"Obama's Brave Decison to Drill Offshore "

[Cha]

One person's take..by Raymond J. Learsy, Scholar and author, "Over a Barrel: Breaking Oil's Grip on Our Future":

In an act of vision and courage, given the hostage the nation has become to the oil industry, oil interests, and the likes of OPEC, the Obama administration is proposing opening vast expanses along the Atlantic coastline, the Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska to oil and natural gas drilling.

This is a momentous moment and brings to mind the leadership of another time and another president. In the depth of the depression, President Roosevelt, with courage and imagination, sought different solutions to confront the crippling economic conditions that had descended on the nation. He petitioned Congress to mandate the creation of "a corporation clothed with the power of government but possessed of the flexibility and initiative of private enterprise". In May 1933 Congress passed the TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) Act to revitalize the economically stricken Tennessee Valley in areas of power generation, river navigation, flood control, reforestation and erosion control. It became outstandingly successful in each category.

During the war years the TVA set upon perhaps the largest hydroelectric construction program ever undertaken in the United States, building 12 major hydroelectric plants to provide power to critical war industries. To this day the TVA has an aggressive clean air program and in this and many other areas as well, has set a standard for public responsibility against which private companies can be measured.

Given the massive rise in oil prices over the last decade and the distortions we have experienced in the oil markets, we as a nation have lost virtually all vestige of trust in the oil industry to develop our resources on federal lands or at sea in a way that benefits all Americans. As presently constituted, the oil-concession system is an abomination that has benefited virtually no one but the oil companies at great expense to the nation as a whole.

Clearly this aberration of a loaded system benefiting just one element of society -- the oil industry -- with its powerful and moneyed interests and influence must stop. Drilling offshore on federally controlled areas is the place to start.

We are at a crossroads for President Obama to seize the moment by establishing our own National Oil Trust. It could be modeled after our own experience with the TVA and that of the world's third largest energy exporter, Norway's National Oil Trust.

Norway's Oil Trust's stated objective is to contribute and create the greatest public value for Norwegian society from Norway's oil and gas deposits. Profits from the Norway's oil and gas operations accrue to the Norwegian Government's Pension Fund and is invested in conservative bonds and investments.

Were we to have a similar program, the trust could be mandated to direct its revenues toward developing alternative energy programs and to expand mass transportation, thereby becoming a cornerstone for energy independence and combating climate change.

Norway's Oil Trust is a source of national pride and accomplishment. So too would a sense of pride and accomplishment accrue to us with our own National Oil Trust. President Obama, now is the moment to build on Roosevelt's legacy!


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raymond-j-learsy/obamas-brave-deciison-to_b_519836.html

Thinking outside the box has got a lot of raging again..we'll see how this turns out down the road..may we all be around & healthy to see it unfold.

[JeffR]

1. He makes a nuanced and intelligent argument that I don't find wholly persuasive.

But it's a worthwhile read, and thanks for posting, Cha. It's intriguing that he describes this move as "brave" since the description "shrewd" in the political sense is the best thing I can find to say about the decision at this point. It's only when we know the details of a comprehensive new national energy policy that the real impact of this will be understood. In the meantime, back on the intertubes, the usual white noise will issue from the usual white noise generators, and a few noisy knees will jerk as if hooked up to electrodes. For me, I don't like this, but the nearer I get to death, the more open I like to keep my mind.

The idea of a National Oil Trust is unassailable, though, and the White House should be pressured on this idea, which has no doubt already been kicked back and forth around West Wing water coolers.

[get the red out]

2. I look at it pragmatically

The ONLY way this country has any hope for advancing on any front at all, health care, environment, jobs.... you name it, is for President Obama to serve two terms. In order to be re-elected he has to find a way to create jobs, and be seen as looking to solve the energy problems short term as well as long term. He has to take a talking point away from the Republicans. I wish we could do away with fossil fuels, clean up the environment, provide health care for everyone, the whole deal; but what gets us there will not fly with most people if it hits them too quickly. So compromise is the only answer. People have been propagandized too way to long to spring big changes on them.

If a Republican gets elected and the media is able to paint President Obama as "another failed democratic presidency like Jimmy Carter" this country is SCREWED! We will see major step backs in every area you can think of, I don't doubt we could fall into a huge depression. This country is full of people who will believe lies and fear tactics, and this country also cannot survive another Republican Presidency right now and still be considered anything close to "first world" by the end of it. We would be lucky if we escaped theocracy imposed by machine gun wielding tea-bagger "morality police", something like the Christian version of Iran. Theocracy for the promotion of corporate interests of course, that disgusting bond of religion and corporate interest is what I believe we have been fighting for so long in this country. I believe it is the money and power behind the whole tea bagger/militia mess we see on TV. Fat preachers telling their minions that God wants them to have guns but not health care.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

3. You're right.

We need to solve the energy problem, but for too many of us, none of the short term solutions are viable. Drilling has an environmental impact. Nuclear energy has an environmental impact. Coal mining has an environmental impact. There's just no current way around it on a massive scale.

I very firmly believe we need to invest heavily into finding alternatives, but until that time comes, we've got to either pick something that we can do here or rely on other countries to supply us with fuel. There's not another solution. Might as well create some jobs while we're at it.

[Cary]

4. Even wind and solar have environmental impacts

But my problem with this move is that it doesn't really do anything whatsoever to solve the energy problem.

[Bobbie Jo]

5. Keeps the speculators from screwing around with

gas prices in the short term, and puts the Saudis on notice to some extent. This is only a small component of his comprehensive plan

Besides...this is more of a strategic move. The oil companies won't touch it if it isn't profitable.

[goclark]

6. I see your point

I believe he is trying to make the best of a bad situation.

[northernlights]

7. brave and brilliant. absolutely brilliant. nt

[Cha]

8. Things change and President Obama

is on this OIL SPILL that was a result of bushcheney Deregulation.

And, yes, he is brave and brilliant.

"The administration has set up a website devoted exclusively to the BP Oil Spill."

http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/

[northernlights]

9. deregulation existed when he decided to expand offshore drilling

all that changed is the effects of deregulation got in the way.

I hope and pray he figures out that there are probably risks he's not aware of surrounding nuclear energy too. I'd hate to lose a few states for 10s of thousands of years.

But I'm very glad they set up a web page. That makes such a huge difference. Really, it does. Much better than W's flyover.

[Cha]

10. Of course the bushcheney laws were still in effect

but that didn't mean the President was going to keep it that way. He believes in accountability.

[berni_mccoy]

11. You're life must be so void for you to come here and try to kick this in the face of supporters

of the President. I feel sorry for you. I really do.

[bertman]

12. "kick this in the face of supporters of the President." Huh??!! Berni, are you saying

that setting up a website is DOING SOMETHING about the flow of oil into the Gulf? Are you saying that the President's decision to curry favor with Lindsey Graham by putting our entire coastline at risk is something we supporters of the President should find comforting?

Have you been reading or following any of the discussion on this issue, such as the fact that there have been ZERO substantive changes in the regulations since President Obama took office? Are we supposed to stand up and cheer because we all want more oil rigs off our coast so we can (maybe) obtain enough oil to last the United States less than a year? Does that sound like a good risk to you?

If it does, I feel sorry for you. I really do.

[Cha]

13. bertman..get out of here..you ain't nothing but negative everything

on the President so you don't even enter this door.

[bertman]

14. Excuse me. I supported the President with my time, money, and vote to get him elected

and I support him now, but I refuse to treat him as the savior of the world. When he does things that I do not agree with I will speak up. I am not a German circa 1938. Thank you.

[Cha]

15. That's what I mean..you're sayin' bullshit like everyone

who doesn't see it your way is German circa 1938. So go peddle your hate elsewhere.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

21. *cough* bullshit *cough* (nt)

[quiet.american]

16. Aren't those "substantive changes" supposed to be debated/included in the climate/energy bill?

Since that has not yet been taken up, debated and passed, it would seem obvious as to why the changes are not there.

Speaking for myself, the climate/energy bill is about a lot more than currying "favor with Lindsay Graham by putting our entire coastline at risk." It's about shepherding climate legislation through our Congress which is composed of just under 50% batshit-crazy members, in order to deliver not only on domestic promises of improved energy policy, but Obama's global promise of improved energy policy.

You know, not for nothing, bertman - no one here is trying to call you a "good German,"-- but there's all of DU (and most of it eager to join in on whaling away on Obama) -- why feel the need to come to the Barack Obama Group to do it, and then get upset when that's not especially welcome here?

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

18. If you think a forum whose mission statement clearly states what the group is for is like

Nazi Germany in any way, then you must have taken a history class form an uncredited high school or majored in Drama.

And I say that as someone that criticized Obama's decision on offshore drilling when it was first announced.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

20. Ah, a slam on a "typo". Bravo. Clearly that makes up for hysterical comparisons to Nazis.

Two options being discussed in a single sentence (as not everyone takes history in college and not all high schools offer drama) isn't exactly an uncommon occurrence.

As far as criticism goes, I was with you until you whipped out the Nazis.

On Edit: IOW, I thought your criticism was spot on until you brought up the Nazis. It's a pet peeve of mine.