More Cap in Trade

I don’t mean to go on and on, but I found a curious item on the http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/energy_and_environment/white house web page under issues — environment about energy.  Here it is:


Our reliance on oil poses a threat to our economic security.  Over the last few decades, we have watched our economy rise and fall along with the price of a barrel of oil. We must commit ourselves to an economic future in which the strength of our economy is not tied to the unpredictability of oil markets.   We must make the investments in clean energy sources that will curb our dependence on fossil fuels and make America energy independent.

  • Breaking Dependence on Oil. Promote the next generation of cars and trucks and the fuels they run on.
  • Producing More Energy at Home. Enhance U.S. energy supplies through responsible development of domestic renewable energy, fossil fuels, advanced biofuels and nuclear energy.
  • Promoting Energy Efficiency. Promote investments in the transportation, electricity, industrial, building and agricultural sectors that reduce energy bills.

I’m looking at bullet point #2 and that sounds like the REPUBLICAN approach and in complete contradiction to Cap in Trade–we have to reduce carbon emmissions–policies.  Because that bill does not allow for increased production,  no new refineries, no new nuclear plants, no increased production of fossil fuels (COAL AND OIL).  Where does this guy really stand.  He says one thing and web site says another.