Thursday, June 11, 2009

Republicans Announce an "All of the Above" Energy Plan

House Republicans yesterday introduced legislation under the "American Energy Act"

I haven't read the entire bill, (then again neither do our Congressmen), but here are the talking points:
  • House Republicans recognize that as gas prices and home utility bills rise, American families are dealt an even greater economic hardship.
  • The Democrats' answer to the worst recession in decades is a national energy tax that will lead to higher energy prices and further job losses.
  • Thousands of dollars in extra energy costs and millions of jobs lost is a high price to pay for an energy policy that will do very little to clean up our environment.
  • The American people deserve better. The American Energy Act is an all of the above plan that will provide energy independence, more jobs here at home, and a cleaner environment.
  • The American Energy Act increases our domestic supply of energy by lifting restrictions on ANWR, the Outer Continental Shelf, and oil shale in the Mountain West.
  • The House Republican plan renews America's commitment to clean and emissions-free nuclear energy. The Department of Energy has stated the best way for utility companies to reduce carbon emissions is to increase their supply of nuclear energy.
  • Despite the enormous success of nuclear energy, no new nuclear reactor has been ordered since the presidency of Jimmy Carter. The House Republican plan builds on the success of nuclear energy by laying down a national goal of ordering 100 new nuclear reactors over the next twenty years.
  • Revenue generated by the sale of leases will be invested in renewable and alternative sources of energy. The House Republican plan also encourages conservation through proven tax incentives.
  • The American people don't want a national energy tax; they want energy independence. The House Republican plan is the comprehensive energy solution this country desperately needs.

Alternative energy innovation, exploration of our own resources, and 100 new nuclear facilities-- policy based on what we need and moving forward--gee, makes perfect sense to me.


Jim said...

Yep, sounds logical. Instead, we'll have the gov't paying tens of billions of dollars to keep GM afloat until they can release an over-priced electric car... without the nuclear (or other) power plants to make large numbers of electric cars feasible... which means there won't be much demand for them... which means they won't be mass-produced... which means they will still be expensive... which means the government will have to subsidize them even more... a $40K Chevy Volt with a $15k gov't incentive or something... their recent $4B "cash for clunkers" is just a start. They'll have "cash for electrics" within three years, I suspect (more than they did with incentives for hybrids, mostly Toyotas)... and in those three years, they'll still have lolly-gagged on nuclear power with no new plants built... not that the government should be building power plants, but they also shouldn't be preventing it or making it so expensive with all kinds of odd regulations.

liz said...

If it's logical and represents common sense, it will never fly with our brilliant government minds.