Angry at the high price of gasoline? If it bothers you to be shelling out over 4 dollars a gallon, how would you feel if you knew the prices didn’t have to be that high? Angrier?
Well, the truth is, this price gouging – between the multiple layered government taxes placed on each gallon of gas and the high prices being charged by foreign suppliers— didn’t have to happen. We could have had energy independence, plenty of gasoline, and much lower prices at the pump.
Who’s to blame? A former president. Over a decade ago President Bill Clinton vetoed a measure, passed by the Congress that would have allowed drilling in the United States where there is plenty of high grade oil to be found. We could have fuel reserves right now had that veto not been used.
But we don’t read about that in the news. We’re not reminded of history in newspapers, newscasts or news magazines. Instead, all we read and hear about is that “Bush and Cheney are oil men” – insinuating that the President and Vice President are taking it to the bank through this high priced gasoline trend. That’s pure untarnished trash. The truth is, we have a Congress that is more interested in politics than serving the public good. They discuss and call for studies and hold hearings into finding alternate sources of energy (although they’re opposed to coal or nuclear) rather than coupling this search for alternate energy sources to actually grappling with the current energy problems.
It’s politics at its worst. If you don’t believe it, here’s another page from the history books. Years back, there was much consternation over the building of the Alaskan pipe line. You know, the pipe line that some members of Congress claimed would endanger the beautiful herds of caribou in the area. Their voices weren’t as loud then, and they weren’t the basis for a big political movement, so the pipe line was able to be built. It’s been operating successfully for years and all the while – again, not that you would read about it in the newspapers—the caribou herds have multiplied.
It’s good to see Senator John McCain now proposing a bill that would allow each state that desired to drill for oil to do so. It’s a proposal long overdue. It’s a bold move to address a current problem and make America energy independent. If passed, it will take time to actually deliver the oil to the public.
But can it pass our current Congress?
If it can’t, it’s time to start voting the political gamesmen out.
_____________________________—
Former TV anchor, radio commentator and print columnist Mary Laney is a regular contributor for The Chicago Daily Observer
You speak not the truth says:
Drilling isn't the answer.
Repeal the Enron Loophole and gas prices will be cut by at least 1/3 immediately.
John Powers says:
Ysntt,
The London Exchanges are laughing at the nitwits in Congress campaigning against futures trades, while the Chicago and New York trading business moves to England to avoid Dick Durbin, Barack Obama and Harry Reid.
JBP
Tony Abbott says:
Blaming Clinton is spurious, every president (Rep & Dem) for 30 years has allowed the ANWR to retian its protected status (I wonder why, probaly because it is the right thing to do). Blaming one particular president for not opening ANWR is narrow minded political posturing.
ANWR is an old and stupid trope for US "oil liberation/independence." Cheney's energy policy has done enough to protect US oil company interests (look at profits).
Those who refuse to embrace future-energy are simply wasting time and resources on this tired and ultimately unprofitable debate.
Dan Kelley says:
Absolutely correct!