Why don't Democrats run more strongly on a platform of energy independence?

[Chris J]

This is a totally serious question.

I hear this more from Democrats than Republicans but I still barely hear it.

Do Democrats think we can become energy independent? If so....why don't they talk about it?

It would be the best counterpoint against the Republicans in regards to the war on terror.

Anybody looked into this?

[iamct01]

Jimmy Carter had a plan to take American off foreign oil by 2000 and even put solar panels on the white house until Reagan won and reversed the plan.

[a_wood80]

Because they can't deliver that without drilling the US's oil reserves. They know the hippies will never go for that.

[dukefenton]

There are three main problems:

1) Democrats are just as heavily invested (on average) as Republicans are in the companies which would be harmed by 'energy independence' legislation. In other words, they stand to lose money out of pocket.

2) Although they will *never* admit it, Democrats understand full well that most 'energy independence' proposals amount to feel-good government mandates which have little practical benefit and significant economic cost. The ethanol fuel mandates, for example, have cost the US hundreds of billions in secondary costs and actually result in *MORE* air pollution!

3) Democrats suffer the additional burden of being beholden to a coalition of interest groups whose demands may be contradictory. For example, actual energy independence would require the US to start using oil deposits which Democrats have placed 'off limits' to make environmental groups happy. If they do what really works, they lose votes.

[labken1817]

The Dems do speak constantly about energy independance. However the electorate basically sets the discussion for politicians and candidates. So if there was more of an interest from the electorate in regards to energy independance you would hear more from the politicians. Right now the topic of discussion is the economy and that is the primary discussion among the politicians.

Here read Obama's plan to set America on the path to energy independance.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/

[darwinman]

i'm sorry, but the words "democrats" and "independence" just cannot in any way, shape or form, be mentioned in the same sentence coherently...perhaps, this is a clue to the answer to your question.

[civil_av8r]

The only plans I hear for their alternative energy plans involve raising taxes. They really should run on promoting incentives.

[Bryan]

What will provide energy independence? Alternative fuels? Utilizing our own oil? Fuel cells? Currently there are no alternative fuels which will make us energy independent. Democrats know this as well as Republicans. We cannot grow enough crops to feed our population and fuel our energy demands with subsidies like ethanol. At the same time Democrats cannot support renewed drilling of oil, mining for coal, or construction of nuclear plants because all of these things go against their environmental agenda. Fuel cells are promising, but at best in their infancy as a viable commercial energy source. Wind and solar power have proved unreliable for large scale use.

The simple fact is that Democrats have no plans for making us energy independent and therefore will not talk about it as anything more that a sound byte. To do so would require that they give answers that they just do not possess. It is just easier to maintain the status quo. Meanwhile they demonize the opponent in an attempt to win elections without taking any hard positions which can later be cited directly when they do not occur as promised. By all means though, feel free to look into it.