Skip to main content

The Politics of It All: Running Out the Clock on Energy

Nancy-Pelosi Politico report on the maneuvering around energy that the House is attempting: while making conciliatory noises about offshore drilling, the goal is to run out the clock while letting endangered Democrats make the case back home that they’re in-line with the current polls that support all those new derricks. And why might the Dems do this?

[House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi’s [D-Calif.] gambit rests on one big assumption: that Democrats will own Washington after the election and will be able to craft a sweeping energy policy that is heavy on conservation and fuel alternatives while allowing for some new oil drilling. Democrats see no need to make major concessions on energy policy with a party poised to lose seats in both chambers in just three months — even if recess-averse Republicans continue to pound away on the issue.

Well, okay. Pelosi’s energy preferences don’t seem that far away from the bi-partisan energy bill we wrote about yesterday, so that might stand up well in a new Congress; and yes, politics will trump policy when there are electoral considerations. We get that. (We also get that even gloomy predictions keep the Democrats below a veto-proof 60-vote majority in the Senate. So the Republicans will still have some room to play.) Read the whole thing, but if the milk curdles in your coffee, don’t blame us.

Politics? Sometimes it makes us want to holler.

Picture of Rep. Nancy Pelosi.


Matthew66 said…
The problem with waiting until the new Congress and Administration is that politicians change tack when they have no effective opposition. If, as polls currently predict, the Democrats have the White House and majorities in both houses of Congress, lots of those congressional Democrats will be insisting that their pet projects in energy take priority, which may spell curtains for a decent energy policy. Peloi could end up in the same situation as Angela Merkel, having to put up with important players with entrenched ideological positions refusing to give ground.

We are still three months out from the election. If a week is a long time in politics, three months is an eternity.
Anonymous said…
Pelosi could end up in the same situation as Angela Merkel, having to put up with important players with entrenched ideological positions refusing to give ground.

Funny - I though Pelosi was an important player with an entrenched ideological position refusing to give ground!

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.

Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …