Laffing At Obama’s Energy Plans

By Kleinheider Posted on December 18, 2008 at 7:27 am

Tennessee resident and economist Arthur Laffer weighs in on the impact some of Barack Obama’s ideas could have on the economy:

The platitude of “energy independence” makes zero economic sense. Yes, it’s true that many nations that supply us with oil are run by anti-American governments. But unfortunately embargoes don’t overturn despotic regimes. More often than not they harden them, as in Zimbabwe, North Korea and Cuba. Since the U.S. is so reliant on oil, embargoes will hurt the U.S. as much, if not more, than the countries of OPEC. The issue of how to handle the anti-American nature of oil-exporting nations is not for the Commerce Department, but for the White House, the State Department and perhaps the Department of Defense.

permalink | 5 Comments

Tags: Arthur Laffer, Barack Obama, Energy, environment  

Energizing Education

By Kleinheider Posted on May 7, 2008 at 7:19 am

Bettina Chavanne warns that Lamar Alexander’s Manhattan project on energy only works if we have enough educated brainpower to concentrate:

Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) said the time has come for a “new Manhattan Project.” In 1942, he said, the world feared the country to develop the first atomic bomb could blackmail everyone else. “Today, countries that supply oil and natural gas can blackmail the rest of the world,” he said. “We need to guarantee victory over that kind of extortion. Concentrating brainpower to that kind of idea isn’t new.” But that brainpower can only come if it’s fostered and encouraged from an early age.

permalink | Comment on this post

Tags: education, Energy, Lamar Alexander, Manhattan Project  

Lamar Gets The Fedgov To Break Down Its Energy Subsidies

By Kleinheider Posted on April 25, 2008 at 4:38 pm

About one year ago, Senator Lamar Alexander requested Energy Information Administration conduct an analysis of federal energy subsides and, as the Wall Street Journal reports, the EIA has come through with the request:

Since 1999, federal energy subsidies have more than doubled—from $8.2 billion to $16.6 billion in 2007. Who gets the most? “Renewables” landed $4.8 billion last year, but that includes $3.25 billion for ethanol and other biofuels. Coal and cleaner-burning “refined” coal took home $3.3 billion, while the nuclear power industry got $1.3 billion. In all, about 40% of the energy subsidy pie went toward electricity production; the rest for things like alternative fuels and energy conservation.

permalink | Comment on this post

Tags: Energy, Lamar Alexander, subsidy