fbpx
Politics Foreign Affairs Culture Fellows Program

Oil Slick

In selecting their nominee, Republicans were willing to forgive countless deviations from conservative orthodoxy because of John McCain’s reliable belligerence on foreign policy. But it’s an uneasy embrace: a new Washington Post-ABC poll shows that just 17 percent of McCain’s supporters feel “very enthusiastic” about him. Last month’s endorsement of cap-and-trade legislation didn’t help. So […]

In selecting their nominee, Republicans were willing to forgive countless deviations from conservative orthodoxy because of John McCain’s reliable belligerence on foreign policy. But it’s an uneasy embrace: a new Washington Post-ABC poll shows that just 17 percent of McCain’s supporters feel “very enthusiastic” about him. Last month’s endorsement of cap-and-trade legislation didn’t help.

So McCain is tracking back, calling for an end to the federal ban on offshore oil drilling. “Energy independence” sells well on both sides of the political divide, and support for domestic drilling resonates with conservatives who don’t like coming second to caribou.

Problem is, they don’t have a clue how global energy markets operate. “We must embark on a national mission to eliminate our dependency on foreign oil,” McCain said. That’s pretty talk. And pretty much impossible.

University of Virginia’s S. Fred Singer analogizes the situation well. Think of the global market as a giant bathtub into which all producers dump their product. Consumers pump from the pool without much regard for origin—the U.S. imports crude from 41 countries. The level in the tub sets the price, which should drop as supply increases. But the contribution from America’s coasts—McCain still opposes drilling in ANWR—would be nominal: the estimated deposit off California is 10 billion barrels, enough to supply America’s needs for about 17 months. But everybody draws from the same tub and is looking to pay the lowest price possible—and we can’t hope to undercut the production costs of larger-scale, more mature suppliers. The notion that the U.S. will have some secret stash that allows us to detach entirely from the global energy market is nonsense, as Senator McCain surely knows. Developing alternative energy sources would mean less need to draw from the global oil supply, which would be a good thing. But he’s looking for answers in drilling–and there’s no way that dumping a bit more into the big bathtub will “eliminate our dependency.”

Of course, McCain may be giving this fiction space because it squares with his vision of global security. Robert Bryce—TAC contributor and author of the excellent Gusher of Lies—quotes Thomas Friedman’s theory about energy independence and Mideast reform: “Shrink the oil revenue and they will have to open up their economies and their schools and liberate their women so that their people can compete. It is that simple.” Bryce retorts:

If only it were that easy. Between about 1986 and 2000, oil prices generally stayed below $20 per barrel; by the end of 1998, they were as low as $11 per barrel. As Alan Reynolds pointed out in May 2005 in … National Review Online, this prolonged period of ‘cheap oil did nothing to promote economic or political liberty in Algeria, Iran, or anywhere else. This theory has been tested—and it failed completely.’

That’s not to say we shouldn’t drill domestically—though this Hawaii girl has greater concern for coral reefs than the average rightwing blowhard. But conservatives should play a little harder to get. Much as they may enjoying the novelty of hearing their buzzwords in this nominee’s mouth, hating Hugo Chavez shouldn’t be sufficient make him their hero.

Advertisement

Comments

The American Conservative Memberships
Become a Member today for a growing stake in the conservative movement.
Join here!
Join here