I address ANWR as part of a specific plan that we should be drilling anywhere that oil is, recognizing that drilling in any one area such as ANWR is not going to be the only solution. Leases that already exist offshore need to be explored, and those companies taking the initiative to explore leases they already hold should be the first companies to be granted new leases in unexplored areas. We need to start building refineries now as well. America’s addiction to oil is not going to be fixed quickly, but it is Government’s job to get out of the way and allow expansion in this industry now.

I’m also not saying the Green Jobs Act is bad legislation, and I also agree it would put a number of people back to work. If we can eliminate the deficit and find programs that we can cut to make this program fit into a balanced Federal budget, I might be willing to revisit my position. However, with the growing demand for energy resources within this country and around the world, I feel that getting government out of the way of growth in both oil and Green Energy will create more jobs in construction in the short term and jobs within the new power plants and refineries (both for oil and biofuels) going forward. If the energy source is not going to be profitable, it is not the job of Federal Government to subsidize it so it makes money. Why should the taxpayer bear that expense?

Ty, thanks again for your comment, and I appreciate you taking the time to look at my positions. We may agree to disagree in some areas, but having a conversation and positive debate is always a good thing in a Free Country!!

James

First you brought up drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge they make it sound like we have SO MUCH oil up there, but if we were to only use the oil from the refuge it has been shown to be at best around a 6 month supply. Also if we were to open it up for drilling it would do nothing to help gas prices now it would take up to 10 years to actually start pumping the oil down to refineries. Even then it has been shown that it would lower gas prices by at most somewhere around 1.5 cents per gallon. So instead of paying 4 a gallon we’d be paying 3.985 a gallon not much of a difference there.

You say it’s not up to federal government to help renewables become profitable, but hasn’t the federal government been doing this for the coal and oil industry for years through subsidies. Subsidies were created to help emerging markets and new technologies get up on their feet why is it that our government still pumps so much money into the fossil fuel industry it’s not like they are struggling.

I completely agree with you that CORN ethanol is a bad idea. It raises food prices and it takes at least a gallon of oil to create a gallon of Ethanol meaning their is no new energy created and it is not a viable source of fuel to offset our dependence on foreign oil. There are other sources that we can use that take little energy and less resources to grow that can actually give a bigger payout. Biofuels aren’t some new creation Henry Ford commisioned George Washignton Carver to start research and production of Biofuels because Ford realized that oil might not be the best way to go. The reason oil became our primary source is that government investment into the oil industry didn’t allow for the market to decide who would come out on top. Don’t you think we should fix these problems from the past?

Lastly you say you would vote against the Green Jobs act and the Efficiency Grant because we have to first cut spending. Well we could start by cutting funding from many of the outdated COLD WAR programs that we are still pumping millions of dollars a year into which no longer serve any purpose for national security. We would also be savign money in the long run through efficiency programs. Plus Through green jobs we can create hundreds of thousands of new jobs for the people in this country that need them the most, and don’t you feel it is important that every American should have a good job so that they may support their family.