A lack of energy

This article (Courant, by David Lightman) on Washington gridlock is very interesting. It explains why it can be so (politically) difficult to pass federal legislation.

(House Majority Leader) Boehner was just as pessimistic
about the chances this year for meaningful energy legislation. Bush made headlines in January when he told a joint session of Congress "America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world."

He then laid out a series of steps to break that addiction. But no major energy measures, such as those that deal with price gouging, strict conservation standards, and helping refineries increase capacity, are scheduled for consideration this week.

It's nearly impossible to get agreement on broad energy measures, said Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4th District. Too many special interests - notably members from states where the auto industry is an important employer and members from oil-producing states - make it hard to find common ground.

"Put all of them together and it's hard to get enough votes to get us off our dependence on oil or get bills passed to promote conservation," Shays said.

I can't think of a more compelling argument for Connecticut to take action, as Governor Rell has suggested... well... other than the U.S. Constitution and the 10th amendment.

Shays mentions the problem with federal legislation and the special interests in oil & auto states. Connecticut is neither. So why don't we take action in Connecticut? My guess is that "energy issues" are too complicated for most of our state legislators. They probably just don't want to take the time to understand them. That's unacceptable in my book.

I know we can do better.

Tim White
State Rep candidate
Bethany, Cheshire & Prospect
TimWhite98@yahoo.com