Driving forward

Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) was the only senator to vote against a measure last week suspending shipments to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The vote was the best evidence yet of the nation’s addiction to cheap gasoline.

Allard, not coincidentally, is retiring. His other colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, felt enough pressure from frustrated voters to approve the measure 97-1, even though they cannot seriously think the move will help cut prices at the pump.

The Energy Department’s statistical arm has estimated that suspending shipments would reduce gasoline prices by just 3-5 cents per gallon, a number blown away by the upward pressure on prices exerted on any given day. No matter. The House approved the measure 385-25, and the Bush administration, after opposing it, said it would suspend shipments.

This is the second questionable idea to gain political traction recently amid frustration over gas prices in this election year. The other was the proposal to suspend the federal gas tax, something shot down by power brokers in both parties.

While that action would have lowered prices at the pump, it also would also have encouraged people to drive more, increasing dependence on foreign oil. Since proceeds from the tax fund road-improvement programs, it also would have cut revenue for repairs that increase fuel efficiency.

Taking on high prices will take leadership, political courage and willingness to compromise.

These are attributes in short supply. Luckily, however, there is no shortage of ideas. The challenge is to incorporate them — both those boosting supply and those curbing demand — into one far-sighted legislative vehicle.

Such a bill would, most of all, need to include fresh thinking. If it is to work, it must reject the tired old either-or notions that have led us to the pass in which we now find ourselves. This must mean a willingness to consider new domestic sources of oil, which means drilling on U.S. land and in coastal waters, just as Norway, for example, does without environmental calamity. It will mean taking steps to act on the public’s increased appetite for green policies that accept the need to tackle global warming.

It is also time to consider building new refineries in the U.S., something that hasn’t happened in three decades. The development of new fuels needs to be encouraged, although skyrocketing commodity prices illustrate the danger of depending too much on corn-based fuels and of Washington picking winners rather than creating genuine and effective competition.

A comprehensive bill is a tall order, but the new administration, Republican or Democrat, will have momentum when it arrives in office in January, and this momentum would be well-used if it were made to carry forward genuine reform of energy policy. In the meantime, we must hope that the administration and Congress we have now do no harm.