domestic oil production

Time to roll out what I imagine will be a regular feature of this blog, The Arg! Files, wherein I discuss a liberal talking point used incessently that makes me want to scream "Arg!" everytime I hear it.  Enjoy...

In yesterday's Washington Post op-ed, "What Palin Got Wrong About Energy", Senators Barbara Boxer and John Kerry once again roll out this silly talking point:

"...the United States has only 3 percent of the world's proven oil reserves, while we are responsible for 25 percent of the world's oil consumption."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/23/AR2009072302633.html

This has been in wide use among Democrats for some time now, making an appearance in the presidential debates last year and in nearly every discussion of energy policy.  Of course, on close examination, it has not a fraction of the power they imagine it does.  But who examines this stuff closely anyway?

While the numbers they cite are true, it is also true that the United States has less than 5% of the world's population and produces more than 27% of the world's wealth (measured in GDP).  Given that discrepancy, and the fact that we are far and away the most economically developed country in the world, don't you think we should be expected to use more oil?  Would they have us to produce less wealth to even things out?  And no, Mr. Liberal, I'm not going to let you get away with saying we don't share all that wealth.  The U.S. is the world's largest private and public charitable giver.  Plus, our goods and services are exported across the globe. 

There are three ways to balance the inequality put forth in the talking point: find more oil, use less oil, or some combination of the first two.  Usually, the implication from Dems who make this point is that the United States must use less oil, since most causal observers would believe you can't possibly add to our oil reserves.  But there again is a faulty premise.  The statistic cited, "proven oil reserves", isn't just the total amount of oil in the ground.  It's more strictly oil believed to be recoverable with a high probability and under "existing economic and political conditions".  Anything about that definition jump out at you?  Why would it be that under existing conditions the United States has a dearth of oil reserves?  I'll give you a clue: it's one word, starts with an L, ends with an S,  and the middle sounds like "iberal".  That's right, liberals.  Way back in 1972, the U.S. produced, get this, 25% of the world's oil.  It's 10% now - and falling.  What happened in between?  Endless environmental regulations slowed or closed off nearly all new production.  Our "proven reserves" don't count gigantic oil basins in Alaska or off-shore because under existing political conditions, we can't recover that oil.  Think any of those Middle Eastern countries have similar restraints?  Dream on.  The "proven reserves" would shoot up under a "Drill, Baby, Drill" energy policy.  Our liberal friends will have nothing of it but don't mind making political hay out of the sad stat they've helped create. 

Final point: if the United States had 100% of the world's proven oil reserves, do you think liberals and Dems would advocate more oil use?  Of course not, and that is the fundamental hypocrisy of this formulation.  They care not a wit about our actual oil reserves, they care about our evil consumerism and its impact on global warming.  They'd use any stat they could to convince us of our evil ways - I just wish they'd stop using this one, it's driving me crazy. 

The Minority Report has obtained a sneak peak at a full-page ad that will appear tomorrow on the front page of The New York TImes, The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post.

The letter, written to the American people is signed by four of the top CEO's in the country.

The letter reads, in part:

The Unshaken Pillar

While key pillars of our economy — housing, banking, autos — have been shaken, one pillar stands unshaken and provides the stability that our economy so desperately needs at this critical time. That pillar touches every American. It supports every local economy. It interacts with every business sector, from agriculture to technology. It provides more than 1.8 million high-paying jobs and another 4.6 million related jobs. It is a pillar of our economy that will not and cannot go away. That pillar is energy.

Today, Americans understand that a strong and diverse energy sector is vital to our economic well-being and prosperity. They know that energy produced here at home creates good-paying American jobs, reduces our dependence on others, and spurs the necessary investment and innovation needed to develop all forms of energy. Congress responded to the American public. Its decision to let expire the 26-year moratorium on exploration of the Outer Continental Shelf may prove to be a significant measure in addressing our long-term economic health. The best guarantee of America’s energy security and economic competitiveness is a combination of exploring for more oil and gas at home, intensified initiatives to develop alternative and renewable forms of energy, and continued improvements in energy efficiency and conservation.

The entire letter and the signatories are here:

It is encouraging during this trying economic time to find CEO's of major American Corporations who still see America as a land of opportunity, and a bright City on the Hill.

Bill Smith, Editor: Congressional Democrat leaders attending the DNC 2008 in Denver are attempting to transfer their failures to President Bush in an effort to distract voters by claiming their candidate is running against the Bush/McCain or McCain/Bush ticket. America is not stupid. Bush is retiring to Texas. And, Sen. John McCain as a maverick has never been part of the Bush team. It is true that Bush and McCain have conservative principles on which they agree. However, McCain as a maverick never placed party line first and often reached across the Senate isle to work with Democrats on critical issues. McCain has a leading democrat backing him and even the current identified Democratic vice president said positive things about McCain's qualifications to be president. Allegiances are shifting everywhere but with the Democratic leadership in Congress

While the candidates carry out their campaigns as they determine best, the Congressional Democrat leadership hides their failures behind George Bush. They are pursing a "con" job on the voters. They are working hard to sell their head-in-the-sand approach to energy policy to the American people. This may prove to be difficult with the divisions in their party who are deciding whether to continue following the inept Democrat leadership's refusal to produce more American energy. Some are tired of their leaders' ineptness and are considering joining with Republicans and sensible Democrats in support for policies like opening more areas to offshore drilling. ABC News reports that Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) is concerned that Democrats’ lack of action on a comprehensive energy solution could cost them politically. Abercrombie has joined with his GOP colleague Rep. John Peterson of Pennsylvania to urge a vote on an offshore drilling proposal.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is paying attention. Pelosi has not been bothered by these situations and has even advocated for Democrats with competitive races to lie and side with the Republicans because she can still stall and control things back in Congress. Though she’s been saying that drilling could be part of an energy package, she refuses to commit to a specific vote. Reuters reports, “She criticized President George W. Bush and other Republicans for presenting offshore drilling as an answer to the recent rise in U.S. gasoline prices, saying expanded drilling would not affect prices for a decade and then only by a small degree. ‘I don’t think that's a good alternative. But if they can prove that it is, and they want to pay royalties to the taxpayer ... then we have something to talk about’. . .”

Non-leader Pelosi would rather deal in distractions than grasp the laws of supply and demand. She says that drilling is not in her DNA. She would do well to read today’s New York Times, which discusses the recent rapid increase in American natural gas production. The Times writes, “Domestic natural gas prices have already plunged 42 percent since early July, an even faster drop in price than oil or most other commodities, in part because the rapid supply growth has begun to influence the market. Price spikes remain possible, of course, but throughout the industry the shale discoveries are causing a shift in thinking about the long-term outlook.”

Although doubtful, Democrats who understand how supply and demand work will be able to use their time in Denver to convince Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to that a “find more and use less” approach to energy is the best way to lower gas prices and provide more energy to America. Republicans have put forward a number of serious plans to do just that. It begs the question, when will the wiser more reasoned Democrats stop being lead by people who are disgracing their positions and hurting the American people? Also, noticeable is that five Democrat senators put themselves forward as qualified to be President of the United States and yet, not one of them would lead the effort to replace an inept Harry Reid. Pelosi and Reid, democrat agents of "no" change!