Obama’s "shift" on offshore drilling has the potential to generate yet another round of accusations of flip-flopping, caving in, calling uncle, having no spine, etc., etc., on an issue that’s near and dear to ocean lovers, environmentalists, and otherwise sensible people with a concern for the future of our planet. Yet I think this "shift" offers an important insight to the way that Obama would lead our country. As an oceanographer who opposes offshore oil drilling more on the grounds that it perpetuates bad social-economic-environmental policy than its long-term harm to ocean ecosystems (though I am not willing to concede that it’s completely harmless), I do see benefits to Obama’s drilling-with-conditions approach. It’s a bit of the "carrot and stick" for oil companies or a "halfway house" measure for American’s oil addiction. While there are excellent arguments against offshore drilling (indeed, anything that feeds our reckless use of fossil fuels), I think a compromise approach is essential as a first-step towards alternative energy development and reductions in greenhouse gases.
For good or for bad, I think Obama’s pragmatic approach is the only one that offers real movement on the larger issues of energy independence and reduction in greenhouse gas emission. As noted in many blogs and news articles, his approach supports a newly proposed plan by a bipartisan "Gang of Ten" senators. The details can be found elsewhere but discussion of Obama’s new "stance" sheds light on his thinking. Marc Ambinder on Atlantic.com writes on August 2, 2008:
This strikes me as less of a shift and more as a gesture of sorts to the reality that the major cap and trade legislation next year that Congress will mark up -- legislation that will be introduced regardless of who's president -- requires the participation of and compromise from the industry.
Obama continues to oppose offshore drilling in environmentally and economically sensitive regions, meaning that waters within 50 miles of Florida’s coast and the entire U.S. West Coast would remain closed. The Gang of Ten plan provides incentives for retooling of the automobile industry for the production of fuel-efficient vehicles as well as a 20-year goal to reduce petroluem-based automobiles by 85%. The Washington Post quotes Obama:
"What I don't want is for the best to be the enemy of the good here, and if we can come up with a genuine, bipartisan compromise in which I have to accept some things I don't like, or the Democrats have to accept some things that they don't like, in exchange for moving us in the direction of energy independence, than that's something I'm open to," Obama said. "I wanted to send a strong signal that we can't allow partisan bickering or the desire to score political points to get in the way of providing some genuine relief to people who are struggling."
For me, Obama’s willingness to allow limited offshore drilling as a means for initiating alternative energy development, as a means for eliminating tax breaks for oil companies, as a way to gain a foothold in future cap-and-trade legislation, and as a means for getting Americans to think about their role in this energy mess, is a very wise move. It’s exactly the kind of leadership I expect from a President. I want someone who is willing to listen to all sides and who is capable of articulating a solution that begins to resolve the problem and head us in the right direction. I don’t expect miracles, even from "The One." And I don’t always expect that legislation is going to go down my left-side view of the world. But I do respect and admire a leader who actually leads (versus dictates), who explains his positions in detail, and who explains his reasons for supporting a particular view. In that sense, Obama offers a conversation, and an opportunity to convince him otherwise, if the arguments are compelling. That’s such a refreshing change from the way Washington currently operates.
There are few, if any, of us who are able to go "cold turkey" on oil. I suspect that even ultra-self-sufficient Ed Begley, Jr. has to rely on products derived from fossil fuels. His web site advertises Begley’s Best, a household cleaner, in plastic bottles!. If you’re anything like me, you’ve started on your path towards energy-independence and carbon-reduction in measures. I changed to energy-efficient lightbulbs, buy Seventh Generation paper products, recycle most things, buy a limited number of bottled products, drive my car less, ride my bike more, added attic insulation and new doors, grow a few vegetables, take 5-minute showers, wash clothes on cold, increased my consumption of local foods, and provide course information electronically, among other little energy- and carbon-reducing steps. But I haven’t retired the Jeep Liberty, I still use grid-provided electricity, I still eat meat and fish, and I entirely overconsume clothes, electronics, and paperback books. In other words, I’m compromising my ideals (screw the oil companies, take down the grid, ban cradle-to-grave products) as a pragmatic necessity until suitable and affordable alternatives are available.
Obama is not a "my way or the highway" leader, or should I say, a "with-us-or-against-us" leader. The "old" political way is to draw a line in the sand, dig in your heels, and shout inflammatory remarks at your opponent (or create ridiculous TV advertisements). To break the grip of reactionary, combative, mantra-based politics, we, as individuals, have to be willing to analyze the substance of our views, and be courageous enough to change them in light of new evidence. It means willing to admit that we are wrong, sometimes. No doubt, offshore oil drilling is a topic near and dear to my heart, and I will do everything possible to prevent expanded offshore oil drilling in California. But I am willing to listen and to engage in a conversation that helps us overcome our oil addiction once and for all, even if it means allowing limited drilling along the way.
It’s well worth your time to check out Obama’s comprehensive energy planif you haven’t already.