Shall We Help Big Oil Get Bigger?

Over the past seven years, crude oil prices have exploded from around $30 a barrel to nearly $100. With prices that high, you don’t need to give an oil company executive much financial incentive [1] to drill for more fossil fuel.

Yet clean energy legislation is stalled in Congress because of opposition to curtailing oil and gas subsidies and investing the proceeds in renewable fuels. Republican Senator Chuck Grassley (Iowa), with a straight face [2], called on Democrats to be “reasonable” and support a package that “at least is not destructive to the incentives we need to produce more oil."

You may recall that President George W. Bush said it is a “serious problem” that “America is addicted to oil.” [3] But he goes farther than Grassley, criticizing proposals to “raise taxes” on oil companies [4], preferring to leave the current tax breaks untouched and keep the oil needle in America’s arm.

This is not a debate between activist government and free markets. The oil industry that conservatives seek to protect is not thriving in a free market. It’s propped up by our government. That’s not what American voters want in their energy policy, and they tried to change it in the last election.

Concerned about environmental catastrophe in the future and squeezed by high gas costs in the present, voters installed a new congressional leadership that pledged a simple change in our government’s priorities: to shift our taxpayer-funded energy policy away from dirty fossil fuels and towards clean renewables.

That was in November 2006, when the price of oil was merely at about $60 a barrel [5]. The oil industry didn’t really need the help then, and it needs even less now. Conversely, the renewable energy industry can’t attract critical investment and create good-paying “green collar” jobs without recalibrated government policies that level the playing field. Otherwise, financiers won’t have the assurance that clean energy is going to be a relatively safe place to put their money.

Following through on the campaign pledge, the House passed an energy bill that provided substantial tax credits for renewables paid for by ending oil subsidies [6]. The threat of a filibuster from the conservative minority kept it out of the Senate version. But with oil prices continuing their ascent into the carbon-clogged atmosphere, demand for an energy policy that brings about affordable clean alternatives may be reaching a fever pitch. Combined with the new frontiers of online activism, the public cry for accessible renewable energy may help push the legislation forward.

Consider that two weeks ago, speculation was spread [7] in the environmental blogosphere [8] that House and Senate negotiators were dropping the tax package, as well as an increase in renewable electricity production, because they couldn’t secure enough votes. Soon after, organizations directed their supporters to urge Congress [9] to keep the critical provisions. Now, media reports say that the tax package is still on table, [2] which Speaker Nancy Pelosi appeared to confirm on Friday. [10]

It’s rare for grassroots actions to impact backroom dealings in a timely fashion. Usually the hard negotiations are completed with little media attention and public awareness, leaving only professional lobbyists with the ability to shape lawmakers’ perceptions.

But the fast flow of information online can open up the process, and give engaged citizens a greater say. The remaining question appears to be how engaged citizens will be.

Polling for clean energy has long been strong — a recent BBC World poll found 74% of Americans support higher taxes on oil and coal [11] when the revenue is invested in clean energy. But short-sighted politicians always fear that support for bold environmental initiatives won’t be fervent enough to provide a political payoff come Election Day.

The louder the cry is from that 74 percent for affordable and accessible clean energy, the more comfortable Democratic leaders will be to fight for a strong bill, the more likely Republicans will be to buck the unpopular Bush, and the harder it will be to claim the oil industry needs taxpayer-help while crude is on the verge of $100 a barrel.