June 24, 2008 - 3:42pm
News

Obama touts clean energy, jobs plan in Las Vegas trip

LAS VEGAS - Clean energy was Ill. Sen. Barack Obama's topic today on his first trip to Nevada since clinching the Democratic nomination.  Speaking at the Las Vegas Springs Preserve, Obama highlighted his plan to expand federal funding for renewable energy and accused his rival, Ariz. Sen. John McCain, of "offering the same old gimmicks" instead of leading on the issue.

"What we are seeing here, from the solar panels that power this facility to the Bombard workers who built it is that a green, renewable energy economy isn't some pie-in-the-sky, far-off future," said Obama.  "It is now. It's providing cheap alternatives to $140 dollar a barrel oil now.  And it can create millions of additional jobs."

Obama blamed politicians in Washington, including previous administrations, of failing to act on renewable energy and said that failure has led to the United States falling behind nations like Germany in developing clean sources of power.

"The difference is, their government harnessed that technology by providing the necessary investments and incentives to jumpstart a renewable energy industry," said Obama. "Washington hasn't done that."

Obama said McCain was part of the "failure in Washington" that has "peddled false promises, irresponsible policy, and cheap gimmicks that might get politicians through the next election, but won't lead America toward the next generation of renewable energy."

He cited three proposals of McCain's, a temporary suspension of the federal gas tax, expanding offshore oil drilling, and a $300 million federal prize for inventing a next-generation car battery, as gimmicks and suggested that McCain only supported them because they poll well.

"When John F. Kennedy decided that we were going to put a man on the moon, he didn't go put a bounty out for some rocket scientist to win," said Obama, contrasting his own plan to McCain's.  "He put the full resources of the United States government behind the project and called on the ingenuity and innovation of the American people, not just in the private sector but also in the public sector."

Obama said he would invest $150 billion in renewable energy over the next ten years, eliminate tax breaks for the oil industry, force the automobile industry to adopt higher fuel-efficiency standards and charge oil companies for land they lease from the federal government but don't drill on.

Obama admitted that his plan would not immediately lower the price of gasoline but added that he would push for a second round of tax rebates and a $1,000 tax cut to 95 percent of working families to provide "real relief to the American people."

"I wish we could wave a magic wand and make gas prices go down. I understand how tough things are right now for folks," Obama said.  "But we can't just wave a magic wand."

Responding to Obama's remarks in a conference call organized by the McCain campaign, U.S. Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) called Obama's proposals "ludicrous."

"He continues to oppose any additional exploration attempts domestically by the country. He has expressed an opposition to any expansion of nuclear generation capacity. And amazingly, he has opposed John McCain's visionary proposal of a $300 million prize for a change in battery technology," said Burr.  "I'm not sure that he's done anything other than mirror the inaction of the Democrat majority in the Congress."

Like his visit last month, Obama did not take press questions during his event at the Springs Preserve.  One reporter covering Obama in the traveling press pool during a tour of the facility said he "was never closer than a Hail Mary pass" to the candidate.

JOSEPH K. COOPER can be reached via email at joseph.cooper@politickernv.com.

Comments

Again with the useless idea


Well everybody, I am back for another economic lesson. However, this one will be much shorter then the one that I employed against Dina Titus and the demand and supply issue of Obama.

This time we are going to go over profits a little, since a lot of people clearly don't understand how businesses run.

The goal of businesses is to make money, that's why people make them. If there weren't that basic carrot on the stick, then no one would run a business, because I can assure you that people don't do it for the business card.

Now, another way phrasing the term "making money" is to call it "making a profit".

Profit = bringing in more money then you spent.

So far, we have that business want to make profit, and that to make profit you bring in more money then you spent.

Now, imagine if you are bringing in a profit for the year, but then an outside influence, say the U.S. Gov't, said "we are going to make hamper your profits via the removal of your tax break".

What we have here is a decrease in the profit of the company. Now what liberals like to think, is that this is going to somehow make the company want to lower prices. This is where the problem arises in their plan. The company will not look at a decrease in profit and decide to lower price and drop profits even further. We'd be lucky if the company didn't decide to INCREASE prices to make up for the loss of the extra money that they lost due to the removal of their tax credit.

The best case scenario we can realistically look for, is that the oil company takes the hit in tax break and doesn't decide to raise prices to compensate for it. Which would put the price per gallon at the exact same amount as it is now.

Well, that was the economic lesson for today. The political lesson to keep in mind here is that the liberals like Obama and Pelosi say things like "remove tax breaks on oil companies" just for press and popularity. It sounds like something that will make the voters happy and so they say it. However there will be no positive gain from doing this.

06/25/08 4:03 pm

McCain admitted that his


McCain admitted that his plan to sell more offshore oil leases would do nothing directly for gas prices, but would have a "psychological benefit." Only about 30% of current leases are under production. McCain wants to ensure that oil companies, his biggest donors, stockpile leases for future profit.
The purpose of repealing windfall subsidies to oil companies is not to cause immediate decrease in gas prices. It is to stop pouring funds that are needed for renewable R&D down that particular rathole.
Thanks for the grade-school level econ lesson.

06/26/08 4:08 pm

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote> <b> <i> <p> <br> <span> <img> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.