Dear President Bush,
I am writing in response to your State of the Union address last week. First of all, I apologize for not watching it on television. Do not take it personally; if John Kerry were President, I probably wouldn’t have watched him either. But I did read your speech.
Your staff had promised that the speech would address energy policy, and it certainly did. I agree with you that America must “diversify” its sources of energy. By all means, let us explore new technologies and biofuels. You also said that “we must step up domestic oil production in environmentally sensitive ways.” I could not agree more.
But while I agreed with everything you said, I was bothered by what you did not say. Namely, you never used the word “conservation.”
You set a goal of reducing America’s oil consumption by 20 percent over the next 10 years. That is a fine goal, but as Washington Post columnist Robert Samuelson noted last week, the U.S. economy and population will continue to grow over the next 10 years and there will be many more Americans driving cars and heating homes. Essentially, increased production and research can only take us so far. We also need to cut back on how much oil we consume.
As you mentioned in your speech, our dependence on foreign oil is an economic, environmental and national security problem.
It is an economic problem because our economy must depend on other countries for a vital resource.
It is an environmental problem because excessive fuel consumption pollutes our living space.
It is a national security problem because out of the world’s top five oil-exporting countries – Saudi Arabia, Russia, Norway, Iran and Venezuela – only Norway can be considered friendly to American interests. When we buy oil, we implicitly support hostile regimes around the world.
Mr. President, I am confident that you understand the severity of our energy problem. In your words, “extending hope and opportunity depends on a stable supply of energy that keeps America’s economy running and America’s environment clean.” That’s why I am so puzzled that you will not make the case for conservation.
Now, I know that conservation is not a word that comes naturally to your lips. You have made a lot of money in the oil industry, as have many of your friends. Also, I understand why conservation may not appeal to your imagination. After all, there is something very American about the idea that we can solve our energy problems simply by discovering new technologies and drilling for new oil.
I suspect that you are hesitant to speak of conservation for philosophical reasons as well. Having watched you closely for 6 years, I have noticed how reluctant you are to tell Americans how to live their lives. You clearly believe that the job of the president is to lead, not to lecture.
That is probably a good philosophy, as I would not recommend that you lecture on the virtues of conservation. Frankly, if you gave a speech calling on Americans to consume less gasoline, some liberal environmentalists might feel compelled to buy SUVs the next day.
You can, however, promote conservation through bold leadership. Allow me to make a suggestion: Tax the hell out of gasoline.
If the federal gas tax increased by 25 cents each year for the next decade, the consequences would be dramatic and immediate. Individuals, afraid of paying five dollars per gallon, would demand more fuel-efficient automobiles. Automakers would produce more vehicles meeting the demands of their tax-conscious customers. Market forces would reduce oil consumption quickly and efficiently.
Of course, neither of us want higher taxes. By itself, an increased gas tax would be a heavy burden on Americans. There is, however, an easy solution. Every dollar the government raises from the gas tax should be returned to Americans through corresponding tax cuts. Under this plan, Americans will pay more at the gas pump, but less income or payroll taxes. The goal of the gas tax should be to reduce oil consumption, not to increase tax revenues.
Mr. President, give another speech on energy policy. Explain in clear and simple terms why you are committed to ending America’s dependence on foreign oil. Then make the case for why a gas tax is the best solution to this problem. You would disappoint some of your friends and surprise some of your critics. For what it’s worth, that would be a speech I just might watch.
Sincerely,
Joe Bailey
[email protected]