Was Perry’s “jobs plan” really only his “energy policy”? No one seems to know. And with good reason.
On Friday, the Perry campaign released a copy of the candidate’s “Jobs Plan”… or did he? No one seems to be able to agree on that one simple point. The Perry website (no link. You know where) still refers to it as a “plan to create 1.2 million jobs”. Fox News Sunday yesterday referred to it as his “Energy policy”. A Google news search finds the plan being referred to equally as both his “jobs plan” and his “energy policy”… sometimes in the same story. One thing is clear, Perry’s “plan” focuses ENTIRELY on one industry: Energy. “Oil & Gas” to be specific, with lots of “coal” and “nuclear” power thrown in for good measure. Texas is big on Wind Power too, so it gets few nods as well. After that, Perry’s un-categorical “plan” eschews Green energy like your drunken brother-in-law at a wedding: the only reason anyone included him at all was to avoid having to explain to your sister why he wasn’t invited.
The opening line of Perry’s “plan” reads: “Creating domestic jobs and making America more energy independent and economically secure are key pillars of my overall jobs and growth strategy” (give him points for saying “key pillars”… suggesting more to come, but in 39 additional pages, Perry NOT ONCE suggests what ANY of those other “pillars” might be. He instead couches every reference to “jobs” in terms of energy production.) If this is not his “jobs plan”, he probably shouldn’t of announced during a GOP debate ON THE ECONOMY last week that he’d be releasing “his plan” just “three days from now”… in response to Herman Cain’s “Nein! Nein! Nein!” plan. The Perry website lists four “policy proposals”: The aforementioned “drill everywhere” plan; his “reconstruct (ie: cripple) the EPA so it doesn’t limit energy production” plan; the “states have a right to drill anywhere they want” plan (“EPA” mentioned again); and his “level playing field for energy producers” plan. Are you noticing a theme? Still thinking Perry’s “jobs plan” failing to mention ANY other industry besides “energy” is a fluke? Me neither. This also opens up another question: “If this isn’t Perry’s jobs plan, then where is it?”
During the GOP debate in Hanover, NH last week, Governor Perry responded to moderator Charlie Rose’s first question this way:
Rose: [...] So we begin this evening with the question: What would you do specifically to end the paralysis in Washington?
Cain: [...] So the answer is, we must grow this economy with a bold solution, which is why I have proposed 9-9-9, [...]
ROSE: Governor Perry, are you prepared — even though you’ve said that you want to make Washington inconsequential — to go to Washington and, as Ronald Reagan did, compromise on spending cuts and taxes in order to produce results?
PERRY: Well, certainly as the governor of the second largest state, I’ve had to deal with folks on both sides of the aisle. I’ve signed six balanced budgets as the governor of — of Texas [editor's note: it took him a second, but he got it]. So working with folks on both sides of the aisle and — and bringing ideas, whether it’s ways to redo your tax structure or what have you.
One of the things that I laid out today I think is a pretty bold plan, to put 1.2 million Americans working in the energy industry. And you don’t need Congress to do that. You need a president with a plan, which I’m laying out over the next three days, and, clearly, the intent to open up this treasure trove that America’s sitting on and getting America independent on the domestic energy side. It’s time for another American Declaration of Independence. It’s time for energy independence.
(Is it just me, or is Perry this election’s “Fred Thompson”? Conservatives were clamoring… begging… Thompson to run in 2008 [because they hated the front-runners Romney and McCain] thinking he would be the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan: A politician-turned-actor with lots of swagger and a folksy simplicity, who turned out to be dumb as a stump in the debates.)
Notice Rose wasn’t asking about “energy”. Clearly, Rose was asking Perry about “gridlock” until Cain turned it into a discussion about the economy. Perry was arguing that the solution to “economic growth” for the entire country is to focus on domestic energy production because THAT is primarily responsible for Perry’s “Texas Miracle”.
So instead of being a “Jobs plan that relies on energy production”, Perry supporters want everyone to believe Perry’s big plan released Friday is solely his “energy policy”, which is why it doesn’t mention ANY other industries besides “energy”. Fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal) are mentioned 10:1 over “green” energy (wind, solar, biomass). “Global Warming” is disparaged, but Texas is a popular location for “wind power” (any surprise, with blowhards like this?) “Nuclear” is mentioned 21 times (15 times in just one paragraph), but nuclear power IS NOT GREEN. Texas is also big on nuclear power despite being a highly tempting terrorist target.
Perry said his “plan” would “put 1.2 million Americans” back to work. Maybe in total, but after you’ve hired enough people to suck ANWR dry, you don’t need to keep hiring people. It’s not like Perry is suggesting “1.2 million jobs a year” as we continue to find new mass-deposits of domestic oil forever, or that there’s enough oil in these locations to keep people employed for 20 years. He’s promising that opening up protected lands and wildlife preserves to drilling will produce 1.2mil jobs IN TOTAL finding, drilling, processing, transporting and selling all that lovely oil. Sorry gov. “1.2 million jobs” ain’t squat. This country needs (conservatively) 100,000 jobs a month just to keep up with population growth. In 12 months, that’s 1.2 million jobs right there. So Perry’s plan… a one-trick pony if that’s all there is to it… is enough to hold unemployment steady at 9.1% for the next 24-36 months (read on), and that’s it.
Okay, so let’s look at the argument that “Energizing American Jobs and Security” is only his “energy policy” and not his solution to America’s economic crisis. Is this even good “energy policy”? Focused 10:1 on fossil fuels and promising no federal funds for green energy development at a time the world is clamoring for it? An energy policy that depends HEAVILY on the ASSUMPTION that we’ll find vast reserves of oil beneath currently restricted lands/waters across the U.S.? The U.S. consumes just under “7 billion barrels” of oil each year (“19million barrels a day” according to Perry’s own report - Page 12). On page 14 of Perry’s “energy plan”, he states categorically that there is “as much as 12 billion barrels of oil and 10 trillion cubic feet of natural gas” under ANWR (The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Northern Alaska). “12 billion” is less than two years worth of oil. Perry’s solution for “jobs and energy security” is to potentially destroy our protected wildlife reserves for less than two-years worth of oil?
“But don’t forget the Natural Gas!”, I hear Freeper’s saying. “Natural Gas” (NG) is less powerful than oil as a fuel, so it takes more of it to do the same work. VERY roughly, CNG (Compressed natural gas) provides 3/4′s the power of gasoline (based on MPG estimates). “Raw” (uncompressed) NG must be liquified to use. According to the USGS (US Geological Survey), it takes roughly 5,800 cubic feet of NG to equal ONE barrel of oil. So… doing the math… “10 trillion cubic feet” of NG would be (roughly) equivalent to an additional “1.7 Billion barrels (or 90 days) worth of oil”… in QUANTITY only. Take into consideration that it takes 25% more NG to do the same work as oil, and you’re looking at risking the destruction of ANWR for less than 2 years worth of “oil”.
Same page (14), Perry claims the “National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska” also hides another “896 million barrels of oil and 53 trillion cubic feet of NG”… or (same math)… 90 days worth of oil and just under 480 DAYS worth of natural gas. Suddenly, I’m not feeling all that “energy independent”. Under President Perry, America’s oil & gas reserves would be tapped out around the time he starts running for reelection three years later, with almost no green energy industry developed to fill the void (I’ve FREQUENTLY pointed to the Conservative inability to look two days down the road and consider the consequences of their actions: war, mismanaging FEMA, tax cuts that explode the Debt, wholesale deregulation, etc), and this appears to be just one more example.
Okay Perry supporters. You say this is only his “energy policy” and not his “jobs plan”? If his jobs plan looks anything like his energy policy, we’re all in big trouble should the worst happen and this neophyte gets elected. Clearly, Governor Perry is aware that the bulk of the jobs created in his “Texas Miracle” are the result of the exploding price of petroleum in his oil-rich state, and he’s relying on the industry to solve the entire nations’ jobs crisis as well. (Of course, if Perry is right and we do find “vast reserves” of energy in America, the natural effect would be to drive energy prices DOWN, meaning LESS energy-income as a result.)
In conclusion, one chilling point of interest: the second line of Perry’s “plan” reads:
What makes my “Energizing American Jobs and Security” plan unique compared to the broader economic reforms I will present in the coming weeks is that it doesn’t require an act of Congress.
Yes, Perry thinks abolishing the EPA and opening up protected wilderness to oil drilling don’t require Congressional approval. He believes he can simply circumvent Congress with the stroke of a pen. Either he is WILDLY ignorant of how government works, or he just doesn’t care. Your choice. Either one says this man has no business setting foot in the Oval Office.
Note from the Editor:
I finally moved my money from BoA on Friday.
I had meant to do it a year ago when news of outrageous “CEO bonuses” broke, but I got lazy, decided it would be too big of a chore, and forgot about it.
But when news of the “$5 Debit Card Fee” broke, I finally got off my duff and made the move EVEN THOUGH I HAVE ENOUGH MONEY THAT THE NEW FEE WOULD NOT HAVE APPLIED TO ME. I did it because it was the right thing to do.
The new bank directly across the street from my BoA is a small(ish) local community bank. I checked them out online, and read they donate $1million to the local community every year. Plus they had online banking (which I use extensively), and don’t charge a fee to use their Visa Debit Card. I opened an account there the next morning. I had to wait for any outstanding bills/payments to clear at BoA first, but Friday I made the move.
I had to go through an “agent” to close my account, a young guy about 10 years my junior in his mid 30′s asked me why I was closing my account:
“I’m moving my money to a more socially responsible bank”, I told him.
That must of been a new one to him. He laughed, smiled broadly, and asked (deliberately?) incorrectly: “A more ‘sociable’ bank?”
“Socially… Socially responsible bank”, I corrected him.
“You know we’re not the only ones who were bailed out?”, trying to guess my reasoning.
“I know. I’m just tired of turning on the news every day and hearing another ‘horror story’ about Bank of America.”
“Where are you moving your money to?”
“The bank right across the street”, which I pointed to and named by name.
“You know they merged with XYZ?” (I missed the name of the major bank he cited, but a quick Google search when I got home found it was a lie.)
“I’ll look into it.”, I replied, smiling.
And that was it. I turned in my Debit card, picked up a Cashiers check for the full amount, left and deposited it across the street.
The hardest, most time-consuming part of the entire process was remembering what companies I had set up “automatic bill pay” with (like my ISP and PayPal), visit their websites and update my Debit Card info. THAT was the extent of my difficulty. (It might of been more trouble if I had CD’s or a credit card.)
Should of done it 12 months ago.
Sign my petition for GREEN JOBS TOMORROW fast & cheap. Use those $4 Billion in oil subsidies to put Solar Panels on the roofs of 40,000 government buildings, or order 100,000 hybrid mail-trucks. Not only would this INSTANTLY CREATE JOBS, it would spark ENTIRE INDUSTRIES with a future, reduce our dependency on oil, reduce greenhouse emissions, and quickly pay for itself (and cut future expenses) with the energy savings. We need 5,000 signatures by December 20th.
|Please REGISTER to post comments or be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE7+ users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts!|