How to Be a President
Fielding Backstage 7/19/2010
 
I won't call it a debate, but I had a discussion with a friend about Obama's performance relative to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. In simple terms, I explained to him, what the job of a president is, and how he should have approached the problem.

The problem is probably the worst natural disaster in the short history of our country. The cause of the spill has not yet been precisely determined, but so far it just seems like a typical industrial accident/equipment failure  that might happen again, although history has shown this equipment to be pretty reliable. What separates this problem from most, is that the accident has caused wide spread environmental impacts, and because of the technological issues of a well 5000 feet below the surface of the water, its solution is not pedestrian.

With this in mind, we will not elaborate on all of the incompetent actions or non-actions taken by Obama, but we will restrict ourselves to a few major points.

  The issues are:
1)   The United States requires a certain basic supply  of resources- oil, gas, coal, etc. in order to keep the country and the economy running properly
2) The impact of the loss of this source must be determined, and the impact of the loss of all deep water oil wells covered by Obama's moratorium, must be determined, including the  issues related to the renting/leasing of the unique floating drilling platforms.

 #1 and 2# are the primary issues. Secondary, but also important issues are:
3) Unemployment in all areas requiring clean-up of the gulf waters, and clean-up of areas impacted by the oil reaching land including general commerce in the areas, sport and commercial fishing, tourism, hotels, restaurants, etc.
4) Unemployment caused by a moratorium on deep water wells.

There are probably some other important issues not included, but these are the major ones that anticipate leadership from the White House. While personal empathy always starts with those that lose their jobs, it is the job of leadership to look at the bigger picture, which is the reduction in the supply of resources needed for our economy to function with minimum economic impact on prices of goods and services, and especially taxes.

Is the solution to import more oil? This would lead to higher prices for everyone, for gasoline and all refined products including jet fuel and diesel, which would increase the cost of transportation and everything effected by transportation costs.

As president, Obama is well aware that the reason why the deep water wells were approved at all, was because  politicians listen to the squeaky wheels of environmentalists that don't want their views of the oceans spoiled, they don't want to inconvenience moose in the Arctic, and other nonsensical reasons, taking precedence over the lives of every American. There is no energy source without some risk involved.

If there was ever a need for a "presidential commission", one could support one tasked with making an affordable plan to provide the necessary resources to power our economy in the future, providing affordable energy. Such a plan would include the research necessary for higher efficiencies, cleaner burning of fossil fuels, orderly development of nuclear energy, and efficient utilization of non-traditional sources like windmills, solar, hydrogen, etc. The key words are affordable and no new taxes for economist based energy rationing that only increase the costs and stifle economic development of a society. Some day in the future, jobs defined as "green jobs" today may be viable, but until they are viable without subsidies, they are not useful solutions to todays issues. Spain for example, is forcing green job issues, but losing 3 jobs for every green job, and increasing everyone's cost of energy in the process.