Reply
Wed 25 Jun, 2008 01:31 pm
MCCAIN: THE LEXINGTON PROJECT
Wed June 25, 2008 12:50:11 ET
In recent days I have set before the American people an energy plan, the Lexington Project Ð named for the town where Americans asserted their independence once before. And let it begin today with this commitment:Ê In a world of hostile and unstable suppliers of oil, this nation will achieve strategic independence by 2025.
This pledge is addressed to all concerned -- to those abroad whose power flows from an accident of geology, and to you, my fellow Americans, whose strength proceeds from unity of purpose. Together, we will break the power of OPEC over the United States. And never again will we leave our vital interests at the mercy of any foreign power.
Some will say this goal is unattainable within that relatively short span of years -- it's too hard and we need more time. Let me remind them that in the space of half that time -- about eight years -- this nation conceived and carried out a plan to take three Americans to the Moon and bring them safely home. In less than a third of that time, the gathered energies of my father's generation built the industrial might that overcame Nazi Germany and imperial Japan. That is the scale of our achievement when we set our minds to a task. That is what this country can do when we see a danger, and declare a purpose, and find the will to act.
As president, I will turn all the apparatus of government in the direction of energy independence for our country -- authorizing new production, building nuclear plants, perfecting clean coal, improving our electricity grid, and supporting all the new technologies that one day will put the age of fossil fuels behind us. Much will be asked of industry as well, as automakers and others adapt to this great turn toward new sources of power. And a great deal will depend on each one of us, as we learn to make smarter use of energy, and also to draw on the best ideas of both parties, and work together for the common good.
This Project is not a plan calibrated to please every interest group or to meet every objection. That is how we arrived to our present predicament. That is how energy policy in Washington became a long list of subjects avoided, options ruled out, and possibilities foreclosed. Nor can I promise you that the long-term success of this Project will bring instant relief.Ê In the mission of energy security, some tasks are the work of decades and some the work of years. And they will take all the will and resolve of which we are capable. But I can promise you this. Unless we begin this mission now, nothing will change at all, except for the worse. And when we succeed in the hard reform ahead, your children will live in a more prosperous country, in a more peaceful world.
About time we challenge individuals and corporations to be great.
This is what real leadership is.
Sounds good.
I have my doubts that anyone can turn *ALL* the apparatus of the government towards a single goal (this one, or any other), but the intent it worthy.
The real challenge is going to be deciding what other government functions are going to have to bear the economic burden of funding alternative energy development. Choices will have to be made. Will someone finally realize that energy independence is really a function of military strategy and divert part of the massive military budget in that direction, or will tiny dribs and drabs of other government programs be used to scrape together a token gesture at energy independence?
And what about the 800lbs (and growing) gorilla in the room... social security, who's gonna finally tame that beast?
rosborne979
Remember the Manhattan project that developed the Atom bomb? Where there is a will there is a way. All we need is for congress to act in the interest of the nation instead of being in business for themselves.
The pubbies are at least free to move on this one. The dems are stuck in the quicksand of the environmental movement.
woiyo wrote:About time we challenge individuals and corporations to be great.
This is what real leadership is.
Amen brother! Garden-variety nuisance-liberals think it's all about balancing one's rights against another's - it could be but those jokers ain't up to the challenge, I mean, they just wish they could invoke the name of a tree and use it to tell someone else what to do - what we need the G for is to facilitate excellence or keep their **** out 'the way!
Hanno, I think that's a pretty good summary.
Thanx, I try to speak to the functional aesthetics of the situation
It's nice to know that McCain turns to Massachusetts (and eastern Massachusetts at that) for his policy initiatives.
gungasnake wrote:The pubbies are at least free to move on this one. The dems are stuck in the quicksand of the environmental movement.
Unfortunately McCain is stuck with the dems in the quicksand. He even believes in global warming.
McCain isn't a good guy here.
It's funny how some support vague statements with no real details.
It's almost like McCain said "Yes, we can."
Like I said, a pubbie or even a RINO like McCain is free to change his mind on this one when the time comes (and it has); the dems are stuck with what they have.
gungasnake wrote:Like I said, a pubbie or even a RINO like McCain is free to change his mind on this one when the time comes (and it has); the dems are stuck with what they have.
Are you suggesting that McCain might flip-flop on this issue?
ebrown_p wrote:gungasnake wrote:Like I said, a pubbie or even a RINO like McCain is free to change his mind on this one when the time comes (and it has); the dems are stuck with what they have.
Are you suggesting that McCain might flip-flop on this issue?
That's way better than being wrong on it.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=298248493806463
Quote:
No More Excuses: The U.S. Needs To Tap Into Its Own Oil Reserves
By TIM WALBERG | Posted Friday, June 13, 2008 4:30 PM PT
The Department of Commerce recently announced that the U.S. trade deficit reached $60.9 billion this past April. America's trade deficit increased by $600 million from April 2007 to April 2008, even though U.S. exports increased by $25 billion.
Why is our country facing a rising trade deficit even though American-made exports grew 19.2% over the last year (April 2007 to April 2008)?
The answer is found at gas stations across the country and in America's $34.5 billion petroleum deficit, which is roughly half of our monthly trade deficit.
America's dependence on foreign energy forces us to import about 12 million barrels of oil a day, sending billions of dollars to many countries that do not share our interests.
A barrel of oil has gone from $70 to $140 over the last year, dramatically increasing our trade deficit and shattering the family budgets of millions of Americans.
National Priority
Our country has vast and large supplies of energy, but unfortunately tapping into American energy sources has become controversial and mired in politics.
And while political games are played in Washington, D.C., Americans keep paying more at the pump.
Just as with the Manhattan Project or the race to the moon, breaking our dependence on foreign oil should be a national priority. Congress needs to allow an increase in America's investment in our overall production of energy.
Last week, I introduced a discharge petition to force a vote on a bill to increase U.S. energy production and invest in alternative sources of energy.
The appropriately named No More Excuses Energy Act, H.R. 3089, would increase the supply of energy produced in America.
Benefits For The Economy
This bill would immediately open up ANWR in Alaska for environmentally sensitive oil exploration.
According to recent estimates, today America would receive 1 million barrels of oil per day from ANWR if President Clinton had not blocked exploration in 1996.
Outer Continental Shelf exploration, new refineries, wind, natural gas and new nuclear power plants are also covered in this legislation.
This bill would return much of our energy production back to the United States and create good paying American jobs, instead of sending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas to prop up countries like Venezuela that are opposed to American ideals.
Despite fuel costs at levels previously only seen in Europe, leadership in this Congress refuses to increase American energy production.
Instead, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and leading House Democrats would rather increase taxes on domestic energy production and increase our reliance on OPEC.
Recently there has been talk in the House of sending lawyers to sue countries such as Venezuela and Saudi Arabia for lower gas prices. Even the best trial lawyers cannot litigate America to lower gas prices.
Since Speaker Pelosi refuses to bring this bill to the House floor, a discharge petition is the only way to force a vote on this legislation.
House rules state that a discharge petition must have 218 signatures (a simple majority) in order to bring a bill to the floor for a vote, and I am working hard to bring both Democrats and Republicans together in support of this bill.
In the coming weeks, House Republicans will show the American people we want to increase domestic energy production. If the leadership in Congress holds us back, we will continue fighting for increased American production.
Cutting Back
Right now, many families in my south-central Michigan district are giving up nights eating out at restaurants or family vacations in order to cover the rising cost of gasoline.
Working families are paying twice as much to commute and pick up their kids from school and sports. If no action is taken, families will soon be giving up much more than they are now.
While many in Congress may gloss over the current energy crisis in America, the majority of Americans cannot.
The American people believe in expanding our American energy supply and developing alternatives to break our dependence on foreign oil. It is time Congress agreed.
Walberg is the Republican representative in Congress for Michigan's 7th District.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace