Just what kind of name is Thaddeus, anyway?!?
So, I got this big long letter from "my" representative Thaddeus McCotter (R-11th District MI). I put "my" in quotes because he is the representative for northern Dearborn Heights where my house is, and because his views don't really represent mine so I refuse to claim him as mine. I did have the opportunity to vote for him the last time he ran... I didn't, but I did have the opportunity. Therefore I felt justified in sharing my opinion with him.
Anyway, the letter starts out with the following paragraphs (check out the uber long sentence in that 2nd paragraph... nice writing, Thaddeus staffer!!):
"Dear Mr. Hurst:
As your member of Congress, I would like to update you on important legislation presently under consideration by the House of Representatives. With high gas prices seriously impacting many Michigan families, I hope you find this update both useful and informative.
As you know, the United States Energy Information Administration (EIA) has forecast higher than average gasoline prices throughout 2008. Of course, much remains to be done to ensure we are not beholden to the fluctuations in the price of oil, because of rising energy consumption by rapidly developing countries such as the communist China, will continue to couple with our nation's reliance upon foreign sources of oil and lead to future escalations of energy costs, which have hampered our economy and contributed to the loss of American jobs, especially in the manufacturing sector - something we in Michigan can ill afford.
Importantly, as crude-oil prices climb, high gasoline prices and the weak economy are beginning to change Americans' driving habits. ...{blah, blah, bunch of statistics, blah}... As the current economic slowdown prompts more Americans to cut back on driving, these habits could lead to a longer term decline in gasoline demand as Americans make the choice to save money by becoming more fuel-efficient."
Apparently, Thaddeus believes the high gas prices will just eventually solve themselves. Although the letter then goes on to talk about how he supports reducing our dependence on foreign oil and reviews all the bills that he supports to "reduce gasoline costs".
Here was my response:
Dear Representative McCotter,
I recently received your letter dated September 10, 2008 with updates of your votes regarding gasolines prices. I appreciate the communications that you send keeping me informed. Unfortunately, it has come to my attention that you do not represent my views.
With regards to your letter, you mentioned supporting H.R. 6107 to permit drilling in ANWR, and I am opposed to this. According to the Energy Information Administration (part of the Department of Energy) in May 2008, drilling in ANWR will take 10 years to begin oil production, with 10 years of production to reach the peak after that. This means that assuming the bill you support gets approved in 2008, our first year of production from ANWR would be 2018, peaking in 2028. I fail to see how this will impact our gasoline prices in 2008 or 2009 (or even 2010, 2011, 2012…). If our mutual goal is to truly become energy independent, ANWR drilling is simply political points to be able to claim success on a stopgap measure for the next decade, rather a solution for now.
Additionally, you mentioned supporting H.R. 6108, the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act. Again, this is not a bill I support. As reported by CNN Money on June 29, 2008, of the 90 million off-shore acres that are currently leased, 70 million of these are not being drilled (presumably because of the high cost for drilling in these areas). I believe that if you are going to support the H.R. 6108 it should at the very least include a provision that charges a fee for holding these leases where companies are not currently producing or exploring for oil. This substantial fee will encourage exploration in areas companies already hold before we open new areas.
Regardless of where we explore for new oil, the bottom line is America consumes approximately 21 million barrels of oil per day and produces between 5 and 6 million barrels per day. Assuming that some of the other bills to reduce consumption are enacted and we can reduce this 21 million barrel/day number, my question to you is whether you truly believe that the estimated 500,000 to 2 million barrels/day for 10 years in ANWR is really going to be an answer to our current high gasoline prices. This position seems suspect to me.
Unless it is your belief that ANWR and off-shore drilling will produce 15-16 million barrels per day in the next year, these are not solutions for high gasoline prices but simply “kicking the can down the road for the next guy.”
I am truly sorry to see that you have adopted what I consider to be a position for scoring political points rather than working to find a sustainable energy solution for America and Michigan.
Thank you and I welcome your response to my concerns.
Best regards,
Dave Hurst
Anyway, the letter starts out with the following paragraphs (check out the uber long sentence in that 2nd paragraph... nice writing, Thaddeus staffer!!):
"Dear Mr. Hurst:
As your member of Congress, I would like to update you on important legislation presently under consideration by the House of Representatives. With high gas prices seriously impacting many Michigan families, I hope you find this update both useful and informative.
As you know, the United States Energy Information Administration (EIA) has forecast higher than average gasoline prices throughout 2008. Of course, much remains to be done to ensure we are not beholden to the fluctuations in the price of oil, because of rising energy consumption by rapidly developing countries such as the communist China, will continue to couple with our nation's reliance upon foreign sources of oil and lead to future escalations of energy costs, which have hampered our economy and contributed to the loss of American jobs, especially in the manufacturing sector - something we in Michigan can ill afford.
Importantly, as crude-oil prices climb, high gasoline prices and the weak economy are beginning to change Americans' driving habits. ...{blah, blah, bunch of statistics, blah}... As the current economic slowdown prompts more Americans to cut back on driving, these habits could lead to a longer term decline in gasoline demand as Americans make the choice to save money by becoming more fuel-efficient."
Apparently, Thaddeus believes the high gas prices will just eventually solve themselves. Although the letter then goes on to talk about how he supports reducing our dependence on foreign oil and reviews all the bills that he supports to "reduce gasoline costs".
Here was my response:
Dear Representative McCotter,
I recently received your letter dated September 10, 2008 with updates of your votes regarding gasolines prices. I appreciate the communications that you send keeping me informed. Unfortunately, it has come to my attention that you do not represent my views.
With regards to your letter, you mentioned supporting H.R. 6107 to permit drilling in ANWR, and I am opposed to this. According to the Energy Information Administration (part of the Department of Energy) in May 2008, drilling in ANWR will take 10 years to begin oil production, with 10 years of production to reach the peak after that. This means that assuming the bill you support gets approved in 2008, our first year of production from ANWR would be 2018, peaking in 2028. I fail to see how this will impact our gasoline prices in 2008 or 2009 (or even 2010, 2011, 2012…). If our mutual goal is to truly become energy independent, ANWR drilling is simply political points to be able to claim success on a stopgap measure for the next decade, rather a solution for now.
Additionally, you mentioned supporting H.R. 6108, the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act. Again, this is not a bill I support. As reported by CNN Money on June 29, 2008, of the 90 million off-shore acres that are currently leased, 70 million of these are not being drilled (presumably because of the high cost for drilling in these areas). I believe that if you are going to support the H.R. 6108 it should at the very least include a provision that charges a fee for holding these leases where companies are not currently producing or exploring for oil. This substantial fee will encourage exploration in areas companies already hold before we open new areas.
Regardless of where we explore for new oil, the bottom line is America consumes approximately 21 million barrels of oil per day and produces between 5 and 6 million barrels per day. Assuming that some of the other bills to reduce consumption are enacted and we can reduce this 21 million barrel/day number, my question to you is whether you truly believe that the estimated 500,000 to 2 million barrels/day for 10 years in ANWR is really going to be an answer to our current high gasoline prices. This position seems suspect to me.
Unless it is your belief that ANWR and off-shore drilling will produce 15-16 million barrels per day in the next year, these are not solutions for high gasoline prices but simply “kicking the can down the road for the next guy.”
I am truly sorry to see that you have adopted what I consider to be a position for scoring political points rather than working to find a sustainable energy solution for America and Michigan.
Thank you and I welcome your response to my concerns.
Best regards,
Dave Hurst