For all its greatness, long-range thinking is not one of the many attributes one would assign to our nation. Our public companies often run on quarter to quarter corporate plans; our government's focus, frankly, is too often on the next election. In the United States House of Representatives, that's every two years. That means the campaign never stops, which too often means that the long-range policy thinking never starts.
Examples are plentiful: America's health care policy? Not a policy you'd describe as a long-term one, given its minimal focus on disease prevention, no immediate remedy to the mounting burden placed on state governments by long-term care admissions, and no apparent solution for the coming demographic tidal wave in federal Medicare and state Medicaid health costs. America's entitlement programs? The only thing certain about them is that they cannot go on as they are currently. Each Congressional Budget Office study confirms the obvious absurdity of our current course, which cannot be sustained without revolutionary changes. But it's not a comfortable political topic, so the absurdity endures.
National security and foreign policy? There are some brilliant long-range thinkers in the Pentagon, the Central Intelligence Agency, and America's think tanks. But these people rarely are making policy. Here too America's policy is quite often defined by a reactive, as opposed to a proactive, approach to the many emerging global threats to our nation and its interests. Difficult as it may be to imagine today, the Iraq War will one day end. What next of America's role in this world? Perhaps understandably, Iraq seems to preclude such thinking right now, but it is precisely such thinking that is required by our government, military and policy makers if we are to be properly prepared for the unforeseen threats of our post-Iraq tomorrow.
And then there's America's energy policy, and it's generous to even use the word "policy" to describe it. The transition of our nation from a manufacturing to a service economy may be nearly complete, but it's certainly not reflecting in our continued demand for oil, which is greater than ever.
By necessity (and to its credit), the Bush administration is now looking at, and beginning to pursue, some long-term alternatives to oil dependence, which President Bush properly labeled an "addiction" in his State of the Union address this past January 31. Since then, it's a credit to this administration that the phrase "alternative energy," used historically to describe ethanol and other non-fossil fuel resources, is losing its relevance as these energy sources become less an "alternative" and more a part of our deliberations over America's mainstream energy needs. From all of this, one hopes a long-term energy policy may yet arise.
Article comments
1 - Dr Dreadful
Tiny quibble:
It's the Strait of Hormuz, not Straight.
2 - Christopher Rose
That's dire!
;-)
3 - Clavos
...aand it's not even a straight strait...
4 - Dr Dreadful
Should the body of water between San Francisco and Tiburon be called a gay?
5 - REMF
^ at least it's straighter than munchkins...
6 - Clavos
You are a bad boy, Doc!
7 - Franco
Well written and informitive ipinion pieces.
Right off of U.S. coastal waters……..European and other nations are right now drilling for oil in areas where our own Congress has prohibited such drilling by American oil companies.
Why?
it will be important that our currently untapped U.S.-based oil reserves are available and sufficient to carry this nation through such a crisis. The time to ensure adequate access to these petroleum resources is not once the U.S. begins its response to Iranian aggression. The time for that preparation is now.
What's holding up the show?
8 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Petroleum is an important material for making things like computers and other packages that do not contain food or drink.
But truth be told, for liquid fuel, or any other purpose, it is not needed at all. The tchnology to replace it is already here, and can be developed in short order....
When the firms come out with those materials, it will be a pleasure to see the faces of all the oil execs and their ba(n)ckers who now think they are in the catbird's seat, as they suddenly realize they are as expendable as Burger King employees.
9 - Clavos
"off of U.S. coastal waters, European and other nations are right now drilling for oil in areas where our own Congress has prohibited such drilling by American oil companies."
Off the US coast??? That's the first I've heard that.
Exactly where?
10 - Clavos
"When the firms come out with those materials, it will be a pleasure to see the faces of all the oil execs and their ba(n)ckers who now think they are in the catbird's seat, as they suddenly realize they are as expendable as Burger King employees."
Ruvy, Ruvy, Ruvy...
Who do you think is going to be supplying those materials? The oil companies--already, they are all spending billions on R & D for alternative fuels; they're not just OIL companies, Ruvy. They are ENERGY companies.
And they're not stupid. If some one else comes up with a good alternative fuel, they'll buy (or steal) the process. They are not about to go out of business any time soon.
11 - Dave Nalle
Clavos has a good point. Shell and BP are among the world's leading producers of solar panels (made from petroleum byproducts) while Chevron is going into the alternative fuels business on a large scale with ethanol and biodiesel.
Dave