Bush plays puppet to energy giants

For every good intention, there are a thousand bills rubber-stamped by Congress.

Take for example President Bush’s new energy bill, on which he wants Congress to vote by the middle of this month. This bill has all the components of a great 15-second sound bite but lacks the substance of a long-term energy solution. It addresses attractive issues such as the power grid outage of a few months ago, but it hardly touches on alternative energy sources for the future.

The bill is less about sustainable environmental policy than it is about corporate appeasement. It represents the worst of politics-as-usual, and it is just a bad idea.

The main elements of Bush’s energy bill read like a point-by-point analysis of how to ensure short-term success at the cost of total and complete desecration of the environment. For example, the bill calls for an increased emphasis on coal industries at a time when alternative energy sources should be developed instead. Bush and his congressional allies aim to cut funding for solar, wind and geothermal renewable electricity by 50 percent ($190 million) while investing just enough in hydrogen fuel technology to claim he is a champion for alternative energies, according to the Sierra Club.

Additionally, despite the Sierra Club’s recommendation to raise the fuel efficiency of cars to a manageable 40 miles per gallon over the next decade, the White House would rather “study” the situation – while breaking ground in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The Sierra Club has also written that the amount of oil estimated to be found in the refuge would last six months if the United States only consumed the Arctic oil during that time. Is it worth the defilement of one of the last truly pristine wildlife areas in the world?

The shortsighted goals of this bill are even more disgusting in light of the perversion of the democratic process that occurs when the Bush Administration involves itself in energy issues.

Take a look at the list of major donors to Bush’s 2000 presidential run. Many are from energy companies that could benefit from the proposed energy bill. It is littered with the broken-moral centers of mega-companies like Vice President Dick Cheney’s beloved Halliburton Co., Koch Industries and the now defunct Enron; many such companies are licking their chops at the chance for a slice of the jackpot that is the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Bush will be literally handing money in the form of subsidies to industries such as the so-called “clean coal” energy producers. Subsidies amounting to $2 billion will be given to companies that continue to employ an energy source commonly accepted as the dirtiest in the world and a leading cause of global warming. Of course Bush spins this beautifully, stating in a recent speech given in Columbus, Ohio: “We can use our nation’s most plentiful energy resource in an environmentally responsible way.” In reality this “clean” process is still dirtier than alternatives like natural gas or the aforementioned renewable energies.

Indeed, it seems that even Bush recognizes the futility of gaining significant public support for this abomination, opting instead to ram it through Congress with the hope of not rustling public feathers. In the process, he is playing the party card, working to see that it passes in the Senate through almost straight party-line voting. CNN reported that he sent Cheney to Congress to prod Republicans closer together and block Democratic input altogether in the bill-writing process.

As the air becomes grimier, Bush’s alliances become clearer. The Bush-administration-energy-company axis is so one-sided and secretive that last year a district judge actually ordered Cheney and his energy task force to release more information to the public.

The fact is, no responsible, informed person outside the major energy companies could accept this bill, and for good reason. The proposed energy bill is nothing more than tit for tat – after securing election, Bush is now exchanging subsidies and the Wildlife Refuge for those companies’ continued “support.”

In his most recent speech in Columbus, Ohio, Bush avoided talking directly about the plan’s main benefactors, instead winning over the crowd with sentimental babble about Sept. 11, 2001 and the need for new jobs. In Bush’s defense, I suppose it would take quite a few man-hours to physically destroy the Wildlife Refuge, so that might create the opportunity for more work.

I find it hard to believe how one-sided Bush’s proposal is. It is a step back from our existing energy plan. It represents everything that is wrong with the political process: secrecy, special interest bankrolls and indifference over the source of natural resources. Bush’s plan is a short-sighted, hush-hush proposal meant to be pushed through against fierce opposition by an overzealous administration in obvious debt.

Public outcry over this bill should be huge. The only reason it hasn’t been is the strategic lack of information. Do not fall prey to this tactic. Educate yourself and get angry. The Iraqi war was a test of Bush’s credibility; now, he should have none.

Moon is a second-year psychology student. E-mail him at jmoon@media.ucla.edu.