There is a "Villain" In Our Dependence on Foreign Oil and His Name is Ronald Reagan

Republicans in Minnesota have become born-again alternative-energy zealots, not to save the planet from global warming (their VP candidate does not believe that man's activities contribute to the problem), but for another laudable goal, eliminating our dependence on foreign sources of energy. At least they get that part of it.

At the same time, in nearly every other phrase, the Republicans will praise Ronald Reagan in worshipful terms. They will attempt to be courteous to the 2 George Bushes, but will immediately cover themselves by referencing Reagan. Indeed, as soon as George W finished his speech yesterday praising John McCain, the convention cut to a picture of Reagan. God is alive and well in St. Paul.

Yet, if there were a single major villain responsible for our dependence on foreign oil it is Ronald Reagan himself.

During the rise in the oil prices following the Iranian revolution, President Jimmy Carter announced policies that would prevent the US from ever importing a single drop of oil more per year than in 1979. The program included subsidies for alternative energies and serial increases in the efficiency (C.A.F.E. = corporate average fuel economy) standards for automobiles

Carter called it, presciently, "the moral equivalent of war". Anyone today doubting Carter's insight? Any takers at the Republican National Convention?

Regrettably, a Republican PR operation realized that the acronym spelled out "m.e.o.w", and they pounced on the program using "meow" to ridicule it. Ronald Reagan then convinced the American people that conservation was beneath them, and he not only cut the subsidies, he also phased out the CAFE standards.

Story continues below

advertisement

It may bear repeating the obvious: every gallon of oil saved by efficiency is a gift that keeps on giving, year-after-year another gallon is not burned. By contrast every gallon produced is used once, and is then gone forever. Of course, oil companies do not make money when you do not burn that gallon every year.

And, now, the tragic truth: had Reagan left those CAFE standards in place, and the US had continued to conserve oil at the same rate as it had from 1979-85, the US today would be importing not a single drop of oil from the Persian Gulf. Not one. Zilch. Zorch. Nada. (See, e.g., Amory Lovins, "Energy Security Facts", Rocky Mountain Institute).

Imagine what benefits there would have been had Reagan not used the Iranian situation for partisan political gain. Start with Detroit. Instead of being far behind the efficiency curve, and losing out to foreign competitors (from countries where the price of gasoline was higher, and thus were producing higher efficiency engines), US automakers would be healthy, and right in the thick of it. Employment levels would be up in Michigan, and high wage jobs would be growing not shrinking. Add to that US ingenuity, and we may well have been the leaders in the world in fuel-efficient and/or alternative energy using automobiles.

Jump now to our foreign debt. Instead of being beholden to close allies like China to hold (and not demand payment) of our debt, our balance of payments would be, if not positive, at least not nearly so negative. The dollar would be higher, as countries would have more confidence in the greenback's value.

Consider our foreign policy. We would no longer be at the mercy of rogue nations, and those countries would not have the resources to support their terrorist activities and their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. To be sure, North Korea and Pakistan, and even Israel, have shown that even poor nations can develop nuclear weapons, but North Korea has done so in part because they believe there is a potential market for their technology among the oil-producing states and Pakistan was likely funded by Libya and other oil-producers. Israel was aided by France. Without dealing in absolutes, we can confidently assert that the world would have been a far less dangerous place.

Consider health. Our air would be cleaner. Asthma rates in children have doubled almost every decade, and asthmatic attacks have become a major cause of absences among schoolchildren. Large populations of young children chronically inhale steroids to prevent such asthmatic attacks.

Oh yes, what about the small matter of global warming? Let us just say that our challenges in preventing future catastrophe would be far less daunting. To warm the cockles of Republicans' hearts, Al Gore may never have won the Nobel Prize.

Ronald Reagan does not deserve all the blame. Having outflanked the Democrats politically on both energy and tax policy, the progressive impulse among the opposition vanished with Reagan's landslide victory in 1984. Bush, always trying to ape Reagan to outdo his father, managed to cancel the remaining tax-credits for purchasing hybrid cars, weakened efficiency standards for nearly everything, provided enormous tax breaks for Hummers and other gas-guzzlers.

Outside the Republican convention, however, that victory rings very hollow 25 years, two World Trade Center towers and two Persian Gulf Wars later.

The next time you fork out $50 to fill your tank with gas, or send your son or daughter off to Iraq, thank Ronald Reagan (with a tip of the hat to George W Bush).

Comments

[TurnThePageGA]

I posted Carter's speech in an earlier blog at another site in response to someone comparing Obama to Carter. Reagan fed us the BS that we party all night and we did except he sold it as "It's Morning in America". Well now it really is morning and now that the party is over we have to live with all the stuff we did last night.

[JJacques]

Republican have never really cared about America just about exploiting it's people and maintaining their power. Is there any doubt that there is a direct correlation between our deteriorating educational system and performance and their subsequent rise? Get smart America and let's try a Democrat.

[UnbiasView]

"President Jimmy Carter announced policies that would prevent the US from ever importing a single drop of oil more per year than in 1979"

Considering he said oil was going to run out by the early 1980s . . .

[research]

Let's see:

We shouldn't have started getting off our dependence on oil 20 years ago, but we should start drilling for 8 months of oil we will get 10-20 years from now?

[UnbiasView]

Do you use oil or plastic?

If the answer is yes, drill away.

[Egalitare]

Carter was a Nuclear Engineer, not an Oil Man.

But he was close enough. Domestic Oil Production has fallen since the mid 70s, and it won't EVER return to pre-1973 levels.

We're better off trying to figure out how to make biofuels from nuisance plants like kudzu.

[KillTheMessenger]

Can you please quote Carter for us? I doubt he ever said that. Which makes you nothing but a spinmeister set on 12,500 rpm.

Here is something Carter really said:

Ours is the most wasteful nation on Earth. We waste more energy than we import. With about the same standard of living, we use twice as much energy per person as do other countries like Germany, Japan, and Sweden. -Jimmy Carter, 39th President of the United States, Address to the Nation, 18 April 1977

Look... it's 31 years later and it's still true!

[SEQUOIABISON]

Great article Paul.

Not too many folks remember that Reagan rescinded the Jimmy Carter CAFÉ regulations, but what is even more disturbing to me is; Clinton and Gore failed to reinstate this very important conservation effort.

I could never figure out why the Clinton administration appeared indifferent to oil and gas conservation, even though he had the biggest anti-combustible engine, environmental guru sitting right next to him?

I think Obama will be even better for the environment than Gore would have been?

Obama/Biden

[PioneerKing]

PAUL:
Thank you for having the courage to challenge the republicans on their worship of Ronald Reagan and their belief that he was the best president our nation has ever had.

Not only did Reagan gut our CAFE standards but Reagan/Bush eviscerated all of the programs and
research on alternative energy such as solar, hydro, geothermal, wind, and other programs.

The republicans also implemented legislation to encourage the purchase of gas guzzling trucks and mini-vans by granting tax credits for the vehicles.

The republicans love to chant "whatever is good for corporate America is good for all Americans," and that whatever they do "will enhance the policies of trickle down economics to improve the lives of all Americans."

Unfortunately, the republican party"s cliques and policies have placed the interests of corporate America and big oil over the interests of the American people and as a result have jeopardized our national security and economic well being.

The Democratic Party is allowing the nation to be distracted by Palin instead of focusing on McCain and the republicans energy polices and other economic policies.

The Democratic Party needs to point out how McCain and Palin have voted along republican party lines and what those votes really mean to Americans and how their votes effect our economy and national security

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-romm/we-tried-offshore-drillin_b_117263.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/muhammad-sahimi/it-is-not-offshore-drilli_b_117340.html

[rafael44]

you are exactly right ..make sme think of the theories of Milton Friedman all this has been simmering since the 1940's

[oldmilitant]

I think this is a well-researched piece that needed writing. Thank you.

[Sparty1]

You had better run! You know better than to talk about the greatest republican ever! You'll have all of them chasing you down any minute now.

[arvay]

Ronald Reagan has not been president for some time now, and nothing is gained by this line of argument. Obama isn't going to win because of a groundswell of revulsion against Reagan. One could reasonably trace the roots of the US-Russia disagreement over Georgia and Eastern Europe to Yalta.

Where does that get us?

Bush is the "villain" and the political miscreant. Forward, please.

[rafael44]

it is called putting things in the proper historical perspective

[qwr]

It's called historical truth. Just because everyone fawns over Reagan (including Obama, but not including R's children), doesn't mean we have to play along.

[BBackSoon]

As the want-to-be tin foil hat wearing person that I am, the RNC/Bushco mess that we find ourselves in was laid out 30 or 40 years ago. These are some patient people with serious long term agendas. Think of how long Cheney has walked (Lurked) the halls of the White House.

We could even argue that this has all been in the works since T. Roosevelt broke up the monopolies and surely since FDR"s New Deal. It would seem that power and money is one of those things you can never have enough of, and that lust is passed from generation to generation.