Hodes Missed a Chance to Lower Energy Costs

By JIM STEINER

U. S. Rep. Paul Hodes is partially correct when he notes, “Unfortunately, political posturing in Washington is holding up real action” on energy issues (“I’m working to solve the nation’s energy crisis,” Monitor Forum, Aug. 7). His focus, however, is misdirected.

Hodes misses the mark on solutions that could have occurred – indeed, should have occurred – and which he could have been part of this summer. Votes should have taken place before the unnecessary five-week congressional vacation. Cheers for those who tried in vain to avoid a recess. Congress had a duty to vote on relief for Americans. Small wonder the rating for Congress is at an all-time low. Congress needed to show leadership and resolve. It failed.

Had I been the 2nd District congressman, I would have supported the following:

– Suspend the 18.4 cents-per-gallon gas tax to promote travel and tourism.

– Suspend the tariff on ethanol, to allow the free market to impact ethanol pricing, overnight.

– Promote, in conjunction with a long-term plan to develop domestic resources in Alaska, our shale oil resources and coastal supplies, the release of one-third of the strategic oil reserve into the market in the summer of 2008.

A drop of ink

The last point enjoys bipartisan support. The difference is in volume. Hodes suggests diverting a smaller volume daily from the strategic oil reserve, therefore introducing modest volume into the market. Unfortunately, this is like adding a drop of ink to a bottle of water. It turns the color a shade, but it is diluted. What is needed to impact the market immediately is a release of one-third of the reserve. This is no different than has occurred in the past.

Relief for Americans this summer was within reach. My opponent proposes “developing a new energy strategy based on conservation and renewable energy [as] the challenge of our generation.”

Realistically, the economy does best when Congress backs off. We must allow oil companies to invest in developing resources that accomplish two longer-term stabilizing goals for America: (1) keeping the price of gas, once reduced, below $3 per gallon and lower; and (2) developing sufficient economic alternative drilling options to keep the price per barrel below $100 in conjunction with developing energy independence for this country.

The short-term plan for 2008 made sense, but the real goal must be long-term energy independence, not merely conservation and alternative energy. The long-term plan stood ready for a vote prior to vacation. It is called the American Energy Act. It provides for new refineries to increase the volume of processed gas. It provides for limited drilling in ANWR, the coastal areas, and our shale oil resources to allow companies the opportunity to develop the most economic alternative drilling locations. It provides for new nuclear plants. It provides for tax incentives for alternative energy development and personal energy conservation efforts. There was time to bring the American Energy Act to debate and a vote. It did not happen.

I intend to be part of the Congress that stays in D.C. and gets the job done.

Winter is approaching. The focus on alternative energy and conservation is misplaced in the debate for achieving energy independence. A real plan for independence has an impact not just on energy costs, but on the economy, small business, the strength of the dollar and national security. Timing and leadership are key.

The recess should be curtailed. It is time for Congress to get to work for the American people. My vote would be to act immediately and to protect Americans and our economy by passing legislation to provide the roadmap for achieving energy independence.

(Jim Steiner of Concord is a Republican candidate for Congress.)

Originally published by JIM STEINER For the Monitor.

(c) 2008 Concord Monitor. Provided by ProQuest LLC. All rights Reserved.