Set America Free Notes&Comments

Kudos to Rep Everett, Terry [AL-2], Rep McCaul, Michael T. [TX-10], Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10], Rep Lowey, Nita M. [NY-18], Rep Price, David E. [NC-4] for becoming cosponsors of HR4409, The Fuel Choices for American Security Act.
Is your Representative on board yet?

An excerpt from Senator Bingaman’s statement on the Senate floor announcing his decision to cosponsor of S.2025, The Vehicle and Fuel Choices for American Security Act:

“In thinking about more efficient use of oil, we need to face up to the fact that most of our oil is consumed in the transportation sector. Growth in transportation demand for oil is the single largest factor in the growth of our dependence on imported oil. So improving the efficiency of our use of oil and natural gas–these were the areas, frankly, in which last year’s Energy bill turned in its weakest performance.

“The Senate adopted a number of reasonable proposals to promote more efficient use of oil and natural gas when we passed our version of the bill, but the most significant of those provisions we passed in the Senate had to be dropped in conference because of the strong opposition from our colleagues in the House of Representatives. These Senate-passed provisions included mandating an economywide oil savings target, increasing tire efficiency standards, and implementing a renewable portfolio standard for electricity.

“Since the passage of last year’s Energy bill, there has been continued interest in these proposals, and last year a bipartisan group of Senators, led my Senators Bayh, Brownback, Lieberman, and Coleman, introduced a comprehensive bill, S. 2025, the Vehicles and Fuel Choices for America Security Act. That bill provides a mix of energy policy and energy tax incentive proposals aimed at moving our economy toward both a more efficient use of oil and a more diverse future mix of transportation fuels, including biofuels. I strongly support many of those proposals. I am joining them as a cosponsor of that bill.

“Because that bill contained both policy and tax provisions, it was referred to the Finance Committee. Yet many of the provisions of this bill are in the jurisdiction of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which ought to review and report those provisions to the full Senate. For that reason, I am joining with a number of those sponsors of S. 2025 to introduce a new bipartisan bill this week that will take those energy policy provisions and put them in a bill that will be referred to the Energy Committee. In this way, we will have a starting point for what I hope will be an effective and bipartisan committee process in the tradition of the bipartisan leadership on energy that our committee enjoyed under Senator Domenici’s leadership last year in the passage of the Energy bill.

“Among the most important provisions of S. 2025 and the new bill will be an emphasis on an expanded plan for economywide oil savings. The President would be required to come forward with a plan to cut our oil use from projected levels by 2.5 million barrels of oil per day by 2016, 7 million barrels of oil per day by 2026, and 10 million barrels of oil per day by 2031. ”

Anne Korin talks about oil, national security, and the imperative of reducing our dependence.

Kudos to Senators Bingaman, Inouye and Kerry for becoming co-sponsors of S.2025, The Vehicle and Fuel Choices for American Security Act.
Is your Senator on board yet?

Bolivia’s Morales just nationalized the oil and gas industry. This is part of an epidemic of governmental looting that is spreading across South America, and will serve to discourage energy majors from making the investments necessary to develop the region’s reserves. As Gal Luft was quoted in today’s New York Times article on the issue, “This isn’t like Saudi Arabia, which over the years has developed a know-how to dominate the industry independently [...] When you cause problems for foreign investors, you cause problems for those who know how to create and develop the industry.”

For background, read/watch Anne Korin’s March 2, 2006 testimony before the House Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere.

Tom Friedman:
“The president can start by pushing the bipartisan Fuel Choices for American Security Act, now wending its way through Congress. This bill would mandate that every car sold in America would not just have seat belts, but would also be flex-fuel capable so it could run on ethanol, methanol or gasoline. It would also pave the way for the rapid commercialization of plug-in hybrid vehicles, which would combine electricity and gasoline to get 100 miles out of every gallon of gasoline consumed.

“Finally, the bill would offer Detroit loan guarantees for transforming its fleets in this direction. “We’re going to have to bail out Detroit anyway, so let’s at least get some public benefit,” the energy expert Anne Korin said.”

Set America Free Coalition members Jim Woolsey & Gal Luft in the Houston Chronicle:
“Large-scale deployment of flexible fuel vehicles running on alcohol, gasoline or any mixture of the two will allow Americans to choose secure domestic fuel over problematic foreign oil. Since the additional per-vehicle cost associated with flexible fuel vehicles is currently under $200, fuel flexibility should become a standard feature in every car ? like seatbelts or airbags.

“Plug-in hybrid vehicles, unlike standard hybrids, can draw charge not only from the engine and captured braking energy, but also from America’s electrical grid [...]

“These technologies exist. There is no need to wait for technological breakthroughs, invest billions in research and development or embark on massive infrastructure changes. What is needed is congressional action to build on the president’s call by enacting the necessary incentives for
producers to make, and consumers to buy, cars that offer fuel choices while encouraging the development of a mass market for alternative fuels, along with the modest necessary changes in the distribution system. Such policies would make the U.S. economy more resilient and put it on a trajectory toward oil security.”

Coalition members Luft and Deron Lovaas:
“With oil trading near $75 a barrel, one can only wonder how much higher prices might get should this year’s hurricane season be as lethal as last year’s, should a full-blown civil war erupt in Nigeria or Iraq, should terrorists attack a Saudi facility or should a standoff with Iran results in a disruption in oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz. Each of these scenarios could take oil prices to the three-digit domain with profound implications for the U.S. economy and the world economy at large.

“As it is, the U.S. economy is bleeding?three-quarters of a billion dollars leave our country each day in exchange for imported oil. That’s more than $450,000 a minute.

“Worse, a portion of the money ends up in the coffers of undemocratic, unstable and/or hostile regimes, which doesn’t add to our ability to win the war on terrorism. At the same time the U.S. finds itself embroiled in a potentially aggressive competition with emerging Asian powers like China over access to energy resources.”

to Rep Bradley, Jeb [NH-1], Rep Drake, Thelma D. [VA-2], Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11], and Rep Hayworth, J. D. [AZ-5] for becoming cosponsors of HR4409, The Fuel Choices for American Security Act.
Is your Representative on board yet?

Cliff May writes:

“For a long time, oil products have enjoyed a monopoly because oil has been cheap and easy. But it’s getting less cheap and Americans ought to be growing uneasy about sending billions of dollars to corners of the Earth where terrorism is both preached and practiced.

“To solve this dilemma, we could invest in a new Manhattan project. If we gathered the smartest scientists and gave them a ton of money, might they develop an automobile that would run not just on gasoline but also on non-petroleum-based fuels?

“News bulletin: The technology to run cars on alternative fuels already exists. The cost: less than $150 per vehicle [...]

“There are other technologies we can and should – in the interest of national security – give a boost. Hybrid cars that utilize batteries for short trips are selling well. A huge improvement would be plug-in hybrids that can use a standard electric outlet to charge. Because less than 2 percent of American electricity is generated from oil, plug-in hybrids would allow city drivers and commuters traveling under 40 miles a day to use no gasoline at all. Equipped also as FFVs, they wouldn’t need to use gas on longer trips either.

“Bills based on the Set America Free plan for energy security are before both the House and Senate: H.R. 4409 and S.2025. Who would oppose such progress? An army of special interests that benefit from the status quo. These groups will fight like ferrets to preserve petroleum’s market share and to preserve the tax and tariff advantages they now enjoy.

“Is it too much to ask that a critical mass of politicians from both sides of the aisle stand up to them, break oil’s monopoly, reduce America’s dependence on foreign energy and allow us to stop funding both sides in the War Against Terrorism?”

There is a genocide in process in Sudan. The Islamist Arab regime of Sudan, via the Janjaweed militias, has been murdering, raping, and enslaving its way through the country. First it massacred 2 million Christians and animists, and now it has set its sites on the Sufi Muslims. The murdered are black.

Sudan is a critical oil supplier to China. In turn, China provides weapons and cover to the Sudanese regime – a coveted U.N. Security Council veto on any attempt at sanctions.

Nicholas Kristof writes:
“China is now underwriting its second genocide in three decades. The first was in Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and the second is in Darfur, Sudan. Chinese oil purchases have financed Sudan’s pillage of Darfur. Chinese-made AK-47s have been the main weapons used to slaughter several hundred thousand people in Darfur so far, and China has protected Sudan in the U.N. Security Council [...]

“the Arab League…met last month in Sudan, in effect legitimizing the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Muslims (almost all the victims in Darfur are Muslim) [...] And where’s the Arab press? Isn’t the murder of 300,000 or more Muslims almost as offensive as a Danish cartoon?

“The biggest obstacle to forceful action is China. The latest outrage came a few days ago when the United States and Britain tried to impose the most feeble possible sanctions ? targeting just four people, including a midlevel Sudanese official. China and Russia blocked even that pathetic action.

“Why is China soft on genocide?

“The essential reason is oil. China traditionally was self-sufficient in oil, but since 1993 it has been a net oil importer, and it is increasingly worried about this vulnerability [...]

“About 60 percent of Sudan’s oil flows to China, and Beijing has a close economic and even military relationship with Khartoum. A recent Council on Foreign Relations report on Africa notes that China has supplied Sudan with small arms, anti-personnel mines, howitzers, tanks, helicopters and ammunition. China has even established three arms factories in Sudan, and you see Chinese-made AK-47s, rocket-propelled grenades and machine guns all over Darfur.”

To Rep Bonner, Jo [AL-1], Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8], Rep Bono, Mary [CA-45], Rep Pryce, Deborah [OH-15], and Rep Rogers, Mike D. [AL-3] for becoming co-sponsors of HR4409, The Fuel Choices for American Security Act.
Is your Representative on board yet?