President Obama and the Obamacrats are trying onced again to hide the truth about energy production in the USA. The latest is the call by Obama's economic adviser Gene Sperling for federal regulation of the use of fracking for completing wells in shale formations. According to Sperling, the industry should welcome federal regulation to make sure that development is done properly. Indeed, according to the AP, "Sperling said the Obama administration, which has made natural gas a cornerstone of its energy policy, was working to develop a framework for promoting shale gas production. He did not offer specifics on what type of regulation the adminstration would support."
Sperling's statement is wrong on many levels. First, it is ridiculous for Obama or any of his people to claim that they have made "natural gas a cornerstone of [their] energy policy". In speech after speech, Obama has talked about solar and wind energy but never mentioned natural gas. When discussing American fossil fuel reserves, Obama always talks about how the US has such a small amount of proven reserves of oil, but he never mentions the vast shale gas deposits that could easily provide decades or centuries of energy to America. Obama has pushed repeatedly for the production of electric cars (which ultimately are powered by burning coal) but has never once spoken about the need for vehicles powered by natural gas. In short, Obama has always ignored natural gas even though it represents the most abundant, clean and useful energy source available to US consumers.
Second, everyone knows what it means for the feds to "regulate" fracking. We can all see the results of the federal regulation of off shore wells in the Gulf of Mexico or off Alaska. Obama has had a moratorium preventing any deep water drilling in the Gulf for the last year. Just this week, the feds also denied a permit to Shell to drill in Alaska in an area that is supposed to have twenty five billion barrels of oil (or close to a five year supply for US needs.) Shell spent $4 billion to buy the rights to drill in the area, money already paid to the federal government, but the same government is now "regulating" Shell so as to prevent any drilling in the area. Next time Obama denounces the $4 billion subsidy that big oil gets from the USA, maybe someone should mention the $4 billion subsidy that Shell oil gave to the USA for drilling rights that it cannot use. Federal regulation of fracking would just mean higher cost, less production and no protection for the environment. The regulation is about government control, not protecting the environment.
Third, only an Obamacrat could call for industry to support federal regulation of fracking without even bothering to state what the regulations would be. Think of it! what if the governor of your state called upon you to support higher taxes without ever telling you what those taxes would be. There would be a big difference between raising sales taxes by one half of one percent and raising the top income tax bracket to 78%. Most folks would like to know what the proposal is before deciding whether or not it makes sense. I guess this goes back to the basic Obamacrat line of reasoning: we have to enact the regulaitons to find out what is in them.
All of this makes clear that Obama and his cronies are not serious about wanting to promote higher energy output. These statements are all for show. But, the American people are not as dumb as obama and his cronies think they are. Obama will get that message clearly in November of 2012.
If I haven't said it lately, let me add once again: "Obama has got to go!!!!!!!"
No comments:
Post a Comment