It would seem to me that the American people need to be a little more careful when it comes to choosing a new president. Currently in vogue is choosing a presidential candidate, all too many of the other high political offices too, that has studied to be a lawyer. Law is an honorable profession but our leaders need to be better versed in economics. The ones in power since about 1932 evidently haven't been connected to reality when it comes to spending. Any reasonable person understands that they can only spend what they earn and if you borrow money it has to be paid back. Any reasonable person that is except for the current crop of politicians.
Our current administration has decided that using oil to power our economic engine is somehow bad. They can think of all sorts of reasons why our use of oil and coal for power should be drastically reduced.
Alternative power is the new buzzword but so far all are way too expensive to be practical. Nuclear power to generate electricity, the cheapest safest practical way, is a no no because "they" are convinced that nuclear will make us glow in the dark or some other dumb excuse.
It is next to impossible to develop more hydro-power because self styled, earth friendly, ecologists are against damming any river or stream. That leaves us with oil.
Now President Obama and his liberal elite administration are convinced that if we can just get the price of gasoline up to the levels that the Europeans pay alternative power could better compete. I've driven in Europe and their narrow crooked streets and short distances to travel are a whole different world. Here in the West we have vast distances to travel so the cost of transportation is a world of difference from commuting in Europe. High fuel prices will put a huge damper on business here and obviously there is no current viable "alternative" source of fuel to meet our everyday needs.
President Obama, for whatever reason, has put a real restriction on the U. S. developing more oil production. He has almost closed all off shore exploration, closed all interior government land and won't allow the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) to be developed. What he hasn't been able to stop is exploration and production on private lands but I'm not too sure that he won't find a way to stop that too if we give him another four years to try.
This weekend President Obama spoke to the people to tell us that part of the rise in gasoline prices is due to unrest in the mid-East. He quoted 470,000 barrels of crude per day drop in production in Syria, Yemen and Sudan alone. He is correct in stating that those drops affect price on the world market but he neglected to mention that his own restrictions on drilling off shore in the Gulf of Mexico have cut production by at least 500,000 barrels per day. One can only imagine what the price of gasoline would be had there not been a surge in domestic production in spite of his own policies designed to curb production.
The President and his green allies do have a point though. The world price for oil is now set by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), and they don't have our best interests in mind. The Saudi Kings and the other dictators of OPEC can only see more riches by ever escalating the price of oil by controlling production. With oil revenue they hold tight to their reign of power and become fabulously rich. Of course the common folk in their sheikdoms see little benefit from the largess of oil revenue but those in power fear the common man and insist on keeping him in a perpetual state of poverty.
Alaska had a better plan. When oil was discovered and developed on state lands in Alaska the citizens of the state were granted a share. Oil revenue pays for the entire Alaskan state government and what is left is divided among the residents of the state. The current allocation is somewhere around $1015 for every man woman and child living there. Think for a moment what a similar allocation to each resident living in the oil producing countries of the mid-East would do for those poor people. That whole fractious part of the world would undergo a huge change and the world would only be the better for it.
How can we get there? The answer is in economics, obviously not the strong suit of the politicians that we have chosen to put in charge. In Sarah Palin's words we should "drill baby drill!" We need to develop all we can on our off shore ocean areas, and on public lands including ANWR. Allow the XL Pipeline and more like it to be built.
How much would be available? Well the Institute for Energy Research states that we have more than 1.4 trillion barrels of oil that is technically recoverable with existing technology. What that means is the United States has more recoverable oil than the rest of the non-North American world combined.
When turned loose the United States would be able to produce all of our foreseeable needs and more. A current estimate is enough for 200 years in the future and more is being discovered. OPEC would no longer have a monopoly as they couldn't compete with our domestic oil due to shipping costs. Then price would drop in accordance with supply and demand. Simply turning loose the oil industry would come at no expense to the taxpayer. Actually we would all gain as owner of public lands revenue would flow into government coffers to offset some of the expense of government. Then the problem would be to keep the politician's hands off the new revenue stream and only use it to pay down public debt.
It is a change that needs to happen. Candidate Obama was right, it is time for change but the real change needed now is to remove him from our future. That is the change that we can really accomplish in November. Vote wisely. Still no word from Grannie Annie's Chaplain in Afghanistan.
That is the way I saw it.