laws punishing profits from oil that "give" to alternatives, if the punishment causes prices of gas to go up then punish them more so the public will be forced to use the less expensive alternatives.



If they mean it.

That's the question, Classact: Do the Dems actually MEAN to force an energy platform shift, or will they forget all about it as soon as they win the White House and both houses of Congress and the right to appoint justices to the Supreme Court? Which is surely the really important thing, as the fate of all those intention statements about stopping the war after the 2006 election makes only too clear. Never mind the war, just secure all branches of government.

[Classact]

If they mean it.

That's the question, Classact: Do the Dems actually MEAN to force an energy platform shift, or will they forget all about it as soon as they win the White House and both houses of Congress and the right to appoint justices to the Supreme Court? Which is surely the really important thing, as the fate of all those intention statements about stopping the war after the 2006 election makes only too clear. Never mind the war, just secure all branches of government.The far left has an agenda that includes tree hugging, closing the Department of Defence, opening the Department of Peace, opening the borders to the people of the world and all that you stated above... the problem is they have to do it in two years or they will be fired by the sane voters.

[The Bare Knuckled Pundit]

The far left has an agenda that includes tree hugging, closing the Department of Defence, opening the Department of Peace, opening the borders to the people of the world and all that you stated above... the problem is they have to do it in two years or they will be fired by the sane voters.

Don't forget closing the CIA and turning the NSA into a Radio Shack store.