Democrats Will Lose Unless They Answer Republicans on Energy

By Barry Slaff

This past week, the Republican Party revealed its strategy for winning elections this November: gasoline, gasoline, gasoline. Democrats everywhere should watch out.

Democrats have become increasingly complacent in recent months, and it is easy to understand why. Polls everywhere show that Democrats– already the majority party– should make landmark gains in the House and Senate this fall. Republicans are eagerly reinforcing the expectation of an inevitable Democratic success: NRSC chairman John Ensign recently stated that “it would be a great night, especially, [for Republicans to lose] three seats — that would be a terrific night for us, absolutely.” Newsflash: if Democrats cannot do better than they have this past week, then Republicans will pull off a truly fantastic upset this fall.

Consider the numbers. According to survey results released by Rasmussen Reports on June 17, 79% of voters are “very concerned” about rising gas and energy prices. 67% of voters believe that drilling should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other states, while only 18% disagree. Even 46% of self-described liberals favor more drilling, while just 37% are opposed.

This next statistic, however, may be the most important of all: 64% of voters, including 50% of liberals, believe it is at least somewhat likely that gas prices will go down if offshore oil drilling is allowed. The fact that lower prices may not come for five, ten, or even thirty years will matter very little come November. Americans want more drilling because they think it will reduce gas prices, and they may overthrow any party they perceive as obstructing legislation that will make this happen.

This “obstructionist” label is exactly what Republicans have begun to project on their opponents. Last Wednesday, President Bush remarked that “unfortunately, Democrats on Capitol Hill have rejected every proposal [for lowering gas prices], and Americans are paying the price at the pump.” A day earlier, House Republican leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) insisted that “today marks another dubious day for this Do-Nothing Democratic Congress. On their watch, gas prices have soared to new heights, and by refusing to schedule a vote on a plan to increase American-made energy to help lower gas prices, congressional Democrats are complicit in this unprecedented surge in fuel costs.”

The Democrats’ response so far has been to blame Big Oil— but whether or not oil companies are indeed extracting “unreasonable” profits, the blame-the-companies strategy has come to a political dead end. By contrast, Republicans offer a tantalizingly vulnerable target: Congressional Democrats. Voters cannot easily force oil companies to lower gas prices, but they can very easily throw the majority party out of office this November if convinced Democrats are to blame for higher prices. As this past week’s activity suggests, Republicans plan to convince voters of just that.

What the Democrats need—and what so far they lack—is their own optimistic path towards making fuel affordable along with clear arguments why their plan is better than the Republicans’. At the very least, Democrats should seize the advantage of being right.

Petroleum’s heyday will soon pass. In May 2007, Toyota executive vice president Masatami Takimoto announced that the company expects hybrids to account for 100% of its vehicles by 2020. Renewable sources such as home-based solar panels and wind turbines are already being used to charge electric car batteries. Electric cars have a long way to go, but the future is bright: in November 2007, the European Renewable Energy Council projected that renewable energy may supply up to 70% of the world’s power by 2050. Alternative fuels are rising fast.

This is more than just long-term, pie-in-the-sky optimism. Democrats can make a strong argument that our country will benefit economically from embracing alternative fuels just as quickly as we would benefit from increasing the domestic oil supply. By getting ahead of the worldwide energy curve, domestic industries could develop renewable technologies at home and then sell them abroad. If we begin to more strongly subsidize renewable energy industries this year, we may see growth in those industries very soon.

Furthermore, the Department of Energy concluded in 2007 that permitting Outer Continental Shelf drilling in the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions “would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.” Democrats need to hammer home two major points with this message: first, this conclusion comes from the most comprehensive study to date by the best-qualified experts on the subject; and second, that embracing alternatives will be more practical and more profitable in both the short- and long-run. The 70%-by-2050 projection of the European Renewable Energy Council indicates that at this point, an investment in petroleum is truly a short-term investment in an industry on its way out in the next fifty years.

Democrats have to make clear that alternative energy is the best path towards economic growth. Unless they make that message clear, they will be sitting ducks until November— and lame ducks thereafter.