Bluestem Prairie: news about Tim Walz (MN-1)

Post Bulletin: Southern Minnesota's congressional delegation on Farm Bill

The Post Bulletin's Ed Felker has the scoop on the response of Southern Minnesota's leaders on the Farm Bill in Delegation pleased with Farm Bill programs  Here's Walz's reaction:

. . .Rep. Tim Walz, D-Mankato and a member of the House Agriculture Committee, saw three priorities included in the bill, including his top measure, a new pilot program to let farmers switch acres to fruit and vegetable programs without permanently losing their eligibility under traditional crop subsidy programs.

The Farm Flex program language would target four or more Midwestern states, though the final details were still uncertain. Walz also won provisions to streamline the enrollment of organic farm acres into federal conservation programs and, with Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, D-S.D., incentives for landowners to rent or sell to beginning farmers and ranchers.

Walz, in a statement, said he was excited to see the bill moving forward after months of deal making. "This bill makes important new investments in nutrition, conservation, rural development and energy programs, and continues to provide a farm safety net that kicks in when crop prices are low, and tapers off when crop prices are high," he said. . . .

Representative Kline is preparing a statement for when the bill comes up next week. Senators Klobucahr and Coleman, both Senate Ag Committee members, support the bill; Coleman

previously said he would work to round up votes to override a veto, and reiterated that stance Thursday. "This process has been about compromise from day one, and the bipartisan agreement reached by the conference committee is a bill that for America that contains significant reforms all sides can agree on," Coleman said in a statement.

A companion article by PB reporter Laura Gossman, Farmers, food banks want farm bill passed soon, looks at local reaction. A couple of responses to the President's veto threat:

Minnesota Farm Bureau president Kevin Paap, a farmer from Blue Earth, thinks the bill fairly balances nutrition, conservation and farm programs.

He's more worried about what might happen if the bill doesn't pass.

"If the bill doesn't pass, there's no Plan B," Paap said. "We need to move on this so we can provide some long-term certainty for our farmers." . . .

Two-thirds of the legislation involves boosts to nutrition programs that benefit food banks.

"We rely on federal foods to feed people in our communities," said Charla Irwin-Buncher, communications director for Channel One Food Bank in Rochester. "It's especially crucial right now because more and more people are in need of our services."

In April, 250 new Olmsted County families started using Channel One, Irwin-Buncher said.

. . ."Every day that goes by is a day that we are being withheld food we could be using," Irwin-Buncher said. "The farm bill has to be passed."

Irwin-Buncher's opinion provides a sharp contrast with mindless pundits who bitch about the bill and hunger.

House passes Neighborhood Stabilization Act, 239-188

In his regularly scheduled weekly press conference this morning, Congressman Walz talked about measures designed to provide some relief for the consequences of the mortgage foreclosure crisis now sweeping the country. 

According to the Speaker's office, the House just passed

the Neighborhood Stabilization Act, H.R 5818,[which] will provide $15 billion in loans and grants to states to acquire vacant, foreclosed homes and was passed by a vote of 239-188 The legislation will allow local communities to rehabilitate foreclosed properties, which currently drive down surrounding home properties, and place these homes back on the market.

In Minnesota's House delegation, Republican Jim Ramstad joined the state's five Democratic representatives in voting for the measure. Republican Representatives Kline and Bachmann voted against the measure.

UPDATE: Walz's congressional office has just released the following statement about the vote, along with the American Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008:

WALZ VOTES TO ADDRESS HOUSING CRISIS, BOLSTER STATE AND LOCAL ECONOMIES
Congressman says legislative measures are key to protecting middle class families from losing their greatest asset

(Washington, D.C.) - Today, Congressman Walz joined a bipartisan majority of his colleagues in passing a package of bills to address the housing crisis that has contributed to America's economic slowdown and is threatening millions of American families with foreclosure.

Walz said that the two bills, the Neighborhood Stabilization Act of 2008 and the American Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008, are together the most comprehensive effort by Congress to date to address the housing crisis and to help American families hold on to their homes. 

"This package of housing measures will help families facing foreclosure keep their homes, help other families avoid foreclosures in the future, and help the recovery of communities harmed by empty homes caught in the foreclosure process," said Walz.  "These bills are a way to ensure that entire neighborhoods aren't affected by the wave of foreclosures that has swamped many middle-class Americans." 

In a speech this week, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke argued that: "High rates of delinquency and foreclosure can have substantial spillover effects on the housing market, the financial markets, and the broader economy. Therefore, doing what we can to avoid preventable foreclosures is not just in the interest of lenders and borrowers.  It's in everybody's interest."

Walz noted that a recent study examined ten states including Minnesota and concluded that, in those ten states alone, lost tax revenue in 2008 will total $6.6 billion due to foreclosures.  Further, an estimated 524,000 fewer jobs are projected to be created this year because of the foreclosure crisis. 

The Neighborhood Stabilization Act of 2008 establishes a $15 billion loan and grant program for the purchase and rehabilitation of owner-vacated, foreclosed homes. The program helps working class families get into the housing market by requiring that homes purchased for resale through the program must be sold to families at or below 140% of area median income.

The American Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 would make middle-class families eligible to receive a tax benefit that is equivalent to an interest-free loan of up to $7,500 towards the purchase of a first home.  Existing homeowners who normally would be able to claim the standard deduction would now be allowed an additional standard deduction for property taxes up to $700 for a married couple filing jointly.

1 Remarks at the Columbia School of Business, May 5, 2008
2 Global Insight, The Mortgage Crisis: Economic and Fiscal Implications for Metro Areas, November, 2007

Photo: Foreclosed home, from MPR.

Tuesday midday news digest: yellow-rumped Powerball Farm Bill edition

The winning Powerball ticket is held by a middle-aged couple in Waseca County. Congratulations to them. The bad news in Waseca: Another life lost on Highway 14.

In Subsidies at center of fight over farm bill, the Albert Lea Tribune covers the final battles over the Farm Bill. Reporter Sarah Kirchner quotes both Senator Coleman and Congressman Walz in the article:

Farm subsidies, alternative fuels and nutrition are at the top of the list of the constantly changing 2008 farm bill being discussed in Congress, but the No. 1 concern is the president’s threat to veto if there isn’t enough subsidy reform.

“It’s not everything the president wants, but it’s moving in the right direction,” Republican Sen. Norm Coleman told the Tribune. “This bill is important for so many Minnesota farmers and producers it would be a mistake to veto it.” . . .

. . .Coleman said he talked with the White House Wednesday and Thursday, and he made it clear it would be a mistake to veto the farm bill.

“You don’t kill a farm bill because you don’t get everything you want. In the end, it’s about compromise,” he said. . . .

. . .Early last week, the House and the Senate agreed on a tentative $300 billion framework for the farm bill, according to Rep. Tim Walz’s office. Currently the bill is being debated in conference committee due to many unresolved issues.

The conference committee is hoping to reach a compromise between the administration, the House and the Senate, with the goal of passing the farm bill and placing it on the president’s desk this week, according to Walz’s office.

However, the president is still threatening to veto unless the bill includes what he wants.

“It’s either his way or no way,” Walz, a Democrat serving on the Agriculture Committee, said. “That’s making it very difficult.”

When it comes to reforming the farmer subsidies, farmers in 2009 with nonfarm income more than $750,000 will not receive subsidies, Walz said Thursday. Each consecutive year, the income cap to receive subsidies will drop.

However, the Bush administration suggested an income cap of $200,000 for farmers receiving subsidies.

Any farmers with an income more than $950,000 are phased out of subsidies in the current bill, and Walz said the new bill has closed loopholes.

Another reform in the bill comes in the form of direct attribution of farm subsidy payments so no “double-dipping” is done, Coleman said.

“We think we’ve done a good job of adding some of the reform we could get,” Walz said, adding some of the farmers are using the extra income for conservation enhancements.

Both Coleman and Walz said more reform has been made to the subsidy section of the farm bill than there ever has been before, but it still isn’t good enough. Walz said President Bush is looking for fiscal responsibility.

“Nobody here is buying that, and that includes the Republicans,” he said.

While subsidies are the hot topic with the farm bill, Coleman said 65 percent of the bill is for food. That includes a $10 billion boost for nutrition.

Walz said there is more new money for the nutrition program than the other parts of the bill put together. This includes more funding for food banks and food assistance programs.

The recent farm bill also includes legislation making it the largest commitment to conservation than any other Congress has made, Coleman said.

Several billion dollars, according to Walz, are going into renewable fuels with incentives for cellulosic ethanol — which uses more of the corn stalk than alcohol from the kernel.

The 2008 farm bill includes beginner farmer/rancher legislation to help new operations get started and a fresh fruit and vegetable initiative for school meals.

With all the parts and pieces adding up, Walz said he thinks the farm bill is a good bill, and it should go through. Both sides of the aisle have worked together making bipartisan efforts to get the bill through, Coleman said.

Both congressmen said the numbers are there to override a presidential veto, if it comes to that.

Kirchner's article has also been published in the Austin Daily Herald.

In the Rochester Post-Bulletin online opinion section, there's a rousing debate over energy policy going on. The editorial board says that Voters can see through politicians' gas-tax ploys. Letter writers sound off in response to last week's oped piece by the GOP's endorsed congressional candidate in Davis should re-think ideas on oil and Stop thinking that oil is the answer.

The Mankato Free Press editorial board agrees Gas tax holiday a bad idea all around.

The Rothenberg Political Report: Open Season in 2010 mentions Congressman Walz as a possible gubernatorial candidate in 2010:

Minnesota Rep. Tim Walz (D) is focused on re-election this cycle to his 1st district seat, but he’s also mentioned as a future gubernatorial candidate. Walz was swept in with the Democratic wave of 2006, defeating then-Rep. Gil Gutknecht (R) with 53 percent, in a district that Bush carried by 4 points. Former Sen. Mark Dayton (D) is also mentioned as a potential gubernatorial candidate in 2010.

So are Tarryl Clark, R.T. Rybak, Margaret Kelliher, Chris Coleman, Tommy Rukavina and many others. The DFL bench is growing.

We have to admit: blogging here at Bluestem will be light while we work on some projects or head out to catch the North American warbler migration. The latter is one of the great ornithological events on the planet. Tiny birds, males now in their bright spring feathers, fly north from Mexico, Central and South America to their breeding grounds. Often, that means Canada, but they'll dawdle in treetops and brush on the way there.

Early yesterday evening, we saw the usual yellow-rumps, a Northern Waterthrush, Nashville and palm warblers, but few cerulean warblers as well.  Another genus of neo-tropical, the summer resident rose-breasted grosbeak, was carrying on in the trees.

These folks have the goods on recently seen birds, and it's hard not to heed their sightings and head out. Later!

Photo: A yellow-rumped warbler.

 

Saturday noon news digest: spring plowing edition

It's a great sunny day, so we're headed out to Swan Lake, Fort Ridgely and the Minnesota River Valley for some afternoon birding as soon as this is up. We hope the sun will dry the fields enough for the farmers to start working.

Not all farmers are doing great. The Post Bulletin reports that USDA to buy surplus pork:

Aiming to boost a sagging American pork market, Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer has committed to $50 million in emergency pork purchases.

The pork products will be used for child nutrition and other domestic foods assistance programs.

On April 10, U.S. Rep. Tim Walz sent a letter to Schafer, urging him to make the purchases to help pork producers, who are being squeezed by high expenses and low hot prices.

"These purchases will help to stabilize hog prices and mitigate the economic losses faced by our producers in southern Minnesota," Walz said Friday.

The ag secretary has the power, under a law passed during the Great Depression, to purchase surplus commodities to support farm prices.

Minnesota's First Congressional District, in the southeast corner of the state, ranks second in the United States in pork production with more than 2,500 pork producers raising 9 million hogs a year. The industry employs 22,500 Minnesotans. . . .

Whether you're buying meat direct from a farmer, from a co-op or at the grocery store, try these roasted pork enchiladas. Mmmmm. These days, it's easy to find queso fresco cheese at any grocery store, though many Minnesotans' taste buds may favor the Monterey Jack.  BTW, Farmers' Markets are opening today throughout Southern Minnesota. In Winona, Scone Lady’ adds flavor to local farmers market. We may have to wait a week or two for asparagus.

And probably that long for the details of the Farm Bill coming out of conference committee. Minnesota Public Radio reports in Farm Bill agreement in hand:

A congressional conference committee will be working through the weekend in an effort to finalize a $300 billion Farm Bill. The legislation pays for farm subsidies conservation, alternative energy, and nutrition programs for the next five years. The process has been contentious and may end with a showdown between Congress and the President. . . .

. . .Peterson expects the Farm Bill to be on the House floor next week. It's expected to have strong bi-partisan support in both the House and Senate.

U.S. Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D.) is also on the conference committee crafting the final legislation. He says there's been a good faith effort to work with the president, now it's time for a showdown.

"We want the White House to sign this bill, we're trying to accommodate their concerns. But if they don't, this bill will have the full participation by both political parties as it passes the House and Senate," Pomeroy says. "We believe we're going to have a level of support where if veto override is what it takes, veto override is what we're going to give them."

Farmers, conservation groups and social service agencies will all be watching closely as that showdown happens sometime in the next two weeks.

KTTC-TV reports Disabled Veterans Meet in Rochester for the group's annual convention.

Congressman Walz will hold an economic summit in Mankato on June 2.

This event will feature thought-provoking discussions and panels on the most important economic issues facing Southern Minnesota and the country. The Summit offers an opportunity to have a regional conversation about the kind of community, State and Nation we are striving for. The event will gather academic leaders, industry experts, the business community, local residents and policy experts to discuss and debate issues of importance to us all.

When: Monday June 2, 2008

Where:    Alltel Convention Center,  Mankato, MN

The Summit Agenda:

7:15: Registration opens

8:00– 8:15 Welcome by Congressman Tim Walz

8:15 – 8:45 An Analysis of Minnesota’s Economic and Demographic Trends and Outlook?

8:45 – 9:00 Building a Competitive Advantage for Rural Regions/p>

9:00 – 10:15 Panel #1: Healthcare

10:15 – 11:45 Panel #2: Early Childhood and K-12 Education

11:45 – 12:45 Lunch and Keynote Address by U.S. Congressman Tim Walz

12:45 – 2:00 Panel #3: Higher Education

2:00 – 3:15 Panel #4: “Agriculture and Energy: Energizing Rural Economic Growth”

3:15 – 4:30 Capitalizing on our Regional Competitiveness

The event is free and open to the public, although the lunch meal is $15. A registration form is here (Word doc).

Michael Travers' letter to the editor, Walz has earned support for second term, has been published in the Mankato Free Press and the New Ulm Journal. The New Ulm resident writes:

Last weekend, the DFL endorsed Tim Walz as its candidate for Congress in the First District.

Walz deserves to be re-elected for a second term. He has been a fresh breath of air in an otherwise business as usual government. To Walz, good ideas come from both sides of the aisle; from people like you and me.

Walz is a true representative of the people of his district. You and I may not agree on every issue with Walz, but one thing is for sure, Walz will listen.

As a family man, Walz gets it. As you hear his wife, Gwen, speak she’ll tell you that each time she comes home from the grocery store or the gas station she’ll remind him of the price of a gallon of milk or a gallon of gas. The pride he has in his family is evident by the smile on his face.

As a former teacher and coach, Walz understands the importance of the issues that face young people everyday and the impact the decisions we make today will have on their future.

This time, the first congressional district has a keeper. This time, the first congressional district has the representation of a man who is genuine, committed, and will not forget that it is a privilege to serve as your representative.

Congratulations to Irma Marguez of St. James, who has been selected Minnesota's Homecoming Queen.

The Olmsted County DFL will hold its Fifth Annual Dinner tonight in Rochester.

KAAL-TV: Walz on the economy

Update: KEYC-TV covers the story here (video at link too):

Congressman Tim Walz is floating a suggestion he says could help lower the price of gas. The Minnesota Democrat is among a group of lawmakers calling on President Bush to stop sending oil to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The President has resisted the idea, but Walz says his concerns are unfounded. Rep. Walz says, "He's bought up to 97 percent of that, and most experts agree that if we would stop, our national security issues are not put in any jeopardy, and prices on gas would fall 24 cents a gallon." The reserve was created in 1975 to guard against disruptions to the nation's oil supply; it currently holds over 700 billion barrels worth of crude. [end update]

There's more of  Congressman Walz speaking in the video clip that accompanies this short article at KAAL-TV, Walz Speaks Out on Economy:

The rising cost of gas is forcing Washington to come up with some solutions to ease that pain at the pump.

Minnesota congressman Tim Walz spoke out about the struggling economy. Walz says he is excited to see stimulus checks make their way into mailboxes across the state, but he says more needs to be done.

“This new Congress understands that this is only the first step. That’s why we’re working on the second part of the stimulus package: to address the home loan crisis, to address gas prices, and to address some of the issues facing middle class families, like food prices.”

Walz also stresses that he wants the president to stop buying into petroleum reserves. Walz says this move will drop gas prices by as much as 24-cents a gallon. . . .

MPR: Walz and Coleman support Farm Bill

In Walz says farm bill vote could come next week, MPR reports:

Democratic Rep. Tim Walz said a new five-year farm bill could get a vote as early as next week. Congress will likely pass another one week extension of the current farm law.

Walz said the bill would cut more than $300 million in direct subsidy payments to farmers. He said the cuts may not be enough for the president, but he said both the House and Senate have strong support for the bill.

"We're very optimistic at least that this thing could be on the floor as early as next week. We will probably vote later this afternoon for another one week extension," Walz said.

According to an Associated Press report from three hours ago, Congress sends Bush sixth extension of farm law.  The extension is for two weeks:

Congress has sent a sixth extension of farm and nutrition programs to President Bush as lawmakers struggle to finish a farm bill that can survive a presidential veto.

Both the House and the Senate on Thursday passed a two-week extension of current law. Bush has threatened to veto the new legislation and has indicated he is not happy with the bill's progress, saying earlier this week that it is "bloated" with subsidies for wealthy farmers

It's not just farm state legislators working to get the bill passed:

Farm groups are not the only interests lobbying for the bill. Anti-hunger organizations are also pushing Congress to finish the legislation, as around two-thirds of the bill's cost would pay for food stamps and other nutrition programs. The legislation includes a more than $10 billion boost for nutrition.

Rising food costs* have added to that urgency.

"I cannot overemphasize how important it is for our elected officials in Washington, including President Bush, to complete their work on the farm bill and bring hope to the 25 million Americans our network serves," said Vicki Escarra, president of America's Second Harvest.

The MPR report also notes that President Bush has threatened to veto the legislation.  Who will be working to override that veto, if it comes?  See if you can figure out which lawmaker the report stresses:

Republican Sen. Norm Coleman said he will  work to override a presidential veto.

Coleman said the nation needs a farm bill that helps feed hungry people and provides a strong safety net for farmers.

"I believe that would be a terrible mistake," he said. "The president's wrong if he vetoes the farm bill. I will work very aggressively to override that veto. You know perhaps we won't get to that point but this is not -- the farm bill is not a partisan bill."

Coleman and other farm bill supporters say the legislation contains significant reforms. Coleman would not say whether he thinks a congressional override attempt would be successful if the president follows through on his veto threat.

Walz said he believes lawmakers who support the farm bill have enough votes to override a potential presidential veto.. . .

Update: Ed Felker has posted more on Walz and Coleman's statements at the Post Bulletin's Political Party blog [end update].

We look forward to the letters to the editor and talking points scolding Walz for his work on the Farm Bill, while praising Senator Coleman. That will be a good one.

*Bush doesn't attribute rising food costs to biofuels nor does he seem to object to subsidies for the biofuels industry. See the third and fourth questions and answers during his April 29 press conference.

Walz to reporters: Positive on Farm Bill, negative to 2008 Senate bid

Update: It's worthwhile to read our May 2 post to read how one new media outlet played this story.[end update]

Congressman Walz just concluded a district press call that focused on the status of the Farm Bill. We'll be doing so reading about the legislation and will try to put Walz's remarks in context with other news reports. As the bill stands right now--and Walz stressed that the bill's language is fluid--it sounds like Minnesota will get some good news for prairie pothole wetlands, acreage flexibility, cellulosic energy research, and beginning farmer programs.

The press asked again about the possibility of a Senate race. Walz was firm about this: he is absolutely not going to be running for U.S.Senate this year, and considers his re-election bid for his congressional seat to be a job performance review.

Kind reminds me of an old country song.

When asked about the status of the Franken campaign itself, Walz said that his attention had been focused on the Farm Bill, updating the G.I. Bill, and next week's war supplemental bill.  What a concept: minding the people's business.

We'll be back with more Farm Bill news in a bit. In the meantime, head over to the Southwest corner of the state and read the Corner House Comments post about McCain’s Attempt to Sabotage The 21st Century GI Bill. That should steam your butterbeans!

Strib business commentary: Wind and our own power

In An energy incentive is drifting in the wind, John Farrell of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance looks at the way the federal tax code discourages local small investors from getting into the wind industry.

Congressman Walz has proposed a cure:

. . .One solution has been offered at the federal level by U.S. Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn. His bill would allow up to $40,000 of the tax credits to be taken against any income taxes, not just taxes on passive income. This would allow as many as 1.5 million households to become investors in Minnesota and tens of millions more nationwide.

Think how much faster America can achieve energy security if it can add millions more investors to the renewable-energy market. Think how much better investment can be if these locally owned projects are returning significant dividends to their rural communities.

Energy independence shouldn't be limited to avoiding oil or gas from the Middle East. It should also mean individuals and communities becoming energy producers. Community-based energy projects create a preference for clean energy, since the owners live next to the power plant. Locally owned energy projects double the return on our investments in wind energy and, more importantly, mean paying ourselves for our own power.

And now  "I Envy the Wind," a morning ditty by Lucinda Williams, inspired by natural power sources. (Disclosure: we studied poesy with her daddy at the Ozarks Famous Writers School).

Energy policy: oh, fer dumb

It's not often we agree with Thomas Friedman, but today's column addresses the boneheadedness of the barriers to a sound energy policy with remarkable clarity.  In Dumb as We Wanna Be, the New York Times columnist writes:

It is great to see that we finally have some national unity on energy policy. Unfortunately, the unifying idea is so ridiculous, so unworthy of the people aspiring to lead our nation, it takes your breath away. Hillary Clinton has decided to line up with John McCain in pushing to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for this summer’s travel season. This is not an energy policy. This is money laundering: we borrow money from China and ship it to Saudi Arabia and take a little cut for ourselves as it goes through our gas tanks. What a way to build our country.

What alternative does Friedman suggest?  Sanity.

What we get instead:

Few Americans know it, but for almost a year now, Congress has been bickering over whether and how to renew the investment tax credit to stimulate investment in solar energy and the production tax credit to encourage investment in wind energy. The bickering has been so poisonous that when Congress passed the 2007 energy bill last December, it failed to extend any stimulus for wind and solar energy production. Oil and gas kept all their credits, but those for wind and solar have been left to expire this December. I am not making this up. At a time when we should be throwing everything into clean power innovation, we are squabbling over pennies.

These credits are critical because they ensure that if oil prices slip back down again — which often happens — investments in wind and solar would still be profitable. That’s how you launch a new energy technology and help it achieve scale, so it can compete without subsidies.

The Democrats wanted the wind and solar credits to be paid for by taking away tax credits from the oil industry. President Bush said he would veto that. Neither side would back down, and Mr. Bush — showing not one iota of leadership — refused to get all the adults together in a room and work out a compromise. Stalemate. Meanwhile, Germany has a 20-year solar incentive program; Japan 12 years. Ours, at best, run two years.

As we've pointed out before, Congressman Walz champions the production tax credit, while the NRCC has played the tax credit for cheap laughs. The endorsed GOP candidate? Let Minnesota's wind industry get becalmed by the free market--while he doesn't mention dropping subsidies and tax breaks for the oil and nuclear power industries.

And this in a state that's the nation's third largest wind energy producer.

Friedman continues:

“It’s a disaster,” says Michael Polsky, founder of Invenergy, one of the biggest wind-power developers in America. “Wind is a very capital-intensive industry, and financial institutions are not ready to take ‘Congressional risk.’ They say if you don’t get the [production tax credit] we will not lend you the money to buy more turbines and build projects.”

Once more, we post the graph illustrating what the absence of the production tax credit means. In human terms, it means those students training at Minnesota West may not keep their jobs, regardless of the beauty of the vision their camera captured one morning as the fog lifted off the prairie.

The tradition Minnesotan expression for this sort of stupidity is "Oh, fer dumb."  A native of Minnesota, Friedman translates "Oh, fer dumb" into standard policy English:

The McCain-Clinton proposal is a reminder to me that the biggest energy crisis we have in our country today is the energy to be serious — the energy to do big things in a sustained, focused and intelligent way. We are in the midst of a national political brownout.

Fer dumb.

Reuters Analysis: No relief for pump prices from Bush drilling plan

Both George W. Bush and the GOP's endorsed candidate for the First (who faces a primary challenge from Dick Day) argue that drilling for oil in ANWR would lower domestic gas prices for consumers.

Really? 

Yesterday afternoon, Reuters release an article analyzing the claim, which was found to be wanting: Bush drilling plan wouldn't have eased pump prices.  The analysis begins:

The Bush administration says the United States would be less addicted to foreign oil and fuel prices would be lower if Congress had only opened up Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.    

But that claim doesn't reflect the long lead time to develop the refuge's huge oil reserves, which would not be available for several more years and initial volumes would still be small if Congress in 2002 had approved the administration's plan to drill in ANWR, energy experts say.

President George W. Bush during his first year in office made giving energy companies access to the estimated 10 billion barrels of crude in the refuge the centerpiece of his national energy policy that sprouted from Vice President Dick Cheney's controversial and secretive energy task force.

With gasoline prices soaring to records in recent weeks, Bush has stepped up his argument that ANWR oil is a solution.

"We should have been exploring for oil and gas in ANWR," he said last week when asked about record pump costs. "But, no, we made the decision and our Congress kept preventing us from opening up new areas to explore in environmentally friendly ways and now we're becoming, as a result, more and more dependent on foreign sources of oil."

Sounds promising, in a President Bush sort of way. But what's in the fine print? Here goes:

"They've [Congress] repeatedly blocked environmentally safe exploration in ANWR," Bush complained to reporters on Tuesday at a Rose Garden press conference. He said oil supplies from the refuge "would likely mean lower gas prices."

The Energy Information Administration, which is the Energy Department's independent analytical arm, estimated that if Congress had cleared Bush's ANWR drilling plan the oil would have been available to refiners in 2011, but only at a small volume of 40,000 barrels a day -- a drop in the bucket compared with the 20.6 million barrels the U.S. consumes daily.

At peak production, ANWR could have potentially added 780,000 barrels a day to U.S. crude oil output by 2020, according to the EIA.

The extra supplies would have cut dependence on foreign oil, but only slightly. With ANWR crude, imports would have met 60 percent of U.S. oil demand in 2020, down from 62 percent without the refuge's supplies.

And it looks like it's now or never, since no major Presidential candidate wants to follow Bush's lead:

All three leading presidential candidates, Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and Republican John McCain, are against oil drilling in the refuge.

And Reuter's cites the debate over whether opening ANWR in 2002 would have lowered prices, even in the future:

"Even if oil was flowing, it would be too small amount to reduce the price" of crude or gasoline, said Daniel Weiss, energy expert at the Center for American Progress, a think tank in Washington.

"President Bush's claim ignores the primary causes behind record high oil prices: a cheap dollar, high demand from China and India, and speculators driving the price up. Drilling and sullying the Arctic would not address any of these causes of high oil prices," said Weiss.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel disputed Bush has implied ANWR oil would be available today if his drilling plan was approved in 2002. "He didn't say my 2002 vote," Stanzel said. However, he could not clarify whose drilling plan the president was talking about.

Gerald Kepes, head of the upstream oil and gas practice at the PFC Energy consulting group, said if the Interior Department had begun leasing tracts in ANWR in 2003 the first oil would had probably been flowing in 2012.

"This all assumes that there would be no environmental challenges," said Kepes, as lawsuits to block drilling could take years to resolve. "Really, 2015 is more then likely."

Opening ANWR could have made current prices worse because Saudi Arabia may have delayed increasing its oil production capacity, making world supplies tighter and prices higher.

    "Since there is a worldwide market for oil, increases in production in one place (like ANWR) could be offset by decreases in production someplace else to keep the prices high," CAP's Weiss said.

One of the curious things we've noticed is that while President Bush is pushing the idea that Congress screwed up by refusing to open ANWR back in 2002 (which might have brought 40,000 barrels a day to the market in 2011), somehow those barrels would have an impact on world oil prices. 

That's fascinating given that Bush doesn't think a temporary halt in purchases for the strategic reserves now will make a difference. McClatchy reported that the President said yesterday:

. . .[Bush] said that the United States is buying only 67,000 to 68,000 barrels of oil per day for the strategic reserve, while world demand for oil is 85 million barrels per day, so he contended that the U.S. reserve purchases are too small to affect global pricing.

"If I thought it would affect the price of oil positively, I would seriously consider it," he said. "But when you're talking about one-tenth of 1 percent of global demand. ...I don't think you get any benefits from making the decision. I do think it costs you, you know, in the case of oil and national security risk."

Alex Koppelman at Salon's War Room suggests a rewrite for one of Bush's talking points:

. . .Bush discussed the opening of ANWR as a shorter-term solution than biofuels or hydrogen, and said, "Somehow if you mention ANWR it means you don't care about the environment. Well, I'm hoping now people, when they say ANWR, it means you don't care about the gasoline prices that people are paying."

If people ever do use Bush's chosen formulation, I hope they change it a little to conform with reality -- I'd suggest something like, "When they say ANWR, it means you don't care about the gasoline prices that people will be paying 20 years from now." In 2004, the EIA released a report saying that if Congress were to allow drilling in ANWR that year, the oil would not actually begin flowing until 2013 and peak production would not be reached until 2025. Even then, according to the Associated Press, oil prices would be reduced by less than 50 cents a barrel (assuming oil was at about $27 a barrel -- as of this post, even after a decline, light, sweet crude for delivery in June was at $116.44 a barrel). And "even at peak production, the EIA analysis said, the United States would still have to import two-thirds of its oil, as opposed to an expected 70 percent if the refuge's oil remained off the market."

Note that the 2004 estimate of a $.50 per barrel reduction was for unrefined oil, not for gas at the pump.

Here's another way to look at the problem of fuel and energy supplies. What returns might we get from public investment into research for cellulosic, hydrogen and other renewable fuels? How might conservation reduce the demand on world energy supplies? The extremist element arguing for the abolition of CAFE standards for vehicles isn't much interested in that sort of thing.

Photo: Derrick in Keister.