REPUBLICAN ATTACK: Democrats are the cause of our energy woes because they insist on blocking production of power plants and drilling in wastelands like ANWR. Just look at what their policies did to California. In addition, they promote nonsensical ideas like using wind, sun and corn to meet our power needs. They are threatening our national security by disallowing us from producing the power that we need at reasonable prices to live as a free society. It is no secret that regulations jack-up prices and reduce supply.
 

REPUBLICAN ULTERIOR MOTIVE: Preserve the energy oligopoly held by their oil and corporate cronies. (See GrandOldPetroleum.com)
 

PROGRESSIVE RESPONSE:

As with most attacks, Republicans will shovel a load of accusations all bundled up in one lie-soaked package hoping to distract from the real issues and overload the accused making it much more difficult to respond effectively. Thus, it is our job, when attacked, to weed out the primary attacks being made. The peripherals can be addressed optionally once the core issues have been addressed and rebuilt to our liking (i.e. the truth). 

In any event, it is critical to remember that the aggressor generally has the upper hand. With that in mind, we should not hesitate to initiate an attack on any issue at any time that suits our desired ends. At a minimum we should immediately follow any necessary defense with an impassioned, informed counterattack.

In this case, the primary attacks are: 

1. There is no commercially viable alternative to fossil fuels and there never will be.
2. Power shortages exist and are due to environmental protections and lack of new fossil fuel power plants.

The peripheral attacks are: 
1. Progressives block all power plant production and oil drilling.
2. ANWR will provide a significant source of oil and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
3. Progressives caused the California Energy Crisis.
4. ANWR is a wasteland.
5. Progressives are a threat to National Security.
6. Progressives are disallowing the nation from producing the power it needs.
7. Regulations are implemented for the purpose of restricting energy supply and raising prices.

The nonsensical attack to be strictly ignored is: Progressives are responsible for everything bad.
 

Addressing the primary attacks: 

1. There is no commercially viable alternative to fossil fuels and there never will be.

Most of our modern conveniences are made possible because of energy. Without energy we would revert back to some hideous medieval way of life. With this in mind, you would think that republicans would support larger investments in alternative energy sources such as fuel cells, wind farms , ethanol etc. to reduce our reliance upon limited and foreign fossil fuels. Instead they laugh at the idea and throw subsidies to a handful of energy companies implying that richer energy companies will solve our energy problems. Well, listen up laughing boys. We are risking our national security by relying on foreign oil (and don't you dare bring up ANWR or any other domestic source of oil, because there isn't enough there to amount to a hill of beans.) and on oil in general. It must be made clear that the oil that does exist in this world is running out. Oil is, for those who either don't know or don't care, a "LIMITED natural resource" (i.e., one day, probably in our lifetime, oil will be gone). Bottom line, we have to develop alternative energy sources NOW. 

So why, we ask, are Republicans so dead-set against developing alternative energy sources (such as wind, solar, ethanol, etc.) and technologies (such as fuel cells)? Once again, the answer is both obvious and predictable, It cost companies money and, once these sources and technologies become viable, they will cost energy/oil companies their (oil/coal) revenue. 

Of course, if there were any republicans with a brain, they would realize, that being pioneers in these alternative energies and technologies would position us to reap the profits from their commercialization in the coming decades. Instead, it is the Japanese who are once again the groundbreakers in new technologies, already with a handful of commercially viable, fuel-cell, automobiles on the market (Toyota and Honda both have fuel-cell models). See how their economy thrives in the next few decades as the benefits of this new-technology, alternative/low energy culture takes hold. Wind energy already provides 14% of the energy in Denmark and is expected to provide for up to 30% of their needs within a few years. In addition, the money saved over the long term will be available for further investment in more productive areas. (as opposed to environmental cleanup and payment for dwindling supplies of fossil fuels). You might also consider the savings in terms of dollars, resources and lives that result when wars are no longer waged over oil. (e.g. Iraq)

FACTS:

• Wind power is increasing capacity by over 1,000 megawatts per year. Wind is estimated by the US Department of Energy to have the global potential to provide more than fifteen times the total 1992 energy consumption on an annual basis. Wind energy creates jobs at a rate of four to ten times that of conventional energy sources, and could provide over one million jobs globally over the next twenty years

• The Energy Information Administration estimates that by 2020 renewable, clean energy sources can produce up to 20% of the nation’s electricity demand. Twelve states have already established a state Renewable Portfolio Standard to stimulate the growth of renewables.

• Increasing automobile fuel economy could save 4 million barrels a day – the amount of oil we currently import from the Persian Gulf.

• The National Academy of Sciences found that existing technology can dramatically improve the fuel economy of all types of vehicles, including light trucks and SUV's. This flies squarely in the face of republican accusations that progressives want to take away our sportscars and SUV's. There is NO impact on the size or safety of any vehicle.

• Over the past quarter century, energy efficiency gains have met more of our energy needs than any other source of power. Since 1975, the energy intensity of the US Gross Domestic Product has been reduced by more than 40%, cutting energy bills by close to $200 billion.

2. Power shortages exist and are due to environmental protections and lack of new fossil fuel power plants.

First, there is no energy shortage. Second, republicans will mislead by wrongly arguing that energy prices are strictly determined by supply and demand. In reality, game theory insists that price fixing/market manipulation is far more lucrative to energy companies. Deregulation allows for the loopholes that assist market-manipulating practices and make it far more difficult to detect illegal activities (e.g. Enron). Republicans will also wrongly claim that "environmentalists" are the culprits for higher energy prices, pushing for legislation on cleaner air and water, (i.e. Pollution controls on factories and other polluting firms) and requiring energy companies to meet certain standards on emissions and alternate energy use. They argue that these investments in the environment and the nation's future energy independence are so costly as to require higher prices charged by energy companies. This is laughable. It is similar to the claim by pharmaceutical companies that they must charge astronomical prices because of their R&D costs. Of course the pharmaceutical companies always fail to mention that 1) "[The] public sector -- not the private sector -- is chiefly responsible for a majority of the medically significant advances that have led to new treatments of disease." 2) the US government pays for a large portion of all private pharmaceutical research via tax incentives, tax breaks and research subsidies. 3) Pharmaceutical companies are always among the most profitable companies in the world. Who needs price controls when we can let the sick people support the wealthiest companies in the world? The same idea applies to the energy companies.

• Republican's answer to everything is, of course, deregulation. Now whom do you suppose deregulation helps? Consumers? Not on your life. It is the deregulated corporations that receive the benefits. Remember that regulation is always implemented to protect consumers. Period. Then, by definition, DE-regulation must do the opposite. (No. I am not claiming that there is no faulty regulation, but it is a rare phenomenon in this country considering the vast legislative process required to make any regulation law.) Deregulators will insist that businesses must be completely uninhibited in order to function at peak efficiency in order to create jobs and produce quality products at low prices. History has shown us that this is simply NOT the way things work. The two most obvious examples are Enron and the Savings and Loan fiasco. Greed always destroys the gears of unregulated markets.

Addressing the peripheral attacks: 

1. Progressives block all power plant production and oil drilling.

• This is a bold-faced lie and should be labeled as such. When Republicans are kept from raping our national monuments, they lash out, cry foul and make up lies like this in an attempt to manipulate public opinion. Don't fall into this trap and try to start quoting examples of where progressives have supported the construction of power plants or drilling. Simply reveal this for what it is - a baseless lie. 

• The Truth was presented very clearly by Paul Krugman of the NY Times, "[L]ast spring [2001], Dick Cheney lamented the fact that the U.S. hadn't built any new oil refineries since the 1970's, linking that lack of construction to environmental restrictions. I wrote a column last May pointing out that environmentalism had nothing to do with it, that refineries hadn't been built because the industry had excess capacity . What I didn't know was that several weeks earlier staffers at [Bush's] Environmental Protection Agency had written a scathing critique of Mr. Cheney's draft energy report, making exactly the same point." 

• Note matter-of-factly that the only "blocking" taking place is by the republicans of any reasonable attempt to develop alternative energy sources and free this country from the iron shackles of oil dependency.

2. ANWR will provide a significant source of oil and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

• Even if the US were operating at 100% of it's full capacity with all the Oil reserves on its shores open to it, the US would still HEAVILY depend on imported oil to meet its oil consumption needs. The Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve  would start producing in the year 2012 and thus have absolutely NO impact on today's, tomorrow's or even next years gas prices. If peak production is reached (about 1 million barrels (optimistic estimate) per day and probably not until 2030), it will probably account for only 3.7% of the estimated 27 million barrels per day that the US will demand at that time. Indeed by 2060, the entire US domestic supply of oil will be ZERO even if the Alaskan Reserve is tapped. What then? This is not a long time. We have to start thinking now about alternative energy sources. 

FACTS:

• Drilling in ANWR would most likely yield less than 2% of US consumption, and would not be available for consumption until after 2012 at a minimum

• When asked if US energy policy should prioritize expanding exploration, mining and drilling or more energy conservation, 54% of people favored conservation to expansion of production (Pew Research Center, 2/12-18/02). 

3. Progressives caused the California Energy Crisis.

In California, where most of the political battle to date has been fought, energy companies and those in favor of deregulation are clearly responsible for the energy crisis. We need only look to the criminal price fixing by Enron, El Paso and other energy companies that, through the wonders of deregulation, were able to manipulate energy markets and strip Californians of $30 billion, an outrageous, unpunished crime that could have existed only as a result of deregulation.  Indeed, the public favors price controls (polls: 70% in favor). California governor, Gray Davis, was correct when he said, against the backdrop of rolling blackouts in his state: "We are literally in a war with energy companies..." Documents from Enron and other energy companies later proved him to be completely on target. Remember "Fat Boys", "Death Stars" and "Get Shorty"

• Informed Republicans will retort, "Nonsense, What these companies did was illegal. Deregulation has nothing to do with criminal behavior such as this. These people broke the law. Regulation will do nothing to combat this." The response to this claim is, "While deregulation does not protect criminal activity, it does abolish many of the rules that are intended to maintain a watchful eye over the activities most likely to breed both criminal and unethical behavior. In some cases, deregulation even "legalizes" activities that would otherwise be deemed crimes. Thus, these activities become sheltered from criminal punishment.

4. ANWR is a wasteland.

Tagging rare pristine wilderness as "Wasteland " is indicative of the mentality that shows contempt for the environment that houses the water we drink and the air we breathe. More arsenic anyone? 
 

5. Progressives are a threat to National Security.

Nonsense. The true threat to National Security is the republicans' creation of an infrastructure and a culture so dependent upon oil for its very survival that this nation will face a crisis within our lifetime like none it has ever seen, unless something is done immediately. Oil will run out. Period. We are simply too reliant on foreign oil, more than half of which comes from some of the world’s least stable regions. September 11th has made the need for an energy security policy a matter of national urgency. Energy independence must be a national priority. It is vital to our national security, to the health of our environment, and to our future prosperity. According to the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, if you divide known world reserves by current annual production and add room for consumption growth, we see that we will run out of oil in less than 30 years! Other estimates run from between 14 and 60 years. Regardless, oil will run out. It is a limited natural resource, a fact that republicans refuse to believe (or at least admit). Each day republicans work overtime to inhibit the development of alternative energy sources and technologies is another day that the current oil reserves deplete by millions of barrels and another day that republicans lead the nation further into the abyss of a national emergency. Not only that, but the world's demand for the limited oil increases every day. Now is the time to invest in alternative energy sources. The republicans fight this endeavor and genuinely risk the nation's security.

• Ending Oil Dependency - "The oil economy makes industrialized countries more vulnerable and reduces our diplomatic options. A long-term security strategy requires a fundamental shift in energy policy." "Replacing oil as the mainstay of our energy policy should be central to a practical and strategic approach to winning the long-term struggle against terrorism, and would dramatically improve Western policy options in the Middle East." 

FACTS:

• Raising average fuel economy to 40 mpg using existing technology would save more than 4 million barrels a day by 2020 – more than we currently import from the entire Persian Gulf.

• According to the Energy Information Administration, an extra dollar on a $100 dollar electricity bill is all it would cost to enable the US to have greater energy security? That’s it.

• If only 20% of the nation’s electricity were produced by renewable energy sources, we would eliminate our dependence on Middle Eastern oil.

6. Progressives are disallowing the nation from producing the power it needs.

Nonsense. This relates back to the lie that progressives are blocking power plant production and oil drilling. In reality, progressives are ensuring that the nation receives the power that it needs. Indeed, while republicans flounder in their 19th century mindset to preserve their oil-buddies' bottom lines, progressives are pressing for the development of alternative energy sources and technologies to create the nation's energy independence and security.
 

FACTS:

• The United States consumes 25% of the world’s total oil production but has just 3% of the world’s known oil reserves. We currently import more than 2.5 million barrels of oil a day from the Middle East. 

7. Regulations are implemented for the purpose of restricting energy supply and raising prices.

Predictably, deregulators will cry, "If you cap prices it will diminish supplies.". Although true in theory, practically speaking, price caps will come into play only in times of relative emergency. Emergency is of course no time to deprive the public of survival levels of energy. To suggest that price caps will in any way harm day to day operations is a bunch of garbage.
 

Addressing the nonsensical issues/attacks: Never address these, lest you lend credibility to an incredible attack.
 

PROGRESSIVE ATTACK:

Talking Points:

• Energy companies, through the wonders of deregulation, were able to manipulate energy markets and strip Californians of $30 billion in 2001.

• Sensible regulation preserves the integrity of capitalism by filtering out the one weakness in the capitalist theory, greedy-criminal-bastards.

• Price caps will come into play only in times of relative emergency. Emergency is of course no time to deprive the public of survival levels of energy. To suggest that price caps will in any way harm day to day operations is a bunch of garbage.

• Oil is, for those who either don't know or don't care, a "LIMITED natural resource" (ie, one day, probably in our lifetime, oil will be gone). Bottom line, we have to develop alternative energy sources NOW.

• Government oversight of the means of energy transmission (i.e. powerlines, pipelines, etc.) is absolutely necessary for the sake of National Security. (Republicans want to privatize)

• Even if ANWR were producing at full capacity (which would take decades to realize) it would still only be producing 2%-3% of our daily oil needs

• Deregulation presents a "Kinder, Gentler" environment for corporate malfeasance and was the policy base that allowed the Enron debacle to happen. 

• Republican oil dependency will be our undoing if we don't make an immediate paradigm shift on energy policy.

• Replacing oil as the mainstay of our energy policy should be central to a practical and strategic approach to winning the long-term struggle against terrorism.

• Define energy policy as national security policy. Our oil dependence is a threat.

• Talk about the jobs potential. Renewables and energy efficiency are more labor intensive than traditional sources of energy. This is a global market that we need to capture. Imagine that SUV's, Light Trucks and other cars with increased energy efficiency would serve as a highly lucrative and desirable export.

• Emphasize that these solutions are available now and are cost-effective. The technology is tested and well developed.

• Emphasize that expanding domestic supplies of traditional energy sources does not make economic or security sense. Those concerned about the environmental aspect are already well aware of the impact from traditional energy sources.

Republican Actions:

Bush and the Republicans.....

• Drafted an energy plan in secret with Enron and other energy companies, granting specific favors to Enron and its CEO Ken Lay. The Government Accounting Office had to sue the administration to gain access to information about the private meetings with energy executives. This plan provides billions of dollars in corporate subsidies, the rollback of clean air rules, and the limited support of efficiency and renewables

• Insist that our only way to energy independence is through increased drilling, rather than expanding renewable energy alternatives.

• Reduced incentives for clean energy and consumer protections

• Rolled back clean air rules

• Refused to support standards and incentives that would open the market for renewable energy sources.

• The Bush-Enron energy policies do not solve the real issues facing our economy, and do not significantly increase the security or sustainability of our energy reserves.

• While Californians were being scammed by big energy companies, Californians cut peak electricity demand by 14% in six months, with a third of consumers reducing demand by over 20%, to end their recent energy crisis. The Bush administration pushed for expensive, slow and unnecessary increases in capacity, effectively lining the pockets of the very energy interests that were robbing Californians of more than $30 billion (Lovins, Amory B. “Supply-side Stupor.” American Prospect. January, 2002).

Buzzwords: 

• Enron, Halliburton, Harken, National Security, Energy Independence, (Fatboys, Death stars, Get Shorty), clean energy, efficiency, opportunity, Bush-Enron, Enron Republicans

Soundbites:

• "Price-gouging energy companies"
• "GOP stands for Gas, Oil and Plutonium Party" (Also See GrandOldPetroleum.com)
• "Republican Oil Dependency"
• "We cannot drill our way out of our energy problem."
• "Republicans are tying our national security to the oil fields of unstable Persian Gulf dictators."
• "The solution is not to produce more oil, which is scarce, but to produce more energy from renewable sources, which are infinite."

PROGRESSIVE POLICY:

America needs a comprehensive energy strategy that reduces our dependence on foreign oil while strengthening our economy. It must de-link our national security from the oil fields of Middle Eastern dictators. This strategy must fundamentally alter both where we get our energy and how we consume it.

Progressives will launch a 10-year project on energy independence mobilizing science, technology, investment and development to eliminate our dependence on Middle Eastern oil, and dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil altogether. We can do this by focusing on 3 goals: 1) stimulate energy production from renewable sources 2) dramatically increase energy efficiency 3) Diversify domestic energy sources

The Progressive energy plan offers: energy independence, national security, environmental protection, economic and job growth and improved productivity. All of this is made possible through the introduction of incentives, standards and investments in alternative energies, clean air, water and other green growth markets. 
 

Create incentives and standards to encourage diversity of domestic fuel sources, including:

• Provide loan guarantees for the construction of the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline to the lower 48 states to provide greater access to cheaper natural gas and to create 400,000 new jobs.
• Increase investment in alternative energy sources and technology:
• Technology: Fuel cells, self-contained personal power plants (hydrogen engines)
• Sources: Wind, Ethanol, Hydrogen, Solar, Geothermal, Biomass

• Improve the efficiency of regional transportation systems by investing in transit and high-speed rail.
• Increase energy efficiency standards for appliances, creating household savings.
• Improve the fuel economy of the American automobile fleet through standards, tax incentives,  and deployment of new technology.

FURTHER COMMENT:

Regulation and Capitalism: Republicans will claim that the pro-regulation crowd is anti capitalist. Utter nonsense. In reality, the pro-regulation crowd is trying to filter out the one weakness in the capitalist theory, greedy-criminal-bastards. Enron, Worldcom, Entergy, Arthur Anderson, Dynegy, Reliant, Halliburton, Harken, Tyco, Global Crossing, Qwest, CMS Energy, El Paso, Williams Cos. etc, etc. The truth is that regulators preserve the integrity of capitalism and allow it to work as it should. 

Price Cap Levels: In general, price caps should be kept at a relatively unattractive price level to ensure that consumers don't go haywire and start bingeing on available energy willy-nilly. On the other hand, this does not give carte blanch to energy companies to raise their prices to the limit during non-emergency times. Any regulation should be reasonable, in place strictly for the reason of stifling gross greed via unethical but otherwise legal behavior and revealing market practices to inhibit illegal activities. The idea is to let markets work and provide a safety net in the event of an emergency. This way, regulation will not discourage conservation or capitalism.

Privatization: A related issue that might arise is the California proposal of state ownership of the means of energy transmission (i.e. powerlines, pipelines, etc.) Of course, Republicans are against state ownership of anything. Feel free to remind them that the integrity of our nation's powerlines, pipelines and the like are a part of the integrity of our national security. As the military and intelligence agencies are ultimately state-owned for reasons of national security, so too should our means of energy transfer. (Note of outrage: Republicans even want to privatize our drinking water! Are they on crack?). Remember that this is necessary for the sake of National security!

Nevertheless, this shouldn't surprise anyone. Indeed, the Bush administration has a history of putting commerce ahead of national security. (See "Privatization" for more information.)
 

MUST READ:

Ending Oil Dependency (http://www.observer.co.uk/waronterrorism/story/0,1373,564843,00.html)
Straight Talk (http://www.ourfuture.org)