|
Vol. 225 No. 8 |
|
 |
| JOHN MCCAUGHEY, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR, WASHINGTON |
Energy issues fade among US election-year topics. Pivotal as it is to the economy, energy policy will play no part in the current presidential race – short of, at any rate, some major crisis. It would take an event of such magnitude as the fall of the House of Saud, perhaps, or major blackouts in California and elsewhere, when gas-fired generating plants run out of fuel.
That aside, the electorate is far more interested in jobs and Homeland Security than it is in arcane debates about the timing and advisability of releasing oil from the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham spoke at length on this topic, but he is so far embedded in the long tradition of know-nothing energy secretaries that no one paid any attention. Perhaps people in prison or in dentists' waiting rooms read the whole interview, as they have more time on their hands.
True, a few people are following energy policy this summer. This elite group includes Halliburton conspiracy theorists, and/or Michael Moore fans, who, because President George W. Bush was once photographed shaking hands with one of many Saudi princes, believe that this administration is now run directly from Riyadh. But everyone knows for whom these persons are going to vote, so it scarcely matters.
Gasoline prices, for one brief shining moment, seemed like a hot political issue, but the topic had no traction. Consumers didn't seem to care, reasoning (as did the late J. P. Morgan) that “markets will fluctuate.” SUVs are as popular as ever. As one columnist wrote, “gas is pricey, but at least it's plentiful. Why whine?” In fact, gasoline is cheaper in real terms than it was 25 years ago, and there is no rationing or long lines. Revealing a common sense with which it is seldom credited, the public seems to have decided philosophically that, in any case, there is little that politicians can do about high oil prices. Meanwhile, the economy is ticking along just fine.
This leaves candidates Bush and Sen. John Kerry (Democrat – Massachusetts) with little to bluster about on energy. Bush's energy strategy is all contained in his massive bill that is hopelessly bowed down by the sheer weight of pork and is going absolutely nowhere this year (more on this later). Kerry has chosen to take refuge in inflated promises (for example, a massive shift to wind energy for electricity generation) that seem too good to be true, probably because they are too good to be true.
A waspish Washington Times editorial column went after Kerry: “Coming from a family that owns five palatial, energy-consuming homes, its very own Gulfstream II jet, a 42-foot powerboat, eight vehicles (including two Jeeps and a Chevy Suburban) and a Harley, Mr. Kerry has no standing when it comes to dealing with energy problems or the current surge in gasoline prices. Nevertheless, Mr. Kerry wants middle- and working-class Americans to believe that he truly feels their pain . . . .”
 |
 |
President George W. Bush (right) and challenger, Sen. John Kerry, have not been able to excite US voters about energy issues to date.
|
|
All of this leaves Washington's energy establishment in the summer with little to do. There are no deals going on in smoke-filled rooms, and energy policy has sunk into a gentle torpor. There is nothing much to lobby upon except technical items – perchance a particular little piece of pork for one member company here, or for a segment of your trade group membership there. But there is no Big Issue. It is a dispiriting time for lobbyists who, as a result, find themselves heeding the siren calls of the golf courses. Maybe the cell phone will warble at the 19th hole.
Everyone (except, perhaps, Bush himself) has given up on the President's energy bill, which was submitted to the Hill three years ago. In June, House Republicans under the banner of the amusingly named House Energy Action Team (HEAT) declared an “Energy Week” to push the bill. But the week seemed weak. All the House managed to do was to pass the same bill that it had approved last fall and which failed in the Senate. This is the pork-packed bill that Sen. John McCain (Republican – Arizona) called the “No Lobbyist Left Behind” bill. That package is still going nowhere.
Sighed another commentator, “At this time of the year, its all politics, all of the time. That means complete legislative gridlock.”
In the end, then, it seems that the energy issues that consume Washington professionals resonate very little this year with voters in Rapid City, South Dakota; Toledo, Ohio; or even Santa Fe, New Mexico. Voters seem to be complacent about surging energy prices and possessed of a boundless optimism that prices, within reason, will continue on their present path. This makes it difficult for politicians to score partisan points.
There seems only one thing to be done to bring energy issues back to the forefront. It is a bold initiative, replete with risks but laden with commensurate rewards. Vice Presidential aspirant, Sen. John Edwards (Democrat – North Carolina), and his trial lawyer friends must launch the mother of all class-action suits, charging OPEC with long-standing, continuing manipulation of oil prices to the immediate, grave detriment of American consumers. No redneck jury would fail to convict or to award zillions of dollars in damages. And the Kerry/ Edwards ticket would surf its way effortlessly into the White House. 
John McCaughey edits and publishes Energy Perspective, a Washington-based, fortnightly publication featuring in-depth coverage of major energy topics. Mr. McCaughey has written and edited for Irish newspapers, an international news agency, the London-based Financial Times and the US-based Energy Daily newsletter, and contributed to many other newspapers. He regularly contributes to this column.
|
