Star Tribune grants Norm Coleman an op-ed

The Minneapolis Star Tribune allowed Sen. Norm Coleman to excrete some Norm-speak^TM on their op-ed page today. It seems that Norm has decided to make the Republican lie "Drill Here, Drill Now" a central part of his campaign.

Nothing is more urgent or of greater significance to the American people than solving our energy crisis -- it is an issue that hits to the core of family budgets, our economy and our national security. From my travels across this state, it is clear that Minnesotans are united in the belief that any solution to our nation's energy crisis that doesn't produce a single drop more of oil is half-hearted. And rather than staying in session to address the rising cost of fuel, the U.S. Senate simply allowed time to expire to August adjournment without accomplishing a single thing.
[emphasis mine]
(Star Tribune)

Norm and his fellow Republicans are responsible for making sure that the only energy policy we've had in the last 8 years involved kick-backs and free money for Big Oil. There has been no movement toward a green energy future. After filibustering hundreds of items since January 2007, after opposing increasing fuel efficiency standards until he flip-flopped on them last year, after 5 1/2 years of doing Big Oil's bidding, he wants to solve it all during the August recess?

Minnesotans expect more from their Senator than grandstanding.

"...it is clear that Minnesotans are united in the belief that any solution to our nation's energy crisis that doesn't produce a single drop more of oil is half-hearted." We are? I think that when presented with the concept of leading the nation in renewable technology while at the same time breaking away from our dependence upon oil sounds good to many Minnesotans, too.

The American people sent us here to do a job, and with the gas crisis soon to be accompanied by double-digit percent increases in natural-gas prices, the problem is about to get worse, not better. I believe the most effective way to lower prices is to increase supply while lowering demand -- it's basic economics. The great news is that America is blessed with the tools to affect both supply and demand, if Congress would just act to unlock the nation's energy potential.

We have remarkable domestic oil and natural-gas resources, but unfortunately, much of it is off-limits. Just consider that 85 percent of offshore acreage is currently not available for development. If we developed the entire Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), we could see an additional 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas -- a significant amount that would make a real dent in our dependence on Mideast oil. The fact is that if the United States were to increase domestic production by just 1 million barrels of oil per day, our dependence on foreign oil would be cut by 9 percent.
[emphasis mine]
(Star Tribune)

And Norm said that he "would be a 99% improvement over Paul Wellstone." Norm has been a better Senator for Big Oil and corporate greed than Paul was. Norm has been a better Bush Loyalist than Paul was. So if you thought we sent Norm to DC for solid constituent services, investigating non-Republican corruption (what little there is by comparison) and pushing a Republican agenda at the expense of Minnesotans, then Norm has done a good job.

"I believe the most effective way to lower prices is to increase supply while lowering demand." Ya think? As a Senator who's in the bag for Big Oil, this is basic economics -- find a way to benefit your corporate donors at every turn and attempt to sell it as benefitting your constituents.

"The great news is that America is blessed with the tools to affect both supply and demand, if Congress would just act to unlock the nation's energy potential." This is a lie. First, most of the oil Norm wants to drill for wouldn't be pumped until at least 10 years from now if not 15. Secondly, if it were so easy to extract oil in the continental US, why haven't the oil companies drilled on the undrilled land they have leased from the federal government? Norm is underplaying how difficult it is to extract this oil.

As to our "remarkable domestic oil and natural-gas resources" that are locked up by those Democrats ... it should be noted that the EIA (Energy Information Administration) is often wildly inaccurate and optimistic in their estimates (see p. 75 of this PDF). The likely output is going to be in the range of 200,000 barrels per day not millions. World oil discoveries peaked around 1930. US Oil production peaked in the 1971. There is a 50% chance (p. 26 of report) of a potential reserve that Norm is referring to actually panning out.

Furthermore, Norm has always blown off any talk of moving in any serious way towards a renewable energy future. Here's the hope and vision Norm has when asked by students visiting DC on Power Shift Lobby Day:

[Sen. Klobuchar's] counterpart, Sen. Norm Coleman, was not so excited to meet with us. When we saw that we were not scheduled to visit Sen. Coleman's office on lobby day, we decided to bring our vision of clean energy directly to him anyway. Fifty students waited outside his office, until the Senator arrived- and then they surprised him by cramming into his office (all fifty!) and demanded that he take our future seriously.

From the start, Sen. Coleman dismissed our ideas and demands. He rejected wind and solar power on the basis that there is no infrastructure and that it would hurt poor people by raising energy bills. He said that "green jobs" are unreliable and ambiguous, and that we really can't afford to move away from coal, because we would be forcing thousands who work in the coal mines, coal plants, and industries that rely on coal into unemployment. He also condescendingly told us that although he was young and idealistic like us once, he had since grown up and come to live in the "real world."
(It's Getting Hot In Here)

Norm believes that nuclear energy and clean coal technology are alternative energy. His donors from the nuclear and coal lobbies might have a little to do with that. Norm will only reluctantly support renewable energy alternatives and only if his buddies in the nuclear and coal industries get some more free money.

However, instead of heeding the cries of our constituents and passing a balanced, comprehensive energy bill with real solutions for this energy crisis, the Senate majority leader brought a take-it-or-leave-it speculation bill to the floor that was more show than substance. It was not an effective solution to speculation, nor did it do anything to increase conservation or production. At its core, speculation is about betting on future scarcity. Along with increasing transparency, we can dampen speculation by convincing the world we are serious about production. To suggest that we can just pass a bill aimed at only one aspect of speculation and then be done with addressing the energy situation is naïve, misleading, and insulting to the basic can-do spirit of Americans.
(Star Tribune)

A particular aspect of Norm-speak^TM is dragging the discussion of any particular issue into the fine points that have little meaning in relation to the bigger picture. Discussing energy speculation as if it were a major aspect of our energy crisis is just such a ploy.

First of all, energy speculation is undoubtably a pernicious part of the problem. But it has nothing to do with the larger problem of our addiction to oil and Norm's intransigence on moving to a green economy. We can solve the speculation with one bill. Of course, Republicans will most likely filibuster it.

When Norm talks about "real solutions for this energy crisis", this is Norm-speak^TM for tax breaks for Big Oil, Big Coal and the nuclear lobby.

You can decide for yourselves about the "take-it-or-leave-it" nature of Reid's energy speculation bill. Strangely, hasn't it been the Republicans who've had the "take-it-or-leave-it" attitude these last 7 1/2 years? Here's Reid's statement on his energy speculation bill:

"Right now, Wall Street traders are raising gas prices with nothing more than the click of a mouse. Without regard for anything but their own profits, traders are bidding up prices by buying huge quantities of oil just to sell them at an even higher price.

"For nearly eight years, the Bush-Cheney Administration has turned a blind eye to this increasingly excessive speculation, which has driven oil future prices to record levels and directly contributed to soaring prices of gasoline at the pump. In fact, the former head of the CFTC's trade division said speculation has increased the price of oil by as much as 50 percent.

"That is why Democrats have introduced legislation to curb excessive speculation and increase transparency and accountability in the oil and gas markets. This bill will address the rising cost of gasoline in the short-term, prevent Wall Street traders from gaming the oil markets and ensure that American consumers are paying a fair price at the pump."
(democrats.senate.gov)

Because it's all Nancy Pelosi's fault, right Norm? Tell us again how reasonable you are, Norm?

As a means to passing a comprehensive energy bill, my amendment to open access to the OCS while ramping up research on battery technology for plug-in-hybrid vehicles was offered as a compromise. Not only did Democratic leaders block a vote on my amendment, but they went so far as to object to drilling even if gas were to reach $10 a gallon. How high do prices have to get before producing more becomes a viable option?
(Star Tribune)

Isn't it odd for a Republican to offer a compromise? Let's review the definition of compromise (as used in the Senate):

compromise -n kom-pro-mize
Cave in to everything that the Republicans and the Bush Administration want and/or demand.

Gosh, it sure must suck to be in the minority where you can't just go along with your buddies as you railroad legislation through the Senate, huh, Norm? Norm is being ignored because he's a back-bencher. He's a minor cheerleader who has done little to distinguish himself other than hop on the Bush bandwagon.

Actually, how bad do things have to get before you change your tune on renewable energy, Norm

Over the last few months, we moved quickly to deal with the effects of the downturn in the economy and housing crisis. How can we allow the energy debate to be bogged down in partisan bickering? I know the objections of Majority Leader Harry Reid do not represent the views of all Democrats -- there are many on the other side of the aisle who do want to utilize America's resources and innovative potential toward a multifaceted solution that includes increasing supply. And most Republicans, likewise, understand that compromises are going to need to be made, for example, by keeping the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge off the table and making sure we invest in conservation. This spirit of compromise is what allowed us, Republicans and Democrats, to work together to pass the energy bills of 2005 and 2007 -- shouldn't $4 gas make us more, not less, willing to bring all good ideas to the table?

I call on my colleagues, both Republican and Democratic, to develop a sensible, comprehensive solution to this energy crisis. Minnesotans are confused and frustrated about the stalemate in Washington. They deserve action, and I will continue to work with members from both sides of the aisle to achieve this end.
(Star Tribune)

This last paragraph is truly inspired Norm-speak^TM. It's so rich, I'll break it down sentence by sentence.

"Over the last few months, we moved quickly to deal with the effects of the downturn in the economy and housing crisis." Republicans, realizing their chances of reelection were dwindling with a recess, quickly voted with the Democrats to try and prop up our economy until after the election. If it crashes then, who cares -- Republicans can then blame Obama.

"How can we allow the energy debate to be bogged down in partisan bickering?" Funny how when Democrats don't want to do what the Republicans want to do its partisan bickering. When Republicans filibuster hundreds of bills, amendments and non-binding resolutions, it goes unnoticed. Nobody in the media complains when the Roadblock Republicans stop the Congress from getting anything done that would actually benefit real people.

"I know the objections of Majority Leader Harry Reid do not represent the views of all Democrats -- there are many on the other side of the aisle who do want to utilize America's resources and innovative potential toward a multifaceted solution that includes increasing supply.". You are right, Norm. The Bush Dog Dems vote with you more than they vote with their own party. The Bush Dogs love drilling and dislike solar, wind and wave technologies as much as you do.

"And most Republicans, likewise, understand that compromises are going to need to be made, for example, by keeping the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge off the table and making sure we invest in conservation." Translation: A few Republicans, the endangered ones, the one's up for reelection want to get reelected. They will say and do anything that might help them get reelected.

"This spirit of compromise is what allowed us, Republicans and Democrats, to work together to pass the energy bills of 2005 and 2007 -- shouldn't $4 gas make us more, not less, willing to bring all good ideas to the table?" The 2005 energy bill was a joke. In 2007 you had an reelection epiphany and decided you had better vote for improving fuel efficiency standards. This is what is called a flip-flop in political terms. You had opposed it up until that point.

"I call on my colleagues, both Republican and Democratic, to develop a sensible, comprehensive solution to this energy crisis. Minnesotans are confused and frustrated about the stalemate in Washington. They deserve action, and I will continue to work with members from both sides of the aisle to achieve this end." Translation: I call on my colleagues, both friends and my lesser, majority-party enemies, to help me get reelected by passing some energy legislation I can vote for. Minnesotans might blame me for voting for Bush's energy policies that got us into this mess in the first place if you don't help me. They better have lower gas prices or I'm in trouble, so please help me get reelected.