The Politics of Distraction
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Tuesday, September 27, 2005; 1:19 PM
President Bush yesterday called for Americans to cope with gasoline shortfalls by cutting down on their driving. And he continued to push for increased military authority in national disasters.
What do these two campaigns have in common? They're both red herrings, to some extent -- distractions in the wake of the shockingly botched government response to Hurricane Katrina.
Consider this, for instance: There is no gasoline shortfall.
And a broad range of experts agree that putting the military into a position to enforce martial law is not only unnecessary, it's dangerous. The Pentagon itself opposes the idea. And under existing rules, the president has ample discretion to send troops in to help disaster victims already -- discretion that he chose not to use for Katrina, but used amply for Rita.
One fair test of how seriously Bush takes his new energy conservation kick will be whether he exercises any self-restraint. But don't expect cardigans or thermostat-lowering in this White House.
Bush's gas-guzzling motorcade was whizzing all over town yesterday -- and today he flies off in his fuel-gulping 747 for his seventh trip to the Gulf Coast since Katrina struck a month ago.
A Call for Conservation
Hurricane Rita had less impact than expected on oil and gas production. And the Bush administration has consistently opposed calls for conservation in the past. So why now? It's not at all clear.
Here is the text of Bush's remarks about energy yesterday morning.
David Leonhardt, Jad Mouawad and David E. Sanger write in the New York Times: "With fears mounting that high energy costs will crimp economic growth, President Bush called on Americans yesterday to conserve gasoline by driving less. He also issued a directive for all federal agencies to cut their own energy use and to encourage employees to use public transportation. . . .
"Mr. Bush's comments, while similar to remarks he made shortly after the disruption from Hurricane Katrina pushed gasoline prices sharply higher, were particularly notable because the administration has long emphasized new production over conservation. It has also opted not to impose higher mileage standards on automakers.
"In 2001, Vice President Dick Cheney said, 'Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it cannot be the basis of a sound energy policy.' Also that year, Ari Fleischer, then Mr. Bush's press secretary, responded to a question about reducing American energy consumption by saying 'that's a big no.'
" 'The president believes that it's an American way of life,' Mr. Fleischer said.



