Outside the oil patch, energy doesn't seem to be a factor in the US presidential election. When the issue is raised, it's usually the Joe Six-Pack complaint, "Gasoline prices are too damn high!" That cry has been repeated so often that many thought President Barack Obama would use Hurricane Isaac as an excuse to spring crude from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve into the market to drive down prices prior to the election.
According to various polls, major campaign issues for both parties include the economy, unemployment, taxes, and the $14 trillion federal debt. The Cable News Network web site reported, "President Obama's tenure in the Oval Office has been defined in many ways by the economy and the worst recession in a lifetime." That normally would be enough to bring down a president who failed to solve those problems in his first 4 years. Yet according to polls, Obama's more charismatic and likeable than challenger Mitt Romney.
Republicans have been hammering Obama's economic policies since 2009 with its conservative tea party wing pushing congressmen not to compromise previous pledges to cut spending and hold down taxes. But compromise is the lifeblood of US politics. Moody's Investors Service recently warned it likely will downgrade the US debt rating if Congress can't compromise soon on a proposed budget. Failure to forge an agreement would automatically trigger $1.2 trillion in tax increases and spending cuts that many say would again plunge the country into recession.
So with just 50 days to go until the US presidential election, it looks on paper as though neither candidate can win while each stands a good chance of losing through some gaffe or unforeseen development. The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll on Sept. 11 showed Obama attracting support from 48% of voters nationwide to Romney's 45%. Another 3% of those polled preferred some other candidate, and 4% were undecided. A tally of possible Electoral College votes gave Obama 247 and Romney 196 with an additional 95 considered toss-ups. The "safe" vote was closer at 180 for Obama and 178 for Romney.
But Obama carries an albatross that could tip the scales in Romney's favor. According to Rasmussen, "For the second week in a row, 50% of likely US voters favor repeal of President Obama's national health care law."
Oil and apple pie
On the campaign trail, Obama and Romney speak of energy in broad, reverent terms usually used in endorsements of mom and apple pie. Both favor plentiful supply of cheap fuel with no adverse effect on environment. Both want to make this country again independent of foreign oil. Neither, however, provides the slightest realistic hint as to how this would be accomplished.
Obama endorsed an all-of-the-above strategy for developing all energy resources, but when it comes to fossil fuels, critics say, it's really none-of-the-above. Romney's policy calls for North American energy independence by 2020. But we've yet to hear the response of our North American neighbors, Canada and Mexico, to the US—the world's largest energy consumer—achieving independence with their oil.
Therefore, the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas asks, "Does either candidate understand the new energy reality that America is facing? After a century of abundant, relatively inexpensive supply, oil and gas are becoming more costly and difficult to extract from the ground, and world oil supply apparently has stopped growing. Meanwhile, global demand continues to rise, and more nations are competing for limited oil exports. The implications of this historic turning point are monumental and far-reaching, and loom over virtually every economic and fiscal issue on the national agenda."
Neither candidate is likely to discuss energy details outside of Houston fund-raisers, however. ASPO officials said, "Candidates generally are not looking to add to the list of issues they need to address, and the risks of misstatement are simply too great."
