< PREVIOUS ] [ 2001 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
As a practicing journalist, I receive leaked material from time to time. But since I am not well connected, the leaks usually concern some petty matter at the local courthouse, rather than national policy from the White House.
Thus I didn't know what to make of a document that was handed to me last week in a back alley by a trench-coated fellow with his hat pulled low. It appears to be an internal memorandum from Vice-President Dick Cheney's energy task force, and it was so informative that I felt compelled to share it:
#####
The main issue is developing an energy policy which will increase consumer demand and therefore the profits of our major campaign investors: the petroleum, coal and automotive industries.
Increased demand means increased prices, and most people
will not like that. However, if we keep telling them that
they will get a tax cut so that they can keep more of
their own money,
they may not notice that they've got
even less of their own money.
In general, though, our prospects are excellent.
Current patterns of suburban development require people to
drive hundreds of miles every week merely to work and shop.
The administration should encourage more such development,
and any local or regional efforts toward other development
patterns (i.e., the so-called New Urbanism
or
improved mass-transit systems) should be denounced as
social engineering.
A further advantage of the traditional American
extended opportunity development pattern
(anyone who
uses the Gore-Green word sprawl
will be immediately
dismissed) is that it devours nearby farmland, thereby
requiring that food be shipped ever greater distances, and
thus increasing revenues for our campaign investors.
The more trucks, and the more commuters, the greater the
pressure to build or expand highways -- and such
construction should inspire an economic turnaround. But we
must be careful not to let this be positioned as a
government spending program,
since our party is opposed
to such things.
Our spinmeisters should go to work on this right away. They have already been producing good results.
For instance, we have enjoyed some success in blaming environmentalists for the lack of domestic energy development during the past decade.
The truth is that world-wide demand was low, mostly on account of an Asian economic slump, which meant low prices and little possibility of a profit from energy exploration. Investors naturally put their money elsewhere, especially when dot-com start-ups looked so promising. But our people can hardly be critical of The Wisdom of The Market, and so we must launch an assault against the greenies.
Colorado Sen. Ben Campbell has already done some valuable work here with his implications that they're a threat to National Security, and we should assist him in any way possible. Granted, it is no simple matter to convincingly question the patriotism of people who want to preserve American resources, but that's why we're here -- to do the tough jobs.
Another spin angle involves the Bully Pulpit. Every
time an American child is seriously injured or killed while
walking or bicycling, the White House Press Office should
issue statements to the effect that this terrible
tragedy might have been prevented if the child's parents
had cared enough about the child's safety to transport the
child in a 5,000-pound Sport Utility Vehicle ...
Similar statements should be issued after any accidents or
incidents involving children on mass transit.
After several months of such statements, the President should demand that Congress pass the Extended Child Protection Act of 2002, wherein parents who refuse to transport their children in safe vehicles (two-ton minimum size) will be charged with felony child neglect.
The immediate benefits are obvious, and there are long-term gains as well, since impressionable children will not develop the bad habits of walking or cycling when they should be driving big gas-guzzlers and thereby supporting our campaign investors for decades to come.
The beauty of this approach is that no one will dare
criticize it, since it's to protect our children,
and experience has clearly shown that it is politically
safe to trample all over the Constitution, just as long it
is done to protect the children.
#####
As I mentioned earlier, this leaked memo came from a stranger, and I have no way of verifying its authenticity. It might have come from the White House, or it might have just been fabricated by some unemployable writer in some little mountain town.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 2001 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >