COLUMN: Remove lobbyist leaches from U.S. energy policy

Drew Miller Columnist

From global warming to terrorism, many of the issues facing America are ultimately related to our energy consumption. One would think then that working to reduce consumption and increase supply would be high priorities for either candidate. And you’d be right, I guess. But there is a reason that these plans regarding energy consumption are phrased in vague generalities.

Establishing an effective energy policy will be a daunting task for President Kerry or President Bush. While some steps are obvious, others are definitely controversial. Most agree that reducing our dependence on foreign oil is a high priority. Just how to reduce that dependence remains unclear.

The energy bill Bush pushed was a $31 billion dollar boondoggle that John McCain referred to as the “hooters and polluters” bill — it dedicated billions to subsidies for polluting industries and millions more for tangentially related pork-barrel spending. Oh, and it would have rolled back a number of important environmental regulations. Thankfully, it died in the Senate.

This could be read as a criticism of the Bush administration, but it is really more of an example of the sad state of affairs in energy politics. The oil and coal company lobbyists have substantial power, which will make it difficult for either president to pass bills that best represent the public interest.

Agricultural energy is important in the swing-state region of the Midwest (a must-win place for both candidates), which means that large subsidies are promised to things like ethanol and biodiesel, with little regard to their effectiveness.

The new president will need to break through the substantial barriers put in place by corporate politics.

He will have to outmaneuver lobbyists and resist the urge to pander. Both candidates have laid out plans for energy that sound promising — in my opinion, Kerry’s much more so.

If either energy plan passes without additional riders and handouts (and without deficit spending), America will be better off.

I am crossing my fingers for it, but I won’t be holding my breath.