A Common Sense Approach

I have written on several occasions that now is the time for the President and Congress to act and reduce the speed limit on the Interstate System in an effort to reduce the use and consumption of oil and gasoline.  Recently, according to the Associated Press, Senator John Warner suggested that Congress might want to reimpose a national speed limit to save gasoline.  Senator Warner asked Energy Secretary Samuel Bodmon to look into what speed limit would provide optimum gasoline efficiency given current technology.

 

The Arab Oil Embargo during the 1970s prompted Congress to lower the speed limit on the Interstate Highway System to 55 MPH.  Studies showed that action saved 167,000 barrels of oil a day and reduced deaths on the System by 4000 per year.  Today the number of auto's on the highway has probably doubled what it was during the 70s so just think how much oil and gas would be saved and how many more deaths would be averted from speeding accidents.

 

It is a fact that the action taken by Congress and other conservation measures taken by the federal government reduced our dependence on oil and gasoline and brought down the cost of both to acceptable levels.  But with oil and gasoline now at record levels, the President, Congress and the two Presidential candidates have offered nothing in the way of legislation to discourage consumption.  They are AWOL on the subject.

 

Senator Warner should be complemented on his actions but there is no need to restudy the matter.  We already know reducing the speed limit will work and what it will save.  Action is needed now.  Bush, McCain, and other neocons' answer is more drilling and production of oil.  In other words, keep our country addicted to oil and gasoline and its price surges and have the people and our economy dependent on the Oil and Gas Industry, the very people who are responsible for this problem do not want to see the problem solved.  Our direction should be at conservation and consuming less and less of oil and gasoline.

 

The problem is not a shortage of oil or gasoline as the country has been brainwashed to believe.  $140 barrel oil and $4.00 gallon gasoline is a result of Bush's approval of Cheney's secret meeting with the Energy Industry, the unnecessary war in Iraq, speculation by the Oil and Gas Industry, the massive debt created by Mr. Bush's policies and a weak dollar because this President has never had a true economic plan to deal with the economy.  No one should ever forget that T. Boone Pickens, an oil executive, publicly was quoted as saying gasoline should be about $4.00 per gallon.  Well, we have not only attained, but passed that price.

 

It is a known fact that the American Oil Companies are sitting on millions of acres of land they either own or lease for drilling and exploration but have yet to drill.  This land is in the United States.  Does any one think this land would be idle if there was a shortage?  But guess what?  They want the Congress to open up ANWAR and other areas to drill. They do not know how to tell the people the truth.

 

The time is past for Bush and Congress to act.  If the leadership of this country and the future President continue to ignore thenecessary  "Greening of America" and fail to start that program now, $200 barrel oil is just around the corner.  President Kennedy once said our problems are man made, and therefore they can be solved by man. Too bad we no longer have leaders like Kennedy.  

Warner won't seek re-election

Republican Senator John Warner of Virginia announced that he will not seek a sixth term in the 2008 election. Warner was first elected in 1978 and is now 80 years old. While Warner claims he currently feels good enough to run for Senator again, he doesn't want to make a six year commitment to the people of Virginia and then not be able to fulfill it:

"I want to be fair to this wonderful state, which has been eminently fair to me all these years. You’ve given me my best shot, and I’m quietly gong to step aside and make way for others."

Warner, I must say, has my respect. He, unlike many Republicans, has stood up and questioned the President and his administration on several issues, most recently stating that he feels we need to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq. Warner stood up for what he believed in and for that, I salute him.

But then there is of course the question of who will run for Warner's vacant Senate seat. If Warner ran again in '08, he would have been hard to defeat, but now the democrats have an excellent chance of winning another seat in the Senate. The most likely democrat to run is former Governor Mark Warner. Former Republican Governor, and former presidential candidate, Jim Gilmore, has stated his interest in running for the Senate as well. If Mark Warner and Gilmore are the two going head to head in the general election, I would bet that Mark Warner would score the victory. His popularity has lasted since he left the Governor's Mansion and Warner has always found a way to connect with voters. Expect to see the democrats jump on this opportunity and score a Senate seat victory.

Another jumps ship!

I am please to report that a key, and much respected, republican Senator has finally seen the light. Sen. John Warner of Virginia said today that:

"President Bush should start bringing home some troops by Christmas to show the Baghdad government that the U.S. commitment to Iraq is not open-ended"

The reason for Warner's change of heart, according to him, is that troop withdrawals are needed because Iraq has failed to make any meaningful progress, despite the influx of troops form the surge. He believes bringing troops home would send a message across the region, that the U.S. is not going to buy the Iraqi government time forever, when their own people are too involved in a civil war to care about the U.S's fate. There is one part of it, though, that I do strongly disagree with: when asked the number of troops he would withdraw, the senator said he would only take 5000 out of Iraq to begin with.

5000?!?!?!?! There are over 160,000 and he thinks 5000 is enough? We need all of our combat troops home, in a safe manner of course. I'm aware that it will be a long, drawn out process to get every last combat troop out of Iraq, but 5000 to start out with is too small a number to send a powerful message to the Iraqis. The top democrats running for president, specifically Hillary Clinton, who has detailed her ideas, have the right idea. Begin the safe withdrawal of all our combat troops. Leave a small force there who's only goal is to hunt and stop the advancement of al-Qaeda. That is the only security threat to the U.S. in Iraq, and the sad part is that even al-Qaeda is there because of the U.S. This B.S. from certain republicans about Iraq being crucial to U.S. homeland security is a complete myth. Al-Qaeda, the only people in Iraq who wish ill will to the U.S., account for under 10% of the violence in Iraq. I hate to come off sounding harsh, but we have given the Iraqis 4 years to fight amongst themselves and settle their differences, but they continue to fight, and they continue to kill and injure hundreds of Americans in the process. If we stop patrolling the streets, trying to control civil violence, there will no doubt be an increase in Iraqi bloodshed, but too bad. I'm just going to say it no matter how horrible it sounds: better them then us. I'd rather read the headline of 100 Iraqis killed in a massacre than one american killed because he had to act like Mr. Policemen between the Iraqis. I'm all for protecting the U.S., so lets fight al-Qaeda, but lets not lose American lives needlessly because the Iraqis themselves can't be get along. Let's protect U.S. interests, and leave Iraqi interests to their own government.