PACE in National Journal: Time to Listen to Americans

It is no novelty that politicians often employ promising rhetoric that fails to deliver. In some sense, we have come to expect our presidents to disregard major election initiatives and goals once they inhabit the Oval Office. President Obama, though, at least on energy issues, has been a man of action, showing his commitment to revolutionizing American energy through subsidy programs, executive orders, and EPA regulations. The problem, though, is that might be the bad news.

While President Obama seems to say all of the right things – increasing domestic energy production and pursuing cleaner air – he hasn’t always done a good job of listening to Americans. The public says they want less reliance on foreign oil, and the administration talks about alternative fuels rather than securing the flow of oil from Canada into the U.S. Now, under election year pressure, the administration alters its trajectory to at least partially support the project. It clearly will take more than words to stabilize gas prices, if that is possible at all.

But is the President listening to the public on electricity policy, the proverbial elephant in the room of American energy? The President has listened to Americans say consistently that they support clean air initiatives, interpreting that support as a mandate to engage the EPA in total warfare against the fossil fuels industry. But who doesn’t support clean air? And do those polled understand that major emissions like NOx and SO2 have decreased more than 65% in the past two decades, while electricity generation has increased by half? Has the president considered whether Americans support diversity of energy resources, as well as power affordability and grid reliability? Most Americans do.

The administration has clearly chosen a “more than words” approach to the electricity sector, issuing a flurry of regulations such as Utility MACT and CSAPR that make it more difficult to use coal, our nation’s most abundant energy resource. Just this week, the administration announced that it is proceeding with its greenhouse gas rule for new coal-fired power plants.  This proposed regulation essentially signals the end of new coal-fired generation plants in the U.S., with the exception of plants using carbon capture technology. The regulation represents a high-water mark for EPA’s regulatory overreach, potentially affecting the long-term stability of American energy production and having ripple effects across the industrial sector.

Likewise, Utility MACT is another regulation that the administration should amend significantly. Much like the new greenhouse gas rule, Utility MACT threatens the nation’s core energy infrastructure and thus the economy.  As Steve Miller, the President and CEO of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, noted in a recent statement, “The EPA’s heavy-handed regulations are forcing coal plants across the country to close, which will result in job losses, higher electricity prices and a less reliable electric grid. In many communities, shuttering these plants will also result in fewer local tax dollars, hurting schools and other public services.”

If the president is listening on these issues, it isn’t to the right people. Many of the administration’s actions have run counter to the goals of FERC (the body that was established to monitor problems with reliability), not to mention economists and state leadership. Just last month, 221 members of the House asked the Obama administration to halt its new greenhouse gas regulation. Why? Because the Obama administration’s regulatory actions are making America’s power sector weaker, more costly, and less robust.

Leaf through the myriad regulations released by the EPA in the past three years and you will realize that American businesses and families are dealing with enough words. What they really want is a direction that makes sense, that protects them from higher energy prices and uses the resources we have to keep our nation strong and great. The good news is that they can have all of that, if the president will only allow them to have it.