Senator Obama finally says maybe he can support a little drilling. Really, he had to; it was getting so that every fillup was like a McCain ad. I think the FEC was starting to track gas sales.
But Sen. Obama has a problem in Nancy Pelosi; she says she's trying to save the planet. I don't remember that being in the job description.
Anyway, she's worried about something with questionable data that might be a problem in 100 years; the rest of us are worried about indesputable economics that will be a problem next month. Gas is $4/gal; milk is next. Everything is tied the price of oil, and people need some relief.
But Speaker Pelosi, like many Democrats, says that drilling wouldn't affect the price of oil or gas for at 10 years (it used to be 5 and gets longer all the time). So it was with some giggling I read about the rejection letter a new study received from the journal of the International Association for Energy Economics. The study says that opening more drilling now, even when the oil is not yet available, will lower prices now.
The editors responded with a polite everybody already knows that:
"Basically, your main result (the present impact of an anticipated future supply change) is already known to economists (although perhaps not to the Democratic Policy Committee)."
But Madame Pelosi (and Harry Reid in the Senate) won't even let the question of drilling come up for debate, much less a vote.
However, she's telling embattled Democrats that they can run on drilling and blame her. This illustrates the problem with parties.
If you're conservative (or in this case just want lower gas prices) but vote for your local Democratic Congressman because "he's okay," you're also voting for Nancy Pelosi. As long as the Democratic party rules the House, she will never allow drilling to even come up for a vote. If you want more oil, you can't vote for your Democrat. To get rid of her, you have to get rid of him. Sorry, dude.