Obama tries to (cap and) trade on the oil spill

After eight weeks, President Obama has decided he needs to stop letting our crisis in the Gulf of Mexico go unexploited. In an Oval Office address tonight, he’ll explain why, as he recently told Politico’s Roger Simon, the spill should “shape how we think about the environment and energy for many years to come” — just as our perspective on foreign affairs was “profoundly … indelibly” changed by 9/11.

Oh, so within eight years our government will be studiously avoiding the word “oil” and referring to “pipeline-caused disasters”? Maybe a future president will make speeches about how oil barons helped pave the way for the European Renaissance.

Nah, probably not.

Obama reportedly hopes the spill will reinvigorate efforts in Congress to pass a cap-and-tax bill. The Gulf oil spill is a tragedy, but it doesn’t change the basic calculus about cap-and-tax — namely that, among other things, it:

1. reduces, not increases, employment by giving companies an incentive to move production to countries without caps on carbon dioxide emissions;

2. represents an enormous opportunity for politicians to game the system by favoring certain industries over others (and certain firms over their competitors — would Toyota really get the same terms as Government, er, General Motors?) in the allowances granted and the initial prices charged for those allowances; and

3. has worked poorly where it’s been tried (for carbon dioxide) so far, most notably in Europe.

Those things were true last summer, when the cap-and-tax bill passed by the House was considered dead on arrival in the Senate. They’re still true now.

183 comments Add your comment

Jefferson

June 15th, 2010
7:31 am

Progress, in the right direction.

Janice Taylor-Gaines

June 15th, 2010
7:34 am

What if they cannot stop this leak? That would be a condition of “runaway”, according to this author: http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/business-technology/bp-and-the-gulf-oil-spill-lessons-for-it-and-business/ – Ch. 21 of his book “I.T. WARS” is a real eye-opener too – can Google to it.

Rev. Al Sharptongue

June 15th, 2010
7:52 am

After eight weeks, President Obama has decided he needs to stop letting our crisis in the Gulf of Mexico go unexploited

— would Toyota really get the same terms as Government, er, General Motors?)

Those above statements show why you are nothing but a Right wing hack who only parrots talk you heard from Rush,Beck, et al.

Marc

June 15th, 2010
8:01 am

Question: Why aren’t conservatives concerned about conserving? When you look at the environmental price of coal and oil, conservatives are willing to pile on massive debt. Flooding, drought, dead forests and oceans? Sorry, kids.

For an alternative viewpoint, I suggest Paul Krugman’s discussion of carbon pricing, “Building a Green Economy” in the New York Times recently. It’s at
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/11/magazine/11Economy-t.html. Among other things, Krugman says, “In any case, experience suggests that market-based emission controls work.”

Soames

June 15th, 2010
8:10 am

Marc,

I suggest reading Peter Morici’s (another well known economist) articles rather than Krugman….at least he doesn’t let politics shape his thinking

Steve

June 15th, 2010
8:31 am

Once again, Obama is slow to move on a crisis. 8 weeks to sit down with the CEO of BP to discuss this. Here’s a hint, 8 weeks later is not leading. That’s being forced to schedule a meeting due to mounting public & media pressure.

johnboy

June 15th, 2010
8:45 am

jesus. can’t you people start seeing that our current energy plans which are dependent on fossil fuels is a growing disaster? quit calling green energy some radical theory and start looking at the economic benefits to switching over to them. if this country were to create the industrial base for building solar energy cells, wind turbines and such it could revolutionize and dramatically improve our economy by creating jobs, creating incentives for our youth to focus on engineering and science and reducing our dependence on foreign suppliers of our fossil fuel dependence. to allow the current energy industry to continue to operate as it is, is simply an invitation for future disasters on the scale of the gulf oil crisis.

Brad

June 15th, 2010
8:48 am

OK, Kyle, let’s discuss the energy/environmental proposals coming from the right. Hm, I guess there’s still only one: screw the impact, let’s make money.

ATLBadger

June 15th, 2010
8:56 am

I agree. Cap and trade sucks. I’d greatly prefer a carbon tax instead.

Horrible Horrace

June 15th, 2010
9:00 am

This latest trend, that of the world “going green”, is just pure nonsense and a play on the dullards of the world whereby the eletists want to raise taxes and control more of your lives.

Wake up idiots.

JKL2

June 15th, 2010
9:01 am

Drill, Baby, Drill

The only place the Demwits want to drill is your wallet.

That Dept of Energy has been really good at getting us independent of for foreign oil. More props to Jimmy Carter. I wish we could have 10 more government agencies that worked that good. With any luck, the 158 new ones started by Obamacare will reach such glory.

Nothing like skyrocketing energy costs to jumpstart an economy. Maybe if there was some way we could add another 15% tax to everything people buy…

Horrible Horrace

June 15th, 2010
9:02 am

Johnboy…be sure to park your automobile, turn off your a/c, eat your foods raw, wash your clothes down by the creek and eat all your garbage.

Chess

June 15th, 2010
9:08 am

I really don’t think people understand how many commercial, household and industrial items we make out of petroleum. An example is the very equipment fisherman use to catch fish. Guess where nylon comes from.

Cheney allowed the oil industry to go unregulated. Obama is going to handle this issue but he has to be careful what enemies he creates. Cheney’s old cronies cares nothing about the flag. Just cash flow. Period.

G

June 15th, 2010
9:16 am

Much like medical care which is erroniously called health insurance in this country (nice branding though by freaking HMO’s eh) This could be a good thing in reason but we don’t have reasonable people running the country and we haven’t for sometime meaning….. This is going to be a freaking boondoggle.

BP needs more regulation. Unfortuately their incompetant leadership has proven that they are incapable of operating safely on thier own without seperate government watchdogs punching them in the face when they do wrong.

What they have wrought now is going to be hell on those of us who are neither poor nor wealthy. The gap is going to get wider because we’re not going to be able to afford any of this.

Great and lofty ideas sure… but executed poorly. We need businessmen in charge of the finances of our government and visionaries to dream up plans…. that way the businessmen can shoot down the ones that don’t fit the budget. Our politicians don’t seem to understand the concept of finite resources.

joe

June 15th, 2010
9:16 am

Shocking that Rev Al is criticizing a writer of an AJC blog…didn’t think he had it in him since all he does on CT’s blog is agree with every single thing that she types. I guess he doesn’t have one single thought of his own that isn’t planted in his mind by the ignorant ramblings of CT, MSM (main stream media) and any liberal talking head…hey Al, why don’t you turn on Herman Cain, 7pm on WSB radio. You might learn something. There’s still time, you can be saved!

In The Arena

June 15th, 2010
9:19 am

Prepare yourselves for the most disjointed, infuriating speech that Obama has given yet. He will use this crisis, which resulted in the loss of 11 lives, to push his own, completely unrelated agenda. He will brag about his own accomplishments and tell you about the great work Steven Chu has done and will continue to do. Steven Chu does not know one darn thing about wetlands restoration.

Why does it take 5 days for any request from the Plaquemines Parish government to even get to the desk of Thad Allen? Each request from the local parish government should be addressed within 5 minutes, not 5 days. Imagine how many more miles of coastline would not have been ruined had Obama not put it place such complex, debilitating bureaucracy.

People along the Gulf Coast and throughout the country have been and are fighting to stop the ruin, but our government is getting in the way, actively hurting the containment and recovery efforts. Keep that in mind while Obama gloats tonight and attempts to destroy all energy production capacity in America.

Randy

June 15th, 2010
9:19 am

Well the liberal media(except FOX ) wanted a liberal democrate in office. Now we are all suffering. Maybe we should elect another CLOWN, who tells everybody what they want to hear and has no idea what to do in a crisis.

HDB`

June 15th, 2010
9:31 am

If the nation had begun the drive towards energy independence when we were urged to under the CARTER Administration rather than allow the Reagan Administration to remove the R&D incentives for alternative energy, where do you think the nation would be now?? Why is Siemens now the leader in wind turbine technology when GE was the innovator?? Short-sighted viewpoint of conservative politicians led us down this path!!

BTW – why aren’t the oil wells in Texas and Oklahoma that were capped in the early 70s by the oil companies under the guise that it’s CHEAPER to get oil from OVERSEAS uncapped and producing oil domestically?? Hmmmmm…….

Overkill

June 15th, 2010
9:31 am

Name calling from the left…………… Why is it so difficult to cap this leak in the gulf? Could it be due in part to the fact the drilling site is 65 miles off shore and 5 miles deep? Did BP make a decision to drill there based solely on the fact they like to work 5 miles down? I think not. Just for a minute let’s all think rationally. What if this oil spill was happening in say, 500 feet of water? Would it have been capped by now? Is it easier to solve problems closer to shore in shallower water? Can we all understand that part ( not all by any means ) of the problem lies in the restrictive rules that govern where ANY company can drill?
The President has no leadership skills or experience. That is not a shot or an insult, it is the fact. What has he led in the past? What crisis has he handled? What success has he had in the past? He has written 2 very successful books. So has Peter Benchley but that does not qualify HIM to lead. The President has now decided to use the spill to increase government power. No surprise there. He says he “Didn’t want to take over the auto industry or banking industry” and now he won’t “Want to take over the oil company” as well.
He has already suggested BP drop dividend payments to share holders. Who does the President think the shareholders are? Big evil “Wall Street Fat Cats”? How about pension funds all over the world that close to a million people depend on for income past retirement.
Good grief, what happened to the President leading by using the resources of the most powerful civil engineering nation on earth? Can we not apply the Corps of Engineers, the Navy, Coast Guard and National Guard to the engineering and logistical problems tin the Gulf? Shaking his finger at BP and saying he is not interested in words, but only action while he refuses to take action ( beyond “Hearings” in congress) is a prime example of what happens when agitators are elected. They spend all their time decrying the past ( Bush bashing anyone? ) and have no plan to actually lead when a crisis hits.

HDB`

June 15th, 2010
9:38 am

In The Arena June 15th, 2010
9:19 am

The levels of bureaucracy need to be streamlined in situations like this; I do agree with you on that aspect….but the bureaucracy was always there….and compounded under the Bush Administration with its cronyism. If you desire to be honest, let’s place the blame where it should be: short-sighted visions by conservative politicians creating an energy policy derived by oil companies solely for profit!!

Randy June 15th, 2010
9:19 am

Not everybody is suffering in the nation; in some cases, the suffering index was higher when GWB was in the White House (DEFINITELY in my case!). What needs to be said tonight is this:

1) CAFE standards within 5 years shuld be 50MPG
2) R&D credits for alternative ebergy will be increased
3) Domestic oil production will be limited to shallow water drilling until safety measures are put in place to prevent what we’re experiencing now
4) Expedited approval for nuclear power plant construction
5) Drilling platforms shall use the European standard for blow out preventers

That’s the start………

Overkill

June 15th, 2010
9:40 am

Enter your comments here

tar and feathers party

June 15th, 2010
9:40 am

Now RoytheCrook wants to steal the gold off the Capital Dome! Will he give it to his out of state lawyer cronies as a “contingency fee” as he did with 100 million Medicaid dollars, or will he give it to his instate developer cronies as he did with Georgia 400 Toll Road Money, imho?

HDB`

June 15th, 2010
9:47 am

Overkill June 15th, 2010
9:31 am

“Can we all understand that part ( not all by any means ) of the problem lies in the restrictive rules that govern where ANY company can drill?”

Question: Who created the rules? Remember the “energy summit” led by Dick Cheney; the OIL COMPANIES created the rules FOR the government….so let’s place the blame where it should lie….

You asked about applying the engineering prowess of the Corps of Engineers…but the CofE were the ones that built the levees that surrounded New Orleans…and look what happened during Katrina. The technical expertise to handle such scenarios rests with the OIL COMPANIES……

Another question: Why are you asking the GOVERNMENT to solve this problem when conservatives want the government OUT of the way of private industry?? That’s a dichotomy of the nth degree, isn’t it?? Why shouldn’t BP be forced to pay its dividends to stopping the leak that IT, Halliburton, and TransOcean are solely responsible for?? If BP declares bankruptcy, then the FIRST order of payment should be to those who have been adversely affected in the Gulf and the clean-up efforts!!

Kyle Wingfield

June 15th, 2010
10:07 am

ATLBadger: A carbon tax would be much more intellectually honest. But it won’t happen because it doesn’t empower elected officials the way a trading scheme does.

HDB: Nixon talked about energy independence years before Carter. It was as much of a false hope then as it is now.

Aquagirl

June 15th, 2010
10:08 am

“Can we all understand that part ( not all by any means ) of the problem lies in the restrictive rules that govern where ANY company can drill?”

BP was drilling there because we’ve tapped more easily recovered reserves. Duh. As the price of oil rises, oil companies look for sources that are more difficult to extract and process. Meanwhile, a lot of people who hate us have easier access to their oil, giving them a sure road to dominate us in the 21st century.

I don’t believe for one second wingnuts have forgotten basic capitalism, you just bleat about it when trying to shift blame on “enviro-wackos” instead of owning up to your own damn mess.

Glenn

June 15th, 2010
10:09 am

This would be a perfect time for the government to take over & fully run the oil industry . The system can’t be gamed if it is controlled by the house . They could sell it at a cheaper price as well . This is the perfect time to expand government into the energy & healthcare industry .

Road Scholar

June 15th, 2010
10:14 am

Kyle, I guess that the high costs of energy elsewhere will not affect the companies…Oh, you mean Europe and China who have invested heavily in alternate energy and have set 20 year goals in achieve petor independance.

Steve: Does the President and the CEO have magic skills to stop the flow? It’s the people who call themselves expets that will stop it. If you are such an expert, then where is your plan?

Overkill: They drilled for oil there because they found oil based on geological (sorry for the big word) studies. BP’s expertise is finding oil. We didn’t know that they didn’t know squat after they found it!

if they are so pushed to drill deeper, then why does shell have a well 8000 ft down in the gulf? Why do you suppose they drilled there? Could it be revenue based?

Road Scholar

June 15th, 2010
10:15 am

Enter your comments hereSorry, petor+ petrol

booger

June 15th, 2010
10:22 am

Immediately after the blowout, BP wanted to cut and cap the well, which has been proven the most successful temporary solution to date. The EPA refused this approach since it could temporariy increase the flow of oil from the well. This led to the dome attempt, and the siphoning operation which had marginal success. Finally the cut and cap method was approved and has proved quite successful. The government is responsible for a great deal of the oil in the gulf due to their tampering.

The Dutch government offered to send ships with skimming equipment three days after the blowout and were politely told no by our government. These ships are capable of skimming 20,000 tons of oil per day. Now finally Obama has said they could help, but how much more of the oil would already be cleaned up if not for our government?

The La. governor wanted to build a sand island as a barrier to oil getting into some of the more sensetive areas of the coastal wetlands. EPA said there had to be an environmental impact study first. By the time they said OK, it was too late.

Seems to me our government is directly responsible for much of the oil floating around the gulf today.

Kyle Wingfield

June 15th, 2010
10:27 am

No, Road Scholar, I mean places like Mexico and Morocco and Vietnam. And the next lofty goal that the Europeans actually meet, as opposed to merely setting, will be the first.

Gator Joe

June 15th, 2010
10:30 am

Kyle,
I believe you’re more professional than you demonstrate by using little phrases such as “Government Motors.” If such a company exists, please provide the evidence. How about the “aid” Blackwater and Halliburton received?
As for the current disasterous course “we” (yes, you’re in for the ride whether you believe it or not) are on, I guess you’re comfortable with doing nothing to address the inevitable destruction of the environment- or hopefully, the eventual end of oil supply. Kyle, respectfully, keep your head in the sand, as the climate warms only your backside will be scorched.

Kyle Wingfield

June 15th, 2010
10:38 am

Simple question, Gator Joe: How many shares of Blackwater and Halliburton does the government own?

And my answer to your second part will sound familiar to anyone who followed the health-care debate on this blog: “doing something” is not always an improvement. It is possible to make matters worse. And that’s exactly what would happen under a plan to redistribute trillions of dollars without having any effect on the climate (ask Democrats how much we will lower temperatures if we reduce our emissions even by 80 percent by 2050).

HDB`

June 15th, 2010
10:44 am

Kyle Wingfield June 15th, 2010
10:07 am

HDB: Nixon talked about energy independence years before Carter. It was as much of a false hope then as it is now.

Kyle….lest you forget…the OIL COMPANIES in 1969 said that it was CHEAPER to import the oil from the MIddle East…and the CAPPED functioning wells in Texas and Oklahoma!! The oil companies also bought and destroyed plans for two cars on the 60s that GM and Chrysler designed to run on alcohol-based fuels..and they destroyed the plans for a 100MPG carburetor in 1973!! The Brazilians became energy independent by converting to alcohol-based fuels…..and the oil companies have held the US prisoner since the late 60s……

It’s NOT a false hope…..but a “conspiracy of neglect by design”!!

CJ

June 15th, 2010
10:48 am

Kyle: “…[cap-and-trade] represents an enormous opportunity for politicians to game the system by favoring certain industries over others…”

That’s exactly the point of cap-and-trade! (Kyle wants us to believe that Republicans don’t already seek to game the system in favor of big banks and big oil—among others)

And for all the so-called deficit hawks out there, the cap-and-trade bill is scored by the CBO/JCT to reduce the deficit. (Probably gimmicks, right Kyle?)

Incidentally, if Kyle wonders why I *like* to call him a hack, it’s because of stupidity like this: “After eight weeks, President Obama has decided he needs to stop letting our crisis in the Gulf of Mexico go unexploited…”

HDB`

June 15th, 2010
10:50 am

Kyle….almost forgot – under Carter, the R&D for alternative energy and wind technology was a tax incentive that allowed GE to be the innovator in wind turbine technology; when Reagan came to the White House and a Republican-controlled Congress rewrote the tax code and took that tax incentive out at the behest of the OIL COMPANIES…..now Siemens leads in wind turbine technology!! When Corporate America took over parts of the government, innovation was stymied so that the oil companies could prosper……..

In The Arena

June 15th, 2010
10:51 am

HDB – 9:38 AM

This has nothing to do with the past. All that had to happen for bureaucracy to be streamlined was for Admiral Thad Allen to give Plaquemines Parish president Billy Nungesser his cell phone number so Plaquemines could have a direct line of contact. Instead the parish government had to jump through 5 days of hoops just to talk to Allen. Cable news outlets had better access to Allen than the local governments of the areas being devastated.

HDB – 9:47 AM

The Corps has a long history of incompetance. The words “Corps of Engineers” is a curse word in Louisiana. Let all the oil companies collaborate with the best and brightest engineers (private sector), without government hinderance. Obama has repeatedly praised his own engineers and their ability to cap the well and restore wetlands. Steven Chu may have a Nobel prize, but it was in a completely unrelated field.

Obama better prove tonight that he does not favor energy dependence. I am afraid he might prove that he does, and then we will know why he bows to the Saudi king. Any comments that further impede domestic energy production will prove that he is for dependence and will also prove that he is oblivious to the tragic plight of Louisiana. I will give him every opportunity to prove me wrong. I hope he does.

LibraryJim

June 15th, 2010
10:58 am

What suggestions are coming from the right? I heard this on CNN yesterday, but a Republican member of Congress:

Clean coal
Nuclear
solar and wind (but as he admitted, they were not at the point where they could be considered a major contributor to sustainable energy yet)
drilling in oil rich land areas
Shale oil

I can’t understand how liberals just spout off their talking points without checking the facts first.

http://www.gop.gov/solutions/energy

Kyle Wingfield

June 15th, 2010
11:03 am

So, CJ, you are in favor of rigging the system as long as you like the beneficiary? Because I’d love for you to point out where I’ve written in favor of corporate welfare. And as you seem to acknowledge, corporate welfare — not protecting the environment — is what cap and trade is all about.

As for the deficit scoring, yes: Anyone who knows anything about the CBO knows that it has to score a bill based on the parameters that Congress gives it. If Congress says, “We’ll auction all the credits” — when everyone knows they won’t — then the CBO has to score the bill as if all the credits will be auctioned. Just like when Congress said about the health bill, “We won’t implement the doc fix” — when everyone knew they would — the CBO had to score the bill on that basis.

And yes, I consider that kind of maneuvering by Congress to be gimmickry.

wex

June 15th, 2010
11:06 am

Until the very hypocrites that spout nonsense on this blog ditch their own cars, turn off their electricity (which includes computers), and start eating what they grow themselves, it’s laughable for anyone to take these hypocrites seriously.

Hell, you know Obama doesn’t want to really get us off oil. How else will he get to all his fancy, expensive, tax payer funded, lavish dates and vacations????

Kyle Wingfield

June 15th, 2010
11:07 am

Finally, CJ, if you read the Democratic talking points — another one of your favorite terms! — leading up to tonight’s speech, it’s crystal clear that exploiting the crisis to jump-start a foundering legislative goal is exactly what they’re doing, and they’re not even trying to hide that fact. This White House is the one that talks about never letting a crisis go to waste.

But keep trying. I need the laughs.

Road Scholar

June 15th, 2010
11:13 am

Kyle: Germany has set a goal of 20 % renewable energy usage by 2020 in 2000. In 2008 they were at 11-12%. Sounds like they’re going to make it. How you ask? Tax incentivs and banks who are taking risks investing in tried and true devices. Photo cells in farmers fields (they still grow all the crops they want), barns, roofs, and building walls.

Denmark, even with all their oil, has set a similar goal.

Reading your posts and responses, I thought that all Mexicans were in the US!

HDB`

June 15th, 2010
11:15 am

In The Arena June 15th, 2010
10:51 am

If we are to REALLY be honest, let’s see if the President says this tonight:

1) The moritorium on domestic offshore drilling will remain in place until safety measures are fully defined and implemented by the oil companies
2) All oil rigs will be subject to US inspection…not that of the Marshall Islands
3) Energy independence is the goal within the next 10 years
4) CAFE standards will increase to 50MPG in 5 years
5) Expedited approvals for nuclear power plants
6) Oil rigs will be standardized for blowout preventers (European/North Sea)
7) Increased R&D tax incentives for alternative energy technology, engineering standards to improve automotive efficiencies

That’s the beginning…..and I think he’s going that way!!!

wex

June 15th, 2010
11:15 am

Kyle,

BTW, Please don’t ban me for simply posting informative facts and realities. One of your female colleagues has a serious issue with these sorts of pesky annoyances.

xyz

June 15th, 2010
11:16 am

Hmmm….Energy independence yet the kooks don’t want us to drill for our own oil? Hmmm…..ok….yeah…..

Atlantan

June 15th, 2010
11:16 am

…but Obama is going to “do all we can to make the gulf coast BETTER than it was before.” I won’t be tuning in tonight, how could he possibly top that stupid comment?

Road Scholar

June 15th, 2010
11:17 am

Kyle: Have you seen the movie” Whatever happened to the electric car”? GM had on and distributed it to California and select other locations. MARTA hasad some and a friend (Asst GM then) drove one and din’t want to give it up! She said it was wonderful! So, what happened to it? Did the gas companies “buy out” GM?

Steve

June 15th, 2010
11:18 am

Road Scholar,
As I (nor probably you) am not a deep water drilling expert, it’s not about me (or you) having a plan.
Obama has indicated on numerous occassions he is on top of this disaster, but has refused to meet with the CEO of the company involved indicating “He knows what their answers will be”. So what if he does know the answer(s) ahead of time. Does that mean he shouldn’t have meet with Tony?
This is the political side of the issue, where Obama is suppose to shine. Granted, it’s all PR and BS, but the public want and need to see that. Otherwise all his talk of “being on top of the crisis” comes across as hollow.
During the past few weeks I have seen Gov Bobby Jindal’s face in the news much more than Obama’s. He knows the equipment they need and has been begging to get it there. From a PR perspective, he has rolled up his sleeves and is working on this as their top priority (as it is). Obama’s administration has NOT delivered on the quantity of equipment that has been requested. He seems to be a day late for everything about this. Monday he finally accepted aid from foreigh countries who can assist with the cleanup even though they had begun offering that help within days of the disaster happening. Why did that not happen for almost two months. Based on the expression “perception is reality”, Obama lacks the ability to handle a major crisis like this.

craziness

June 15th, 2010
11:19 am

The truth of the matter is, the Global Warming fear mongers on the left will not be satisfied until everyone, but them, are stuck using horse and buggies while hunting for their own breakfast, lunch and dinner every day. Meanwhile, they get to keep their fleets of cars, private jets, mansions, etc.

Kyle Wingfield

June 15th, 2010
11:20 am

Road: I realize 2008 may be the most recent data available, but I would hazard a guess that Germany’s investment in renewables, public or private, has fallen off since the financial crash that year, and that the trajectory of renewables usage will flatten out as well.

Spain’s experience shows that governments (and energy consumers, since renewable generators get largesse on both ends) can’t sustain the subsidies required to pump up these industries.

Road Scholar

June 15th, 2010
11:20 am

Library Jim: So, other than oil, and bitching about nuclear, what have they done about it, other than stopping Obama?