In speaking about his support for the military "surge" in Iraq, John Mc Cain said that he would rather lose the Presidency than lose the war. It’s too bad he hasn’t followed the same principled approach on energy. The New York Times lead editorial this past Sunday reiterated a point I have made a number of times on this site. We cannot drill enough oil and gas to solve our energy crisis. There are too many people on this planet and we use more and more fuel every day. John McCain has missed an historic opportunity to develop an American consensus about renewable energy, instead taking on the expedient, poll-driven mantra of "drill, drill, drill: here and now". What a disappointing and shameful exercise.

After September 11, the American people demonstrated that following a graphic shock, like the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, they could understand the subtle and insidious threat of terrorism. Here in New York City, our always stressed municipal budget has found room to hire 1000 staff in the NYPD to work on this critical issue. The American people are capable of great insight when their leaders choose to lead. On energy, McCain knows better, but has abdicated the leadership role he once played on this issue.

Given how much oil we have here and abroad, it’s hard for people to understand how we can run out. The Times editorial, mentioning all of the advertising on energy they saw at the Republican Convention observed that: "… one advertisement, from Chevron, seemed strikingly on point. "It took us 125 years to use the first trillion barrels of oil," it said. "We’ll use the next trillion in 30." This nicely framed a big part of the energy challenge." There are a number of ways to express the data about our use of fossil fuels, but even if we didn’t have to deal with the issue of climate change, we absolutely need to get off of our addiction to fossil fuels. This is not something that needs to be completed next week, but it is something we need to start immediately.

The continued use of fossil fuels threatens our security, our economy and our environment:

• It threatens our security because it requires that we pay tribute to our enemies to keep our cars moving. No matter how much domestic oil we produce, we will need more to run this place.
• It threatens our economy because an increasing portion of our wealth and productivity will go into paying the cost of energy. Increased competition from India and China for oil and natural gas will continue to drive the price of fossil fuels higher and higher.
• It threatens our environment because burning fossil fuels adds carbon dioxide and a range of more prosaic pollutants to the atmosphere.

According to his campaign web site, Senator McCain’s campaign "Lexington Project", promotes energy independence, and is an "all of the above strategy" for reducing our dependence on foreign oil. Despite the plan’s attempt to promote sustainable energy, it’s first element is increased domestic oil and gas production and another key element is to ensure that 45 new nuclear power plants were "on track for construction" by 2030. McCain must realize that the odds of getting local communities to accept new nuclear power plants is zero. While there is an effort to promote balance on his web site, McCain’s emphasis on the political stump has been "drill, drill. drill"

It’s not hard to understand what’s going on here. With the McCain campaign now fully in the hands of former George Bush and Karl Rove campaign associate, Steve Schmidt, McCain is being transformed into the type of Republican Presidential candidate we’ve gotten used to over the past decade. Jim Rutenberg and Adam Nagourney detailed these changes in a September 7 piece in the International Herald Tribune. According to their excellent article, McCain’s new tougher approach was approved by Karl Rove himself who observed that: "Since the elevation of Schmidt and his new responsibilities, he’s given the campaign a new focus and energy and drive that’s been very impressive," …They’ve had a much better July and August than April and May." Rutenberg and Nagourney report that "the new tone has been jarring to some veterans of McCain’s presidential run in 2000 who worry that the campaign exudes a cynicism that undercuts the senator’s old reputation for "straight talk" and a more elevated style of politicking. On a number of occasions, McCain’s campaign advertisements have been described by campaign watchdog organizations as false or misleading, particularly those attacking Obama on tax votes.

I believe that this approach will backfire in the end. One of the reasons that Senators and Obama and Mc Cain won during the primary season was that they promised a politics that might not decend to the ritualistic exchange of rhetorical fire we’ve become so accustomed to. On energy and environment, McCain once represented a singular voice of sanity in a political party that seemed determined to ignore scientific fact. That is long gone now. And with it fades the hope of a civil, reasoned exchange of views during the fall political campaign. Oh well.

Follow Steve Cohen via RSS.