Energy Blog

As I was doing research for and representing Ralph Nader, I kept on asking myself one question: “WHY IS HE RUNNING?”

Ralph Nader was born in 1934, which makes him 74 this year. If one of people’s isssues about McCain has to do with his age (72), Nader definitely is disadvantaged–he is two years older than McCain. Not only is his age disadvantageous, there are other factors that are against him. He is an independent candidate this year, without any support from a party. He also has been very vague and ambiguous about a lot of his proposals, which left people wondering and even doubting the feasibility of many of his claims. Also, it is clear that the public interest is no way near Nader. Most people do not even know he is running for president; he does not appear in any newspaper articles, magazines, tv programs, etc.

Then why is he running? People say that he is running to “make a statement.” Well, after his controversial role in presidential election eight years ago, I felt as if he made the biggest statement a third party candidate can ever make in history; I see it as one of the golden moments of Nader’s political life. But… why this come back that people know will not compare to his impact eight years ago?

Personally, I learned to appreciate Nader in a different light through this mock-press conference. I do see that he has no burning personal ambition or prize he wants to gain through the election. However, in this intricate web of politics, what is he after? What does he want to see?

All the candidates’ representatives talked about their policies on the issue of energy including American independence from foreign oil, improving transportation technology, cleaner alternative fuels, and energy efficiencies.  Funding of these policies were only brushed upon during our mock press conference.  No in-depth information was given by any of the representatives on how the federal government will be able to fund their respective ideas and policies.  Even after the financial debacle, it seems that the federal government still knows how to spend money, and a clear example of their spendthrift personality is the federal governments ‘double-edged sword’ bailout plan of $700 billon to buy up troubled mortgage investments previously held by fallen insurance giants and banks such as American International Group (AIG).

After all this where will the government leech from to fund its energy policies?  Should I remind you about our national debt?  According to the national debt counter, United States’ deficit is a fourteen digit figure, over $10 trillion. According to Associated Press, The $700 billion government bailout could send the national debt to more than $11 trillion.

Now I ask all the representatives, after hearing this how will their candidates fund their energy policies without drastically increasing the national debt.  Got Funds?

Even though I represented Palin in the class debate, I have to admit that Palin’s policies on energy are too vague and general to actually produce substantial benefits in our time of energy crisis. Drilling in ANWR will absolutely not solve energy problems in the U.S. The drill, drill, drill attitude seems as if it will truly only benefit Alaska. The expert knowledge on energy that McCain claimed Palin to have is mostly limited to the state she governs. Palin has put great emphasis on energy independence, which is an ideal for this country. However, the way in which Palin plans to go about energy independence comes short of ideal, very short. Palin has presented the option of drilling in our lands to use the natural resources we have in an attempt to be independent of foreign suppliers. She defended drilling saying that drilling helps something, even if it cannot solve everything. It seemed that Palin runs her policies on defense. 

Barbara had mentioned my answering of reporter’s questions, some that Palin has failed to answer herself. I found great difficulty in representing Palin. Probably the only aspect of this energy crisis that I can full agree with Palin on is that the country should try to raise their energy independence. Besides that, I felt that Palin’s policies could only be defended and not explained. The notion of drilling mainly in Alaska does not offer the grand solution she makes it out to be. In addition, Palin’s extreme lack of emphasis on alternative energy sources causes even greater speculation of a woman who, if elected with McCain, is expected to be the nation’s overseer on energy policy.

Now this does not mean that Palin remains the only candidate without a solution. I agree with Evan and Lisa that none of the candidates seem to have a solid solution. Even with the numerous policies on energy that they present in their debates and campaigns, we must realize that most of it is talk. I don’t wish to be completely pessimistic, but the promises that these candidates make about fixing our energy crisis in ten years or so do not hold any true substance. We cannot easily believe that these policies will just go into effect or effect much in general. 

On a lighter note, I was trying to add a video to this entry, but I can’t seem to get it to work. So I will just try to post the link to it instead. Hope you enjoy. 

http://www.hulu.com/watch/36863/saturday-night-live-couric–palin-open