9.  What principles would your administration adhere to in the realm of energy, the
environment and America's economic future? How would your administration relate
those principles to the philosophy and issues described in your responses to questions #7 and #8 above?

 

Mike Huckabee:

Energy independence has become a national security issue, it is part of the war on terror.  None of us would write a check to Osama bin Laden, slip it in a Hallmark card, and send it off to him.  But that’s what we’re doing every time we pull into a gas station.  We’re paying for both sides in the war on terror – our side with our tax dollars, the terrorists’ side with our gas dollars.  The first thing I will do as President is send Congress my comprehensive energy plan.  We will achieve energy independence within ten years of my inauguration.

We have to explore, we have to conserve, and we have to pursue all avenues of alternative energy:  nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel, and biomass. 

While I want to reduce our dependence on oil, I especially want to reduce our dependence on imported oil as fully and quickly as possible.  We need to get oil and gas from ANWR and our continental shelves.  We need safe, clean, and economical nuclear power.  I would provide loan guarantees to get our nuclear industry going again and ease the process for getting these plants licensed and built.

I support the increase in fuel economy standards to an average of 35 MPG by 2020, which the Senate passed, but the House did not consider.  We need more flex-fuel cars that can run on biodiesel or on E85, which is 85% ethanol, and the pumps to serve them.  Right now we have six million such vehicles, but only 2,000 pumps for those fuels in a country with 170,000 gas stations.  We need more hybrids and more work on hydrogen cells.  

I support the requirement that 15% of our electricity be generated by renewable energy by 2020, which the House passed, but the Senate did not.  About half our states already have such renewable energy standards.  I would expand these standards to provide for “alternative energy” rather than “renewable energy” because that would include all “clean” sources, letting us add clean coal and nuclear to the mix.  That would keep prices down for consumers, be fair to parts of the country that, for example, don’t have a lot of wind, and allow us to raise the standards to an even higher percentage and do it sooner.

I believe that we must be good stewards of the earth, and I support “cap and trade” of carbon emissions, but at a reasonable level that does not adversely impact our economy.  I believe that some allowances should be given out and some should be auctioned off to ease the burden on businesses.  I am opposed to a carbon tax and to the Kyoto treaty. 

John McCain:

America’s dependency on foreign oil is a major strategic vulnerability for our nation. One element in al Qaeda’s war against us is to target the U.S. economy by driving up the price of oil in the hope that severe recession and higher inflation will follow. Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda terrorists have spoken many times about the need to “mount … operations accordingly” in order to hit energy supply points in the Middle East and other regions to spike oil prices. Moreover, while most of the world’s known reserves are in the Persian Gulf, oil supplies are no more secure elsewhere on the globe. In Russia and Venezuela, Vladimir Putin and Hugo Chavez have rolled back democracy and utilized oil and gas as foreign policy weapons. Nigerian supplies – our fifth-largest supplier – are endangered by internal strife. Oil’s availability is uncertain and its price at the mercy of countries where our values aren’t typically shared and our interests aren’t their first priority.

As president, I’ll propose a national energy strategy that will amount to a declaration of independence from the uncertainty bred by our reliance on oil sheiks and our vulnerability to the troubled politics of the lands they rule. My plan that won’t be another grab bag of handouts, a full employment act for lobbyists, nor another round of tax breaks and other subsidies.

We have in use today, a zero-emission energy that could provide electricity for millions more homes and businesses than it currently does – nuclear power. Yet it has been over 25 years since a nuclear-power plant has been constructed. The barriers to nuclear energy are political not technological. We’ve let the fears of 30 years ago, and an endless political squabble over the storage of nuclear spent fuel make it virtually impossible to build a single new plant that produces a form of energy that is safe and non-polluting.

America competes in a global economy where innovation and entrepreneurship are the pillars of prosperity. The competition is stiff and the stakes are high. We have the opportunity to apply America’s technological supremacy to capture the export markets for advanced energy technologies, reaping the capital investment and good jobs it will create. Our innovators, scientists, entrepreneurs and workers have the knowledge, resources and drive to lead the way on energy security, as we have in so many other world-changing advancements. The race has always been to the swift and America must be first to the market, with innovations that meet mankind’s growing energy and environmental needs.

Answering great challenges is nothing new to America. It’s what we do. We built the rockets that took us to the moon – not because it was easy, but because it was hard. We harnessed nuclear energy, mapped the human genome, created the Internet, and pioneered integrated circuits that consolidate the computing power of the Apollo spacecraft onto a barely visible silicon chip. If we can do all this, we can surely solve our oil-dependence problem and strengthen our security.

Ron Paul:

For decades, D.C. has shaped its actions—both foreign and domestic—around the assumption of a constant, pressing need for oil.  The federal government has kept prices at the pump artificially low by saddling taxpayers with the costs of corporate subsidies and oil-driven foreign entanglements.  Many in the DC establishment think our only choice is between increased federal spending on alternative energy and new regulations controlling our lives or continuing to subsidize large energy companies and allowing our need for oil to dictate large parts of our foreign policy. However, excluding freedom leaves no room for real innovation, new ideas, or competitive approaches.

Once we end federal energy subsidies and stop invading countries to secure our oil supply, the price of fossil fuels will begin to reflect the reality of a limited resource that is mainly obtained from the unstable Middle East.  Erase the federally-mandated advantage, and the market in alternatives will flourish.

The strict enforcement of property rights corrects environmental wrongs while upping the costs of polluting.  I strongly believe in the concept of “the polluter pays,” meaning that if your land, water, or air is being polluted, the proper response is to sue the polluter; the damages awarded cost the company money and end up reflected in increased production and sale prices.  The current system of preemptive regulations and pay-to-pollute schemes does nothing but favor those nimble and wealthy enough to perform the regulatory tap dance.  Only a free market, with real penalties for causing harm, can bring about change. 

After the federal government decided long ago that it knew how to manage our health care better than us and replaced personal responsibility and accountability with a system that puts corporate interests first, our free market health care system that was once the envy of the world became a federally-managed disaster. Health care should not be left up to HMOs, big drug companies, and government bureaucrats.

I support:

By removing federal regulations, encouraging competition, and presenting real choices, we can make our health care system the envy of the world once again.

 

Mitt Romney:

America faces multiple challenges on the energy and environment front.  One of the greatest challenges facing America today is finding affordable, clean, and secure sources of energy to fuel our economy. America’s economy is the strongest in the world, and it is fueled by energy.  Rising energy prices is a burden American businesses and families could do without. It is crucial to find a way to satisfy our growing energy demand without slowing our economic growth.  Another challenge we face is protecting our economy and our national security from a dangerous dependence on foreign oil. A third challenge is surmounting these challenges while remaining responsible stewards of our environment to ensure that our children and grandchildren inherit the same quality of life we enjoy today. 

In order to accomplish these goals, my administration will establish energy security as a top priority. The President must assume direct leadership and compel movement toward bold, achievable goals.  We must shift federal priorities to emphasize issues of energy security—particularly at the Department of Energy.  We must increase our domestic production by pursuing our ample domestic sources of energy.  This means exploring for and producing oil and natural gas offshore and in ANWR.  We must accelerate construction of domestic, safe, and emissions-free nuclear power plants.  We must expand our renewable sources such as ethanol, biodiesel, solar, and wind.  We must continue to develop new, cleaner ways to use a source of energy of which we have a plentiful supply: coal.  In addition, we must increase energy efficiency without slowing our economy. 

After establishing energy security as an administration priority, I will turn to the source of America’s strength—the American people. America, without question, is the innovation capital of the world.  In new technology that transforms both supply and demand for energy in our lives, our environmental and energy problems will find solutions.  Therefore, I will increase investments in research, development, and demonstration projects that hold promise for diversifying our energy supply and increasing our energy efficiency, such as: basic research in key technologies like improved energy storage; bringing cleaner energy technology to market through commercialization of large-scale renewables and advanced nuclear technologies; improved smart-grid technology for power distribution; and cleaner, efficient uses of existing fossil fuels such as clean coal and coal-to-liquids.  We will license these technologies here at home and abroad.  This technological superiority will be good for our economy, and the whole world can share in our innovative successes.

Through the use of these new technologies and implementation of common sense policies, we can fulfill our responsibilities to our children and grandchildren to leave an environment that they can enjoy without hurting our economy.  These actions will allow us to heat our homes, drive our vehicles, run our businesses and protect our environment, while not inhibiting our economic growth. 

While these challenges may seem daunting, I believe America is ready for them.  We will do what Americans have always done when confronted with a problem: we will rise to the occasion with optimism, assertiveness, innovation, and strength.  We can and must create a future where America is safe and strong with affordable, clean, and secure energy.

 

Fred Thompson:

Energy, the environment, and America’s economic future are intricately connected.  We must pursue new sources of energy in order to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and non-democratic regimes that do not have our best interests at heart.   Our dependence on these sources threatens our national security, limits our foreign policy options, and places our economy at risk.   Indeed, all too often the United States finds its options limited by the actions of unstable governments who have used the revenue from their oil exports to sustain their regimes and illicit activities.  Our dependent relationship with these types of regimes hinders our efforts to promote freedom and democracy abroad.

To achieve energy diversification, we must increase our domestic supplies, expand our use of alternative energy sources, and invest in future technologies that can free us from our dependence on oil.   Key areas that should be explored include expanding the use ethanol and other bio-fuels; investing in nuclear power; and developing new more affordable forms of renewable sources of energy.  We should encourage State and local communities as well as the private sector to promote ways to reduce energy consumption and improve energy efficiency.  Improving transportation networks and incentivizing industry could also lead to increased energy conservation.

As we explore other sources of energy, we must be careful to protect the environment.   Government regulation to this end should be limited to those areas that the private sector has not been able to effectively manage on its own.   Because the federal government is one of limited and enumerated powers, the States and local communities are, in most cases, best able to determine whether government regulation is required, although I recognize that the transient nature of pollution often requires federal intervention.  Before the federal government imposes any regulation, however, it should conduct a cost-benefit analysis and, if regulation is appropriate, regulate in the most efficient and less burdensome manner to achieve the optimal utility.

On Global Climate Change, I believe it is prudent for the U.S. to take steps to reduce its Carbon Dioxide emissions.  Possible solutions include promoting advanced energy technologies, developing alternative fuels, and encouraging greater involvement of the private sector.  I strongly oppose international agreements like the Kyoto Protocol that are not universal in application and that likely will do much more harm to our economy than good for the environment.

With regard to our economic future, I believe that the federal government can make the most difference in sustaining our nation’s long-term growth by giving Americans more control of their own lives and more power over their pocket books.  This means we must cut taxes and keep them low.  We need to make fundamental tax changes that reduce federal taxes, make them fairer, and simplify the system.   I believe making President Bush’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent, eliminating the death tax, getting rid of the AMT, and reducing the impact on marriages would be steps in the right direction.   I also believe the federal government should give people and their doctors more control over their health care decisions with less interference from the federal government.   Lastly, we need to create long-term financial security by saving and protecting social security and giving Americans more choice when it comes to their retirement future.

 

Rudy Giuliani

As a matter of policy, Rudy Giuliani does not respond to questionnaires, but his campaign provided a letter summarizing his positions. Click the above link to read the letter.

 

Click here to return to the main Questionnaire page

All responses are listed in alphabetical order. The American Conservative Union provides these responses for public information only. ACU neither endorses these candidates nor their responses.