http://www.capmarkets.com/ViewFile.asp?ID1=250483&ID2=246878081&ssid=2&directory=11758&bm=0&filename=ENER0721_spec.pdf

That's from Stanford Group, and it's commentary and predictions on what energy legislation is in the works and which of it actually has a chance of getting passed without heavy dilution and compromise.

I don't know nearly enough to make the arguments I do (if you want to hear someone that knows what he's talking about, listen to Amory Lovins), but, apparently, I'm not afraid to share my in-process opinions and pretend they're more than just half-formed.  The following is an email I sent to some Acorn people in reaction to the Stanford Group pdf:

All these Washington proposals are totally ridiculous.  The US government shouldn't be wasting its time tinkering to try to lower oil prices.

A. High oil prices are good for the world in the long term.  They spur both technological innovation and responsible consumer behavior. 

2. If this were a developing economy in danger of starving, then MAYBE it's the government's role to keep energy prices artificially low.  We shouldn't forget, however, that most people living in the US are RIDICULOUSLY rich compared to people south of the equator and elsewhere in the developing world.  In the US, we can cope.  We can spend less, consume less.  It's not a big deal.  Yes, it'll mess with our consumption driven economy, but, honestly, wouldn't it be smart for us to rethink a little bit just how much we want our economic well being tied to Tickle Me Elmo sales?  Again, long term, I think it would be great if we could disrupt and adjust this spend spend spend borrow borrow borrow economy.  

D. If the government wants to keep the economy cooking (and the tax revenue rolling in), how about investing in the old and busted infrastructure?  Build a little efficiency into the system.  Get your cargo from point A to point B on well greased wheels along friction free tracks; don't up the horsepower and force it through the mountain.

And, now that the A, 2, D list is over, and I can no longer continue my obscure reference to Home Alone, I'll have to just go with a dash to lead into my fourth point.

-I don't think tinkering will affect anything.  Speculation tinkering.  Drilling tinkering.  Gas tax holiday tinkering.  It's all band aids.  Band aids trying to cure a chronic stomachache (or lung infection, if you want to add some morbidity).

Clearly not the most diplomatic tone I've ever taken.  But oh well.  I think there's legitimate reason to be frustrated with the US government and their instant gratification approaches to lawmaking.  Though, from their perspective, they don't really have much choice.  If they make their constituents make any compromises in the short term, I'm sure opportunistic political opponents will rise up come campaign time, and see how well they can pander their ways into office.

Democracy.  Total bummer sometimes.