During the days of $4/gallon gas in the summer of 2008, then-Speaker Pelosi tried faking out the American people with a series of ‘drilling bills’ that really weren’t about expanding drilling. The bills were really about opening a tiny fraction of the OCS while putting the rest of the OCS offlimits forever.

At the height of the high gas prices, House Republicans put together an all-of-the-above energy plan. They named it the American Energy Act. It didn’t take long before it was getting great ratings with Main Street America. Here’s what Rep. Thad McCotter wrote about it then:

Leaving by example, Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi jetted off on her summer vacation under the assumption energy squeezed Americans would throng to buy her book, Know Your Power.

But Americans weren’t buying it literally.

Economically maimed by the pain at the pump, citizens demanded vacationing Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats’ ‘Don’t Care’ Congress get back to work and pass an ‘all of the above’ energy bill to lower gas prices.

Unmoved by these working families’ sufferings, Speaker Pelosi conjured up another so-called ‘energy proposal’ one that is already acclaimed by none other than the anti-energy zealots at the Sierra Club. Yes, this is the same Sierra Club that pronounced: “We’re better off without cheap gas.”

Unfortunately, the Sierra Club’s collective “we” included us.

Not surprisingly, then, the Speaker’s latest lethargy proposal apes other energy schemes she’s brought to the House floor without amendment and under a super-majority vote requirement. Desperate to guarantee these bills’ defeats and blame Republicans, the Speaker orchestrated the nauseating spectacle of ‘Don’t Care’ Democrats, who a few months ago wouldn’t vote to drill a tooth, now hugging derricks instead of trees.
This time, though, with a month of vacation under her Beltway, Pelosi’s ploy has a new wrinkle. In the media she is floating specious reasons why Republicans will vote against her radical cornucopia of energy insecurity.
What she still fails to grasp, as with all her energy scams, is that the public will not be misled.

Americans understand House Republicans’ bi-partisan ‘all of the above’ energy plan provides maximum American energy and, so doing, ensures lower gas prices and energy security.

While the American Energy Act called for a robust increase in drilling for domestic oil, it truly took an all-of-the-above approach. Also included in the AEA was a plan for investing in energy-saving technologies, a heightened awareness for the need for conservation and alternative energies.

With gas prices skyrocketing, I recently posed a question to a senior member of the House Republican Conference if we’d see a return of the AEA. This senior member assured me that the AEA’s return was inevitable.

This is reassuring for a variety of reasons. First, we can’t continue to rely on foreign sources of oil. Shipping $400,000,000,000 a year to Middle Eastern governments is foolish and counterproductive.

Second, drilling on the OCS and on the Bakken will create possibly a million great paying jobs at a time when our unemployment is unacceptably high. Creating a million jobs in the next year would shrink the deficit to almost sane levels almost instantly.

Third, a significant investment by private companies into profit-producing technologies that would save energy would shrink demand for energy products while creating new manufacturing opportunities.

Fourth, the Republicans’ all-of-the-above plan would significantly shrink our dependance on foreign energy sources, which would strengthen the U.S. from a national security standpoint.

Fifth, getting the manufacturing sector of our economy growing is what the economy desperately needs. Manufacturing state-of-the-art conservation products would also automatically increase R & D budgets.

The bad news is that militant environmentalist organizations like the Sierra Club would lobby Senate Democrats hard to defeat the bill or filibuster it to death. There’s a silver lining to that, though. A vote to continue a filibuster would be seen as a vote for higher gas prices.

With 23 Democrats up for re-election, rest assured that that type of vote would put most of them on a hot seat.

The other thing it does is it forces President Obama to take a position on increasing energy production. If he doesn’t pressure the Democratic Senate to pass the AEA ASAP, then Republicans will argue that he did nothing while gas and grocery prices skyrocketed.

Good luck selling that in 2012.

When the AEA is submitted, it’s important that House Republicans pass the AEA ASAP. I suspect that it would get alot of Democrat support, especially in states like Oklahoma, Colorado, Louisiana and Virginia. If there’s substantial bipartisan support in the House, which is likely, then Senate Democrats will have little political cover in not approving the legislation.

It would put President Obama in a most precarious electoral position, too.

For all these reasons, I hope the AEA will be submitted soon and quickly enacted.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply