Reid

Iain Murray on the Anti-Stimulus

by Richard Morrison on February 12, 2009

in Deregulate to Stimulate, Economy, Stimulus to Nowhere

On behalf of my distinguished colleague Iain Murray, who is busy speaking at a very important press conference this morning, let me present his prepared remarks on the impending stimulus bill:

Remarks of Iain Murray, Director of Projects and Analysis, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Good morning. Others have already told you what an unutterable waste of money this so-called stimulus package is. I just want to make two points. First, that the American people have been misled about the nature of the bill, and been sold a pig in a poke. Second, that if you really want to stimulate economic activity, there is a very simple way to do it that doesn’t cost a penny; we call it “liberate to stimulate.”

The American people were told that this bill would give Americans jobs as a result of great public works projects. It won’t. Congress and the Agencies have between them made it very difficult to undertake great infrastructure projects, and impossible to do it quickly. That’s why almost all the supposed “shovel-ready” projects in the bill are maintenance projects and the like. If you thought Americans would be building roads, only 3 percent of the Senate stimulus package is for roads. Only 7 percent is for new infrastructure in general.

As for so-called “green energy,” the much-vaunted aim of doubling alternative energy can be achieved by business-as-usual, so little energy is provided by wind and solar. My colleague Jonathan Tolman and I also worked out that the House bill contains just about $6.4 billion aimed at creating “green jobs,” and only 70,000 would be created. This bill is not what was advertised.

So how can we stimulate the economy? As I mentioned, Congress has made it very difficult to build infrastructure. It needs to lift those restrictions. Gov. Schwarzenegger and three former California governors have all complained about the restrictions of the National Environmental Policy Act causing misallocations of infrastructure funding. Those restrictions need to be removed, as Gov. Schwarzenegger has asked. Similarly, we need clean electric power, and we need large amounts of it, but it takes ten years or more to break ground on a nuclear power plant. If the regulators sped up the permitting process like they’re doing in the UK, then we could get moving on new nuclear build very quickly. Those sorts of reforms don’t cost anything, and can get America back to work, which is what we all want to see.

Check out more on the topic under the “Deregulate to Stimulate” category.

Democrats Poised for Yet Another Land Grab

by Richard Morrison on January 9, 2009

in Energy

In these troubled times, Congress’ plate is piled high with vital legislative priorities. Naturally, upon getting to work this week, the Senate is zeroing in on the most important of all: taking millions of acres of land that may yield a vast amount of natural gas and other mineral resources and locking them away from development forever. Take that, energy crisis!

Our very own Myron Ebell had something to say about this move in a press release today:

The Bingaman-Reid bill is full of bad provisions, but the worst are the ones that would prohibit oil and natural gas production on more than a million acres of federal land. Tens of millions of acres of federal lands in the West have already been withdrawn from mineral and energy production. The new Congress should be opening some of these areas, which would help increase domestic energy production and lower prices. Instead, faced with declining natural gas production and potential shortages in the near future, the first bill that Majority Leader Harry Reid wants the Senate to consider would take 1.2 million acres in Wyoming with high natural gas potential out of production.

I should also point out that property rights advocates like the Competitive Enterprise Institute have long opposed expanding federal land ownership, in part because of the federal government’s poor track record in managing the lands it already controls. Management strategies adopted by the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and National Park Service have led to destructive wildfires, habitat loss, and the spread of pests and disease in large swaths of forest and range land throughout the Western United States. Over one hundred non-profit groups last November sent a letter to the Senate raising concerns about an earlier incarnation of the current legislation.

ADDENDUM: CEI adjunct fellow Bob Nelson has been writing about the deficiencies of federal land management for quite some time – his Forbes column from 2000 is an excellent introduction to the topic. In depth researchers will want to get a hold of a copy of his book, A Burning Issue: A Case for Abolishing the U.S. Forest Service (Rowman & Littlefield).