"the White House is betting that they'll force Republicans into a corner"

[babylonsister]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/03/drill-obama-drill/38242/

Drill, Obama Drill
Marc Ambinder

Mar 31 2010, 9:39 AM ET


For a Democratic president, this is a pretty gutsy move to open the public debate about an energy bill. Or, well, maybe it's not: it's high-reward, low-risk; environmentalists will complain, but then again, environmentalists complain. Aside from the substance, which is beyond our ken, the politics of this move is easy: with one fell swoop, Obama deprives Republicans of the major talking point they'd use to object to more expansive government-based climate remediation and energy prospecting policy.

Republicans will quibble over details: why is he not opening up more places? Why is he excluding Bristol Bay? Why is he excluding parts of the Gulf of Mexico? His steps are too slow, too limited...

The Republicans sort of have a point, although it's not the point they're comfortable with: estimates of how much oil can be extracted are very old -- decades old -- and, as the New York Times notes, "{i}n many of the newly opened areas, drilling would begin only after the completion of geologic studies, environmental impact statements, court challenges and public lease sales. Much of the oil and gas may not be recoverable at current prices and may be prohibitively expensive even if oil prices spike as they did in the summer of 2008."

To which the White House responds by pointing to the headlines: "Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time." Grist, the environmentalist news website, considers the move a "stunning concession to fossil fuel companies." It shows that the president has a sense of urgency about energy and the environment. Etc.

In any event, it seems a little tone deaf, given what the public knows and will learn about the announcement, for Republicans to argue that Obama "continues to defy the will of the American people."

By announcing this BEFORE the Senate moves forward with its climate change legislation, which may or may not include cap-and-trade (probably not), the White House is betting that they'll force Republicans into a corner before the public debate begins, they'll give some cover to moderate Democratic members of Congress (who love it when Obama picks a fight with his own base), and they'll get some public cred with Americans who want to see the president moving quickly to find opportunities to create jobs. This isn't about votes in Congress per se, it's about perception, cover and framing the debate. It's also a move that tries to get ahead of rising gas prices.

[msongs]

1. a bit of conservation will have better effect than ALL offshore drilling possible nt

[sellitman]

3. I hope you are right.

This nuance stuff is hard to wrap my brain around. Lol

[Captain Hilts]

5. Conservation helps IMMEDIATELY. But no one has the nerve to say the word. nt

[Enthusiast]

18. We know how the concept of conservation

is spun by the corporate media. We are ruled by corporate wishes, no question.

[flpoljunkie]

6. True, but we need a good climate change bill. If this concession makes that possible, that's good.

Whether the Republicans will cooperate--no matter what Obama does-is also questionable. Will they continue to be the party of 'Hell, no.'

[seabeckind]

9. That's a contradiction.

We cannot have a good climate change bill if concessions are made -- especially if they're made before negotiations begin.

[flpoljunkie]

22. I obviously disagree, but the proof is in the pudding. We will see.

[Enrique]

2. Obama should embrace the GOP's entire agenda

think of the corner that would put them in!

[Nite Owl]

8. It's all about politics

not about doing the right thing.

[TheCowsCameHome]

10. They'd still find something to cry about....

...but it would be fun to take away most of their ammo.

[Clio the Leo]

4. ...

[seabeckind]

7. This Bullsh!t is getting tiresome...n/t

[Skinner]

11. If they succeed in passing comprehensive climate change legislation...

...then (in hindsight) I think this might end up looking like a savvy political move, and a worthwhile policy compromise. It will depend on what's in the final bill.

But if they don't pass comprehensive climate change legislation, this will have been a huge mistake. I can only hope that the Administration has not signed away its best bargaining chip for nothing.

[dgibby]

15. Reminds me of taking single payer off the table before the

HCR debate even got started. I thought that was a very stupid move, but that's when I still believed the PTB actually WANTED the Public Option. Silly me! My bad!

[Kokonoe]

12. Gas will be well over $3.00 a gallon this summer.

As we already know, that causes a poor economy and job losses.

[n2doc]

13. That may be the real point to all this

Obama is trying to take away a major political argument (however unfounded in reality) by the repubs for this falls elections. The 30 percenters won't be swayed, but some independents will be.

[JuniperLea]

19. It was $3.05 in Seal Beach, CA this morning... eom

[4lbs]

21. It was $2.95 here in San Diego, for regular unleaded, on Monday.

It will surely hit about $3.25 here this summer. In San Diego, June/July prices are usually about 25 cents higher than they are in April.

[Exen Trik]

14. Obama...

I'm going to trust you on this. But as an environmentalist, I'm still going to complain. Loudly.

You do your job, I'll do mine.

[Beetwasher]

16. Exactly The Position To Take!

:thumbsup:

Welcome to DU.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Enthusiast]

20. Well said. nt