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

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.


The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.

What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot., the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.

From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…