The End of Energy: The Unmaking of America's Environment, Security, and Independence

9. The End of an Era

9 The End of an Era When it came to energy policy, the differences between Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter were stark. They reflected not only their disparate policy preferences, but also their fundamental dispute over the proper role for the federal government. Energy had been the centerpiece of Carter’s domestic presidential agenda. He had pushed to transform our nation’s energy policies more than any president of the twentieth century. In addition to the energy legislation he secured in the first three years of his term, in June 1980 Carter signed six more pieces of legislation known collectively as the Energy Security Act. These laws were intended to stimulate the supply of alternative energy sources and to encourage energy efficiency through a complex combination of subsidies and tax breaks. At least one well-known energy economist, however, described this legislation as “probably the low point in contemporary U.S. energy policy.” All in all, Jimmy Carter signed many thousands of pages of energy legislation during his single term as president. During the 1980 campaign, Carter took credit for the fact that oil imports that year were down more than 20 percent from their level in 1970, but he failed to mention that they were down only 7 percent from their 1976 levels, the last year of the Ford administration. Nor did he mention that imports were lower largely due to a combination of higher prices for imports, lower U.S. demand because of the recession, and an almost tenfold increase in Alaskan oil production since 1976 to 1.6 million barrels a day. Reagan, in contrast, who frequently said that “Washington invents cures for nonexistent diseases,” told an enthusiastic black-tie audience at the Petroleum Landmen’s convention in El Paso, Texas, that “the problem isn’t a shortage of fuel but a surplus of government.” He suggested that 148 Chapter 9 the United States had no energy problem until the government had gotten involved, and he urged the elimination of the Department of Energy. “It has a budget as big as the total after-tax profits of the entire U.S. oil industry ,” he said. “What the hell has it accomplished?” In addition to his desire to abolish the Department of Energy, which was Jimmy Carter’s pride and joy, Reagan had other major energy policy disagreements with the Democratic president. During the campaign, in the midst of a five-day swing through six key eastern and midwestern states, Reagan vigorously attacked Carter’s policies. Reagan told 6,000 people at an outdoor rally in Cleveland, Ohio, that, according to reports of the U.S. Geological Survey and the Department of Energy, “America has a proven and potential 47-year supply of oil, including oil shale, a 27-year supply of natural gas [which has since grown dramatically], and at least a 321-year supply of coal.” He accused President Carter of concealing these figures from the public and leading people “to believe that there is an acute shortage of energy resources in this country.” Reagan blamed government regulations and “production barriers” for the energy shortages. He promised to increase U.S. energy supplies. “We will get America producing again,” he said. “Coal, oil, natural gas, shale oil, solar, geothermal, and safe nuclear power. Every available resource we have must be used to free us from OPEC oil domination.” Reagan used an increase in oil imports from Libya to take a shot at Carter’s brother’s troubles, and in an over-the-top effort to link energy policy to the nation’s weak economy he accused Carter of “deliberately putting two million people out of work in a single year.” “If that’s Mr. Carter’s idea of good energy policy, I don’t want any part of it,” he said. In fact, Reagan wanted little of Carter’s energy strategy, nor did he regard environmental concerns as serious objections to expanding domestic production. Moreover, he was quite congenial to using federal lands for domestic exploration and production. Reagan wanted to move the federal government out of the energy producers’ way and laid the blame for the nation’s energy problems on the government’s “price-fixing, regulating, and controlling” of the industry. He proposed immediately decontrolling oil prices: eliminating regulatory and environmental barriers to coal and nuclear power; leasing more federal lands for energy exploration and development; limiting spending on synfuels, solar, and other alternative fuels, and supporting basic research; and signi...