NYT editorial: Energy Fictions; With voter discontent over fuel prices, Dems, Obama shift on energy

[DeepModem Mom]

Energy Fictions
Published: August 9, 2008

A toxic combination of $4 gasoline, voter anxiety and presidential ambition is making it impossible for this country to have the grown-up conversation it needs about energy. The latest evidence comes from Senator Barack Obama, who in less than a week has reversed his stance on tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, softened his opposition to offshore drilling and unveiled an out-of-nowhere proposal to impose a windfall profits tax on the oil companies and funnel the money to consumers in the form of a $1,000 tax rebate.

Compared with his slightly hysterical opponent, Mr. Obama had been making good sense on energy questions, and his recent speeches had included a menu of proposals for energy efficiency, conservation, alternative fuels and new technologies. Yet public opinion polls showing deep voter discontent with fuel prices — and Senator John McCain’s steady pounding on the issue, including television ads blaming Mr. Obama personally for the rise in gasoline prices — have caused high anxiety among Democrats. They also seem to have persuaded Mr. Obama, who earlier had resisted gimmicky proposals like a gas tax holiday, to strike back.

The Democrats’ presumptive nominee has made a poor choice of weapons, beginning with his proposal to tap the petroleum reserve, an idea that Mr. McCain has wisely resisted....

***

The windfall tax idea seems exactly the kind of populist gimmick Mr. Obama has been trying to avoid, and could be counterproductive....

The senator’s shift on offshore drilling is less disturbing and more nuanced. Having opposed it in the past, he now appears willing to endorse selective drilling in places where states allow it, and only then as a negotiating tool to win a much bigger and broader bipartisan energy package. This is far more defensible than Mr. McCain’s gung-ho, drill anywhere approach. But Mr. Obama cannot allow himself to be seen as endorsing the twin fictions (assiduously promoted by Mr. McCain’s advertising, if not by the candidate in his own public statements) that freeing up the 18 billion barrels in areas now off limits to drilling will bring quick relief at the pump and, in time, satisfy the country’s long-term needs.

Here is the underlying reality: A nation that uses one-quarter of the world’s oil while possessing less than 3 percent of its reserves cannot drill its way to happiness at the pump, much less self-sufficiency. The only plausible strategy is to cut consumption while embarking on a serious program of alternative fuels and energy sources. This is a point the honest candidate should be making at every turn.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/opinion/10sun1.html

[MasonJar]

1. I totally disagree with this editorial. A windfall profits tax is definitely a fair approach.

We are paying those profits at the pump so a rebate from the oil empires is certainly appropriate. As to the oil reserve, which I understand is almost full and for emergencies, let it be tapped so that people can afford to go to work. Meanwhile it is time for vast exploration of other sources of energy, but not the 45 nuclear plants of McCain. That is one of the world's worst ideas. As to the drilling offshore, I am against it, but if Obama actually uses the drilling to garner strong advances in wind and solar and etc., then perhaps a minor amount might be permissible. In general, however, I contend that we must abandon oil and coal.

[CitizenPatriot]

2. how does drilling impact our prices

why isn't anyone saying this or should I ask, why isn't anyone getting it? Drilling here ANYWHERE is not going to change the price of oil. that oil will be sold on the global market at market price, not a special price to americans. who is drilling there? have they promised to give it to us? it will take years before they even get the oil.

Why all the dishonesty?