 This article will address another issue to add to the individual's
"personal political profile." The issue addressed in this article is
America's energy. America has a long history of being fueled by
various types of fossil fuels: Coal, oil and natural gas are the
most common types of fossil fuels since they are derived from the
earth's resources of reserves for those commodities.
The producers of oil have been demonized, the practice of "fracking"
has been maligned as irresponsible, moratoriums on drilling for oil
and mining for coal have been implemented, and some have suggested we
strengthen, with government stimulus funding, the alternative energy
efforts to find ways to provide alternative sources of energy
including solar power, wind power and water power. At this current
point in our national development, those alternative sources are not
nearly as marketable in society at large as is the dependence on
fossil fuels.
The reality is that we have during the last century put ourselves in
a position that has brought us to a dependency on the fossil fuels
we must have to run industrial nations, irrespective of their
political ideology. At this point on the spectrum of human existence,
we have sold our souls to the use of fossil fuels such as oil and
coal. Without those things, we would be required to return to the
so-called Middle Ages, when ships depended on wind and travel
depended on feet. The truth is no person in any industrialized
society or otherwise would be willing to give up the
industrialization and technological advances we have with oil.
Remember, much more is made from oil than just gasoline. Look around
the environment —
literally tens of thousands of "things" are made
from oil derivatives.
Because this is such a large issue for America and the rest of the
world, it has worked its way up the issue ladder to become a
political issue tied up in the election cycles. One cannot discount
the extended impact energy has on the rest of the economy, including transportation, jobs, manufacturing, research and
development, medical science, and believe it or not, tradition. So,
it is not surprising that energy has become a hot issue that brings
out large decisions such as the building or not building of the
Keystone Pipeline from Canada to Texas.
Energy Liberal perspective
The liberal perspective is tied to other issues like global warming,
or climate change, where many in the liberal camp believe the
phenomenon is more "man-made" than natural consequences. Even though
there are huge reserves around the world, the liberal position puts
a lot of emphasis on fossil fuels being a resource that is
diminishing. Because those resources are diminishing, the liberal
groups want to cut back or eliminate dependence on oil and coal in
favor of more research and development of alternative sources of
energy.
Again, remembering the liberal viewpoint is built on a foundation of
large government tending to problems, the liberal group wants
government to establish an overall plan of shifting from the use of
fossil fuels to alternative sources like solar and wind. The liberal
mindset believes the government should have the dominant say-so in
exploration of new forms of energy, and this should be funded through
taxpayer funding. The liberal point of view wants to engage in a
form of capitalism that has politicians making choices between
companies that should be funded by taxpayer money and those that
don't. Additionally, the liberal group believes that more
restrictive laws, regulations and policies should be enacted to
control the efforts of private markets in the energy business. This
ultimately leads to government control of the gas and electric
companies, removing them from private ownership. Again, the liberal
groups believe the individual citizen should be protected from the
private ownership of energy-producing executives and companies.
[to top of second column] |
Conservative perspective
The conservative perspective, of course, counters the liberal
perspective by insisting that the fossil fuels are in abundant
supply and available to the United States to keep America
self-sufficient for several generations in the future. They cite the
current exploration and production taking place on private land in
the United States, and they look to studies that have produced results
that there are vast supplies of oil under the public land and offshore around the borders of the United States. They support the
issues like building pipelines to transport the oil and offer studies and current safe pipelines as evidence there is little or no
impact on the environment when pipelines are built.
The conservative group believes the prices of oil dictate the price
of domestic fuel and artificially keep the price higher when other
countries like Mexico, Canada, Saudi Arabia and additional countries
in the Middle East band together to keep the price of oil much
higher. The conservative group insists the United States actually
helps the people in other countries who engage in terrorist
activities against the United States by propping them up with higher
prices of crude oil. The conservative group continually calls for
opening up the oil fields in America to stop the dependency on
foreign oil.
The conservative perspective supports the increase in development
and production of nuclear energy as an alternative to the fossil
fuels. They often cite the redundant safety procedures and practices
in that industry, both in America and abroad, that demonstrates the
low incidence of accidents around the sites.
The conservative groups contend that the use of wind and solar
power has not arrived to the 21st century in sufficient enough
availability to provide affordable energy to the mainstream
American. Although the conservative group does support the continued
search for and development of alternative sources of energy, they
believe it should be through private investments from private
companies and not with taxpayer money. Further, the conservative
groups believe the industries that supply natural gas and
electricity should remain in the free market system, owned privately
rather than being taken over by the government.
Therefore, regarding the issue of energy, as a voter, one must
decide if they are standing with the liberal side of the issue or
the conservative side of the issue. Generally, if agreement from the
voter is with the liberal perspective, the voter will vote for the
Democrat. If the agreement from the voter is with the conservative
perspective, the voter will vote for the Republican.
So, as with the issue of abortion, this issue of energy adds to the
voter's personal political profile and will help guide the voter
through the election. Each candidate will be examined regarding
their standing, not just on their political party affiliation, but
how they stand on the issues of abortion and energy. That candidate
who matches the voter's personal perspective will win the vote from
that person. Again, this is very important not just in the general
election, but in the primaries as well. During the primary cycle,
there is usually an array of candidates from the same party, but
with differing viewpoints regarding how they will approach solutions
for any given issue. So look for discussions regarding more issues
in the next articles.
[By JIM KILLEBREW]
Click here to respond to the editor about this
article. |
