Two Roads to America’s Energy Future


In his poem, “The Road Not Taken,” Robert Frost paints the perfect picture of today’s debate on America’s energy future. Here, Frost describes two paths leading in two different directions, “Two roads diverged in a wood, and I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.

Much like the subject of Frost’s poem, America today finds itself at a crossroads. There are two diverging paths we can choose with regard to this nation’s energy policy. The road we ultimately choose will indeed make all the difference.

Despite growing job losses, some in Washington, D.C. have decided a recession is the ideal time to impose a massive new cap and trade energy scheme. Cap and trade is Washington-lingo where the federal government imposes a federal ceiling on carbon emissions and then sets up a complicated market for entities to buy and sell the right to emit carbon at levels under the cap.

Going down this road leads to a regressive national energy tax that intentionally increases energy prices on every American consumer, restricts economic growth, and aims to dictate and regulate Americans into a new “green” energy future. To put this in more concrete terms, some studies indicate the Democrats cap and trade proposal will raise electricity prices by 90% and gasoline prices by 74%. Now for some folks, energy price hikes of this nature may be more of an inconvenience than a hardship, but for low-income families already spending one out every five dollars on energy bills, these increases will have a devastating impact on already struggling family finances.

With more job loss on the horizon, we simply cannot afford to take chances with policies that will allow energy costs to “necessarily skyrocket” as President Obama stated when responding to the likelihood that energy prices will increase as a result of “cap and trade” policies.

History has shown that taxes and regulations do not lead to job creation. Yet, here we are again entertaining the standard tax and mandate policies taken from page one of the Democrat playbook. Instead of forcibly confiscating more and more dollars from struggling taxpayers, we should be helping not hindering Americans to get back on their feet by allowing them to keep more of their hard earned money.

Representing just one of the thousand-plus bills the so-called “Party of No” has introduced so far this Congress, the Congressional Western Caucus and the Republican Study Committee recently introduced the American Energy Innovation Act (H.R. 2300). This bill provides a competing energy vision for the country; one we believe is shared by the majority of the American people.

Our proposal provides a comprehensive, forward-thinking approach to how we address today’s energy and job creation needs, and one that goes in an entirely different direction than the Democrat’s approach. The path we believe we should travel looks to innovation, conservation, and production as the means to greater economic prosperity, a cleaner environment, real job creation and realistic environmental achievements in the near future.

This alternate energy vision is premised on the idea that tax increases never lead to job creation and that arbitrary government mandates only stifle American ingenuity. It is based on historical evidence that progress in the environmental arena follows economic prosperity, not the other way around.

As our nation stands at this crossroads of America’s energy future, we must recognize that the federal government can never dictate and regulate our way to job creation and energy independence. The best thing we can do for the environment is to have a strong, vibrant, growing economy. The path we propose recognizes that government doesn’t create jobs. The private sector does. The best thing government can do is to reduce burdens and remove hurdles. In other words, government needs to just get out of the way.

While there may be a majority of Democrats in Congress who believe we should go down the cap and trade path, I couldn’t disagree more.

I suggest we take the path less traveled.


Category: ,

RSS feed

6 Comments Leave a comment

I'm really surprised

kowalski (Diary) Monday, June 1st at 12:14PM EST (link)

I’m really surprised that Republicans aren’t talking about the fact that the only three true energy sources that could possibly meet anticipated central power station demands in this country over the next century are thermonuclear fusion, conventional fission, and exoatomspheric solar.

Guys, they’re the only ones. We’ve known that for more than 20 years now. It’s about time Republicans started talking about it honestly and stopped cowering behind “clean coal”.

You don't need cap n' trade

kowalski (Diary) Monday, June 1st at 12:17PM EST (link)

You don’t need cap n’ trade if you don’t produce any carbon emissions. The French have been way ahead of us on this for years, since the last administration allowed ITER to be constructed there, in an enormous lapse of leadership.

To their credit, at the close of their term the Bush Administration finally did something to make the NIF a reality instead of letting it die on the vine.

The alternative is continuing to burn fossil fuels, which practically everyone now (including me) thinks is a joke.

You know Republicans deserve

kowalski (Diary) Monday, June 1st at 12:27PM EST (link)

You know Republicans deserve the “stupid party” label when Dianne Feinstein shows up at the most truly promising energy facility in the country to dedicate it, even though she’s insipid and incoherent. Maybe she was drunk.

Here’s an idea: how about the American people start thinking about a way to produce lots more energy without bribing the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and without burning all that limitless coal?

 
 

Yup

drothgery Tuesday, June 2nd at 9:36AM EST (link)

Which means that on energy policy, there are

1. Pro-growth people who support nukes and a space policy that would make space-based solar practical. Unfortunately the contigency for this is mostly geeky conservatives and libertarians who have read Jerry Pournelle novels.

2. People who believe in magic alternative energy fairies. It really disturbs me how many people who have to know better publicly support this view.

3. People who want the third world to stay poor and the first world to become poor. It disturbs me even more how many people publicly support the second view when they actually support this one, which is absolute evil as far as I’m concerned. Third world-level poverty isn’t inconvenient. It kills people.

 
 

A majority of Democrats in Congress believe we should go down the cap and trade path

izoneguy (Diary) Monday, June 1st at 12:28PM EST (link)

So let them. Republicans should go on the record and vote NO on Cap & Trade. Once the democrats own Cap & Trade 100% then the Republicans can bash them every waking hour until Nov. 4th 2010 & 2012.

Once enough Americans of all political persuations have had enough of high energy bills then if the Republicans cannot capitalize on that grief then I don’t know how you turn it around.

It will take democrats in the Congress that understand Cap & Trade will be a boondoggle that most Americans will not accept before anything can be done.

Joe Biden might think that paying taxes is patrotic, but I don’t think paying higher energy bills to support the “Climate Change Mafia”
is patriotic at all.

The point cannot be made often enough: Modern liberalism, as embodied in the Obama presidency, is the defender of the status quo. And the status quo is a road to economic ruin. Political forces cannot redistribute the wealth that the economic system does not produce.

 

Great way to frame the issue

cbs (Diary) Monday, June 1st at 7:17PM EST (link)

Thank you, Congressman Bishop, for your thoughtful comments. I hope you are able to get this message of “two roads” out to the American people.