I understand that politics is a strategy and is played to win, but I wish we could reach a place where the good of the country was more important than personal political gain. Unfortunately, we are not there. What would energy independence mean to America? It would probably result in a dramatic shift in our foreign policy. We would no longer have to cater to the whims of oil producing countries that fund terrorism and do not allow their citizens to live in freedom. We would not longer be borrowing money from other countries to give to countries that hate us. At least we could do it with our own money.
What would it take for America to be energy independent? I would suggest building a few new oil refineries. Since 2008 we have built three refineries. The last refinery built before 2008 was built in 1998. (This is according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.) We would also have to find ways to better tap into our energy resources and transport the petroleum products we produce. On February 12, 2014, I posted an article about the people who are making money because the Keystone Pipeline is not being built. A number of those people are in Congress voting on the Pipeline. Somehow I don’t think that is in the interest of the American people–I think they are voting on their own financial interests.
Meanwhile Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton has come out in opposition to the building of the Keystone Pipeline.
Fox News has the story, and contrasts her current position with her past position:
In 2010, then-Secretary Clinton indicated potential support for the project as she told a San Francisco audience, “We’re either going to be dependent on dirty oil from the [Persian] Gulf or dirty oil from Canada.”
She was right about that, now she has changed her mind.
It is interesting that the unions support the Pipeline because it will mean jobs. The extreme environmentalists oppose it.
Yesterday Politico reported the following:
Two major unions have decided to delay endorsements in the presidential race — a move labor insiders attribute in part to the uncertainty Vice President Joe Biden’s potential run has inserted into the Democratic primary.
The decisions are a setback for Hillary Clinton, who has been courting the labor giants in the hopes of an early lock down of two powerhouse unions that can organize millions of members and resources on the ground. And they come against the backdrop of a Clinton campaign show of force — in terms of establishment donors, delegates and endorsements — as Biden weighs his options. Adding the support of two of the most muscular unions now would have sent a powerful message there is little room in the race for the vice president.
The two unions are the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). It will be interesting to see what happens next.