In a recent interview with ABC News, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA), asked if he would be interested in serving as Sen. Barack Obama’s “energy and environment czar,” coyly replied, “I’d take his call now, and I’d take his call when he’s president — any time. Remember, no matter who is president, I don’t see this as a political thing. I see this as we always have to help, no matter what the administration is.”
Rather than address whether that means he would take such a job if offered or not, which at this juncture is pointless speculation, this piece deigns two far more pertinent issues: 1) whether there is any need whatsoever for an “energy and environment czar”; and 2) whether Mr. Schwarzenegger would at all be suited to serving in such a position.
First to be considered is whether the U.S. even needs a cabinet-level official to be in charge of national energy and environmental policy. Off hand, it appears that such a position would be redundant and probably useless. There is already a Department of Energy, already an Environmental Protection Agency. So, why could we possibly need yet another official to work atop, below, or beside these government bodies?
Moreover, what duties would this “czar” even fulfill? Would he be responsible for opening up some 60 percent of Federal land, the east and west coasts, and 85 percent of the outer-continental shelf to oil and natural gas exploration? No, because that’s Congress’ job.
Would he be responsible for deregulating the process of building new nuclear power plants, or putting an end to the useless litigation against building such plants? No, again, because that’s Congress’ job, and the States’.
Would he be responsible for lifting the Carter era ban on nuclear fuel reprocessing? No, because once more, it is up to Congress and the President to do that.
Would he be responsible for lifting market-distorting, murderous subsidies on biofuels, and the overall mandate on the use of ethanol in our fuel? Nope. Congress.
Generally speaking, would he play any role whatsoever in increasing the supply of energy and thus reducing its price for hard-working Americans? If not, then this position would certainly be redundant—for there are already far more than enough useless politicians and bureaucrats who are completely content to sit on their doffs, refuse to do something to make America energy-independent.
More likely, an “energy and environment czar” would simply be a political appointment intended to promote global warming hysteria to the general public and probably overseas, as well. In the context of an Obama administration, such an appointment would merely be a feel-good measure to show how “diligently” the government was working on unproven alternative energy and defending the environment against impending ruin.
Which is why Governor Schwarzenegger would actually be perfect for this position: he would do nothing to increase America’s actual energy supply, would support keeping the nation’s conventional energy supplies beyond reach and off the market, and would promote either mandates for or Federally-funded research into alternative energy use and production. In other words, he’d support the status quo, while posturing and preening for the unblinking TV eye.
So, he’d fit right into the Washington apparatus that has allowed our dependency on foreign oil to increase astronomically, allowed gasoline prices to spike all the while keeping a lid on increased supply, and has put fraudulent concerns over the environment as a greater priority than America’s economic, strategic interests.
And actually, Mr. Schwarzenegger is right in his coy response. His reluctance to, for example, allow drilling off the coast of California, is not a “political thing.” It’s a matter of consensus—misguided, errant, foolhardy, liberal consensus. To him, reducing the production of domestic oil is “helping out,” which clearly he is willing to do in order to advance himself in an Obama administration.
The problem is, his worldview—the belief that the earth comes first and the welfare of the people on it comes second—is completely repugnant to providing the energy necessary to keep our economy running.
ALG Perspective: America is not going to reduce carbon greenhouse gas emissions in half as the Greens want and simultaneously meet the energy demand of the next 50 years. Those pretending that we can have decided that A can somehow equal ~A. It’s an illogical fallacy. Moreover, Big Government cannot continue to pretend to be interested in reducing energy prices when it is so plainly responsible for increasing those prices and does nothing but promote policies that will make them increase even more so.
