 |
McCain Confused Over Energy Subsidies |
 |
The WSJ reported yesterday the differences in John McCain’s and Barack Obama’s approaches to energy policy, noting McCain’s strong resistance to government support for clean and renewable energies (subscription may be required):
For example, while Sen. McCain says he favors an effort to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil, his voting record shows a reluctance to support mandates, tax credits and other policies often touted by other politicians, including Sen. Obama, as ways to spur greater use of alternative energies and energy efficiency. Sen. McCain argues that many of the steps are little more than subsidies that enrich special interests….
At a roundtable with business leaders in Washington state last month, Sen. McCain expressed reluctance to support government incentives such as tax credits for wind and solar energy. He compared his stance on the matter to his position on corn ethanol. “I’m a little wary — I have to give you straight talk — about government subsidies,” he said. “When government jumps in and distorts the market, then there’s unintended consequences as well as intended.”
Well, that certainly is straight talk. Especially from the candidate who last week announced his opposition to the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act because it didn’t include enough subsidies for the nuclear industry:
As I have said, I’m very deeply committed to the nuclear component of any legislation that will have a significant effect on greenhouse gas emissions…And I’ve been disappointed so far that there has not been a robust and serious addressing of the issue of nuclear power.
To get this a little straighter, McCain is opposed to subsidizing clean and renewable energy on the grounds that subsidies are bad; however, he favors subsidizing the nuclear industry on the grounds that we need clean and renewable energy; all whilst opposing a bill that does, in fact, seek to build clean and renewable sources of energy (which nuclear is not) and still provides plenty of subsidies to nuclear energy.
Here is what John McCain told Grist last year about supporting (truly) clean and renewable energies like wind and solar:
I’m not one who believes that we need to subsidize things. The wind industry is doing fine, the solar industry is doing fine. In the ’70s, we gave too many subsidies and too much help, and we had substandard products sold to the American people, which then made them disenchanted with solar for a long time.
Huh. I didn’t know the wind industry was doing fine. I also didn’t know Americans have been disenchanted with solar since the ’70s, (though I do remember them getting pretty disenchanted with nuclear power when this and this happened around that time). Of course nuclear accidents haven’t stopped the federal government from providing what can only be described as a “robust and serious” endorsement of nuclear in recent decades, with the nuclear power industry receiving nearly $100 billion in subsidies since WWII. Just for good measure, McCain (the one who doesn’t believe we need to subsidize things) proposed an additional $3.7 billion in his own (2007) version of a cap-and-trade bill.
John-O did have one thing right — that nuclear subsidies can produce “unintended consequences.” I don’t know about you but when I think of the potential unintended consequences of building nuclear power plants all across America and of filling Nevada with radioactive waste, I think I’d rather find out what the unintended consequences of exploring wind and solar energy are.
What a dick.
Good catch!
That said, Lieberman-Warner was a crap bill, and I’m glad it died. The way McBS tried to dance around the issue just underscored how much of a mess L-W was, and I am glad that a bunch of Republicans and BushDogs didn’t get a chance to put a check in the box that says “Climate Legislation Accomplished.”
While I hate to wait even one minute more for a response to the climate crisis, I am happy to wait for the next, more progressive Congress to offer a bill with the necessary restrictions on emissions, a loophole-free cap, and fewer subsidies for nasty nuclear and mythical clean coal.
Yeah, I’m with you. We can do better than this bill, and pass something with a President who will actually sign it.
The truth is this bill was never going to pass this year — Boxer always claimed that it was a test to see support for various provisions. But essentially, as Red Wind notes above, the Congress is going to look very different next year and thus the political equation will also change, so this really isn’t much of a test.
It’s all possible. Just Do It - stop the procrastination, stop the excuses:
With record-breaking $$billion$ profit every quarter for the past two years, Big Oil can afford to - and should be forced to - help hurting Americans by subsidizing green-energy alternatives.
Let Big Oil pay the subsidies to retro-fit every car with electrical power, and to add solar panels on every house and car.
If Congress refuses to close the Enron energy loophole, and the London-Dubai loophole, they should force Big Oil to subsidize green energy alternatives - starting now: not next year; NEXT MONTH!!
Repurpose defense contractor’s manufacturing plants to build solar and wind power generators. It’s all possible. Just Do It - stop the procrastination, stop the excuses.