Environmentalists' Hold on Congress
Opinion Editorial by Walter E. Williams -
Jul 31, 2008
29 ratings from readers
For decades, environmentalists have lobbied for laws restricting energy production. What's most scary, however, is not the misguided nature of these laws, but how much political clout the environmentalists possess.
Let’s face it. The
average individual American has little or no clout with Congress and can be
safely ignored. But it’s a different story with groups such as Environmental
Defense Fund, Sierra Club, and The Nature Conservancy.
When they speak,
Congress listens. Unlike the average American, they are well organized, loaded
with cash, and well positioned to be a disobedient congressman’s worst
nightmare.
Their political and
economic success has been a near disaster for our nation.
For several decades,
environmentalists have managed to get Congress to keep most of our oil
resources off-limits to exploration and drilling.
They’ve managed to have
the Congress enact onerous regulations that have made refinery construction
impossible.
Similarly, they’ve used
the courts and Congress to completely stymie the construction of nuclear power
plants.
As a result, energy
prices are at historical highs and threaten our economy and national security.
What’s the political
response to our energy problems? It’s more congressional and White House
kowtowing to environmentalists, farmers, and multi-billion-dollar corporations
such as Archer Daniels Midland.
Their “solution,”
rather than to solve our oil supply problem by permitting drilling for the billions
upon billions of barrels of oil beneath the surface of our country, is to enact
the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 that mandates that oil
companies increase the amount of ethanol mixed with gasoline.
Anyone with an ounce of
brains would have realized that diverting crops from food to fuel use would
raise the prices of corn-fed livestock, such as pork, beef, chicken and dairy
products, and products made from corn, such as cereals.
Ethanol production has
led to increases in other grain prices, such as soybean and wheat. Since the
U.S. is the world’s largest grain producer and exporter, higher grain prices
have had a huge impact on food prices worldwide.
Congress and the
environmentalists aren’t through with us. If you’re bothered by skyrocketing
food and energy prices, wait until Congress re-introduces its
environmentalist-inspired Climate Security Act, so-called “Cap and Trade.”
Cap and Trade is
deceptively peddled as a free-market solution to the yet-to-be-settled issue of
manmade climate change. Under its provisions, companies would be able to emit
greenhouse gases only if they had a government allowance.
The Congressional
Budget Office estimates that a 15 percent cut in emissions would raise the
annual average household’s energy costs by $1,300. Since energy is an input to
everything we use, we can expect everything to become costlier, resulting in a
reduction in economic growth.
There’s a hateful side
to Cap and Trade that’s revealed by asking the question: how will it be decided
who received how much allowance to emit greenhouse gases?
Congress could sell the
allowances and/or give them away to favorite constituents. You can bet the rent
money that a new army of lobbyists, with special pleadings, will descend on
Washington to lobby Congress.
And you can be sure
that campaign contributions and favoritism will play an important role in the
decision of who received what amount of allowances.
Much worse than that is
the massive control government would have over our economy and our lives.
Congress might decide
that since tobacco use is unhealthy, it might not issue allowances to tobacco
companies. While many Americans might applaud that, how many would like
Congress to refuse to issue allowances to companies that produce foods that
some people deem unhealthy such as French fries, sodas, canned soups, and potato
chips.
Congress might deny, or
threaten to deny, allowances to companies that in their opinion didn’t hire
enough women and minorities.
The possibilities for
control over our lives would be endless and could include nuisance-type edicts
such as requiring us to buy a permit to barbeque in our backyard.
The thirst to wield
massive control over our economy helps explain the near religious belief in
manmade global warming and the attacks on scientists and others who offer
contradictory evidence.
Walter E. Williams
is a professor of economics at George Mason University in Fairfax,
Virginia. He has authored more than 150 publications, including many in
scholarly journals, and has frequently given expert testimony before
Congressional committees on public policy issues ranging from labor
policy to taxation and spending.