Red State posted an article today about the impact of the six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. 

The article states:

“The Obama Administration has filed some 27,000 pages of documents in Federal court which disclose the process by which it decided to forge ahead with a deepwater drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico, in spite of expert advice, public opinion and a Federal judge’s ruling.”

This needs to be looked at in context, but first let’s look at the impact.  The Administration wants to extend the drilling moratorium until November 30.  According to the Wall Street Journal, the moratorium will cost the area 23,000 jobs.  Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) invited Dr. Christina Romer, Chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, to testify before the Senate Small Business Committee hearings.  Dr. Romer has not appeared and in a conversation with Senator Landrieu stated that the Administration did not currently have economic impact data on the moratorium, but would be initiating a review.

The article points out that the oil rigs, which actually drill the wells, are the economic engine of the region.  To shut these down is to impact all the support industries that supply manpower, parts, transportation to the rigs, and the infrastructure that supports the workers.  The moratorium will have a serious negative economic impact on the entire region.

There is one more part of this picture that needs to be remembered.   On June 18th of this year, a website called Infowars referenced a Harvard study on the impact of President Obama’s energy policies.

The article states:

“President Obama has a solution to the Gulf oil spill: $7-a-gallon gas.

“That’s a Harvard University study’s estimate of the per-gallon price of the president’s global-warming agenda. And Obama made clear this week that this agenda is a part of his plan for addressing the Gulf mess.”

If the goal is $7 a gallon gas, there might be a few things to think about.  Considering that the cost of gasoline for Congress is paid for by the taxpayer, does Congress have any reason to want to keep gas prices low?  Since the cost of Presidential travel is paid for by the taxpayer, does the President have any incentive to keep prices low?  What will be the impact on the economy and on the average American of $7 a gallon gas?

I really do support the idea of keeping pollution as low as possible.  Clean air is a good thing.  However, American car manufacturers have worked to provide Americans with relatively clean cars.  The move to electric cars will not actually make things any cleaner–it may cut emissions, but how clean is the source of electricity?  We need practical people in our government to formulate cohesive energy policy–people who understand both economics and the environment and are willing to balance the two.  Until we have balance betweem the economy and the environment, we will not have prosperity.