« March 2006 | Main | June 2006 »

Gas Grief

Now is the winter of our discontent; made glorious summer by this sun of York...

Well, Shakespeare was almost right – he just got the seasons reversed. That is if you’re looking at this quotation through the lens of someone having to buy gas this summer, which should be most of us. I first came over to the States in 1997. At that time, a gallon of regular was going for around about $1.00 a gallon, give or take. While it’s scary to me to consider that was almost ten years ago (time flies!) looking at the prices this morning made me blink anew – in today’s dollars, it hasn’t been as expensive in this country since the early 1980s. And the price isn’t forecast to go anywhere but up. Can America ever wean itself off of oil? Of course – if by ‘wean’ you mean ‘wun out’.

Energy independence is a perennial political football. Everyone seems to agree that Energy Independence Is A Good Thing (this is not a great leap of political courage). Of course, energy independence can mean more than one thing. For some, it means plumbing the depths of ANWR (Arctic National Wildlife Reserve) to chase down a few extra years of oil. Others find hope in fuel cells or wind turbines or thousands of hamsters on wheels (my personal favorite). Waiting in the wings is the specter of nuculer (Sorry, sorry, n-u-c-l-e-a-r) technology, which promises clean and bountiful energy (with only a really, really small chance of complete destruction). Coincidentally, tomorrow is the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster.

The United States has long enjoyed gas prices that would make people in the UK swoon for joy. To put things in a little perspective, at the time of writing, a gallon of unleaded regular is going for $6.46 on average, back home (ever wondered why we drive those tiny little cars with tiny little engines?). Americans are often mocked for their big, greedy cars and their excessive consumption. Not all of this is the fault of today’s consumer, though; urban sprawl and the sheer size of the place has led to a far greater reliance on the car over here, than in Europe. Back home a 100 mile commute per day would be considered remarkable; here, it is almost average. People here think nothing of driving two hours to pop over to see friends. A two hour drive for me growing up was an expedition!

The town my parents live in is approximately the same size as Portsmouth. The difference is it has (at the time I left, anyway) two competing bus lines and about four cab companies, and a light rail system linking it with Glasgow (Scotland’s largest city, about forty minutes away). Portsmouth, by comparison, has sidewalks. Well, on some streets. And some streets have streetlights, too! If you don’t have a car back home, you can walk to the town center on lit streets, with full paved sidewalks (admittedly, while avoiding drunken yobs who will seek to relieve you of valuables); or call a cab, or take a bus. Over here, you can wait about two hours for a cab to find you, or you drive. Everywhere. America, in general, is not a pedestrian based society. Even those at the lower end of the income scale have at least one car – that’s not a symbol of largesse, but just a reflection of raw need. No car means no job.

To see Bush today deciding to take a stand on ‘high gas prices’ was a source of much amusement for me. Apparently, severe instability in the Middle East, insurgents in the Niger delta, brewing conflict between Chad and Sudan, Venezuelan antipathy, rampant shortsighted greed on the part of the energy conglomerates and an increasing energy demand from the likes of India and China aren’t as influential to gas prices as a few scurrilous station owners marking up prices. Good to know that we’re taking the situation well in hand, George. Oh, and allow them to make more polluting gas, too. That’ll help lower costs – or at least improve profit margins. And hey - just where is that Iraq oil anyway? You know. That oil that was supposed to pay for reconstruction? Ah, well.

What most politicians realise – and yet cannot say – is that America (and most every Western nation) is locked into the global economy. One cannot just ‘take’ the oil anymore, as was done 100 years ago – the taking is too costly, and you’d be fighting Russia, China and India for it anyway – and nor is there enough to go around. Consequently, prices will continue to rise until there reaches a breaking point; when enough citizens have to choose between driving to work and eating, perhaps we’ll finally see some movement on sustainable nationwide mass-transit and move to renewable energy (or a complete breakdown of society and people driving Mad Max tanker trucks around – my money’s on this option). For now though, there’s no political hay to be made by telling people they have to drive less, in smaller cars, or telling industries they have to clean up and be efficient – or heaven forbid, telling Congress that they have to start working together on the problem instead of blaming the other side.

Posted by union_jack at 06:57 PM | Comments (1)

DeLay, Away. Disarray.. Hooray!

At the best of times it's pretty hard for me to feel sorry for a politician of any stripe who is forced to step aside due to allegations of dirty deeds. The protestations of innocence are always the same, as is the lack of credibility. So when Tom DeLay finally had to read the writing (in ten foot high blazing pink neon letters) on the wall that it was time to go, I didn't feel too bad about it. Maybe a little gleeful, even. Few people have personified the current face of Republicanism - ruthless, brazen, hard edged and hypocritical - as the man from the Texas. Newt Gingrich beats him, I suppose - it's a constant surprise to me as to how Newt gets away with espousing family values as he does - but when it comes to all out ball-crushing intensity on crushing your political opponents to goo, Tom Delay should be someone to study for years to come (Note to Democrats : LEARN).

Did DeLay fall or was he pushed? It may have been a little of both. Personally I don't believe a man like DeLay would fall on his own sword against his will. A few members of his own side have been calling for his resignation since last year when the ethics charges first began to bite. In the end, it took the vortex of Abramhoff to finally stack the dice to the point DeLay felt he couldn't win. And rather than fight that losing battle, he thought it was best to step aside - either for the party to win without him or to attempt to save face - you pick. Either way, local Republicans must be breathing a sigh of relief. Though they couldn't let DeLay step down without one last impressive display.

Is DeLay the proverbial canary in the coalmine for the Republican chances in November? I think he just might be. After all, it's not been a good two weeks for the Republicans, especially if you're taking the long view. What with DeLay toppling and Abramhoff sentenced and promising to name names I think we're in for a juicy summer of revelations. The best bit of the news story was the Judge ordering Abramhoff to report to jail in 90 days; and then the prosecution asking for him to remain free for six months, because he's cooperating so nicely. It's one nice thing about such crime; it's very rare that you see someone keeping to any kind of code of silence. Who will be next to be snarled up? Newsweek asked that question, and made a fairly persuasive case for suggesting Conrad Burns had best be practicing his defense skills. What with DeLay's former aide Tony Rudy also taking the stand, the dominos are still toppling. I sure hope so. One particular lobbying job of theirs sufficiently raised my hackles; arguing for legislation that would enable garment manufacturers in the Marianas Islands (a Commonwealth of the U.S.) to claim 'made in USA' on clothing, but without respecting U.S. laws that govern wages and immigration law. The next time you buy a 'Made in USA' t-shirt that was actually made in a remote pacific atoll by some kid earning $1 an hour, you can thank Rudy.

Thankfully, things are going far beyond Burns, Rudy and DeLay; a treasure trove of emails is revealing not only the spread of influence peddling, but how blatant it was. Washington has always been a town of wheeling and dealing of course, but seeing things dragged into the light does make me wonder if future staffers will be required to write meeting minutes in longhand and destroy the papers - or perhaps eat them, if caught in the act. If the emails are to be believed though, the thing that strikes me as ironic is the sums of money involved. $2000 here, $5000 there. Barely enough to fund a good attack ad on a weblog, much less fund a campaign. And it's this level of cash that might ultimately sink the lobbying system? Fat chance, really. As the Boston Globe noted, the current widely touted reforms are little more than window dressing. Washington runs on money, and neither party is going to occupy what scarred moral high ground remains if it means giving up those sweet, sweet campaign donations.

Either way, the Republican party is certainly eating the brunt of the publicity on this issue and it's showing. They may hope that with DeLay gone, the worst is perhapsy behind them. After all, even if he's indicted, he will have stepped down, and can be safely dismissed (or perhaps given a Presidential Medal of Freedom in a few years) to the lecture circuit - and perhaps, pulpit. Apparently after all this, the true reason he's being hounded is because the liberals hate Christians. Still, I'm sure the good Lord will provide. Let's just hope he doesn't remember that thing about the money changers and the temple - or that rich man, camel, and needle's eye thing.

Yes, with DeLay gone, the outlook can only get bright-- wait, what's this? Scooter Libby filing court papers that allege Cheney and Bush were the source of leaks of intelligence reports to make the Administration's case against Iraq? But didn't Bush say he'd fire the source of any leaks? Oooops. If Republicans want to take the summer off to just go and drink beer by the pool, I totally understand. Just be glad the Democratic spin machine is about as strong as the desire for true lobbying reform in Washington* or you'd actually be in real trouble.

* That would be to say, not very strong.

Posted by union_jack at 08:54 PM | Comments (0)