Game Fishing Forum banner

1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,957 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
If we are in the midst of an Energy Crisis...

Why are the candidates ignoring Energy Policy?

Deafening silence on energy

Let me see if I have this straight: With crude oil prices hovering near a record, two of the three people with the best shot at becoming our next president went to the capital of Texas last week to debate and uttered not a word about energy policy.

At one point, Hillary Clinton even debated the debate moderators over whether she could further debate health care. But energy? Nope. Just a couple of passing references to foreign oil and greenhouse gases.

This week, the Greater Houston Partnership is sponsoring an energy summit, which it hoped would draw the candidates to the world's energy capital a week before the primary to debate an issue of great import to Texas voters.

As of Friday evening only Clinton was slated to appear.

Which tells you that energy policy in this country is headed in the same direction it's been heading for the past quarter-century â€" nowhere.

The candidates have offered proposals that range from the crunchy to the nutty, feel-good snacks devoid of meaningful solution tossed at the electorate.

The Democrats â€" Clinton and Barack Obama have few differences on energy issues â€" are focused on environmental concerns. They worry about the consequences of energy rather than the creation of it.

That's important, and it must be dealt with, but it doesn't address the issue of our energy needs.

The Democrats also are big on conservation, which is long overdue. As Americans, we simply waste too much energy, and we have to appreciate the long-term effect that consumption has on the price of finite fuels.

Clinton has offered some interesting ideas about savings bonds to raise money for renewable fuels and a government-sponsored entity to promote energy efficient homes. Those may be worthwhile programs, but they don't make a policy.

The Democrats also favor raising the mileage standard on automobiles, which is more faux-green politics than substantive solution. Automakers for years have thrown out a few high-mileage econoboxes to meet the standard while flooding dealerships with gas-guzzling behemoths.

Mileage standards might work if they were imposed on each model, but Detroit and its unions balk at that. So do we. In our cars, we like lots of room, lots of gadgets and lots of horsepower.

Having the federal government pressure cities and states to lower speed limits and synchronize stoplights would be far more effective, but unpopular with voters.

The real issue, of course, is oil. We use more of it than any other country, we desperately need it, and it leaves our economy vulnerable.

By LOREN STEFFY - Houston Chronicle

Excerpt: Click Here to Read Full Article
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,456 Posts
We already KNOW Obama's energy policy. It was contained in his 2008 earmarks...

GROW MORE CORN! :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,957 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Grow more corn, FOR FUEL, sounds like a real waste good moonshine. :(

I suppose if all the candidates agree on higher taxes, smaller engines, slower speeds, same ole alternative energy choices and draconian user fees they have nothing to debate.

Next thing you know they will want us too register our rigs! :lol:
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top