Graham's costly energy compromise

Our elected officials often speak of compromise. Sometimes they even cooperate to the nation's benefit. Generally, we approve of leaders who, when working to craft commonsense solutions, make principled compromises. But when compromise erodes and undermines principles, the public rightfully objects.

Yes, government officials are elected to demonstrate strong leadership. At times, this means making tough choices and taking unpopular stands. Abandoning one's principles altogether, however, is never acceptable.

We're seeing a case study in political compromise right now in South Carolina, as Sen. Lindsey Graham continues to shepherd cap and trade legislation through the Senate.

Graham's "great compromise" combines a job-killing cap and trade regime with what he claims is an increase in offshore energy exploration along the outer continental shelf (OCS). According to Graham, his energy plan would improve our energy security and independence.

Graham's claims are debatable. So too is whether or not the so-called "pros" of the deal Graham and Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry are crafting outweigh the "cons." Cap and trade aims make our most affordable and reliable energy resources more expensive. During the presidential campaign, then-candidate Barack Obama said cap and trade would cause electricity rates to "skyrocket."

Cap and trade represents the largest tax increase in American history. But with unemployment at 10.2 percent -- a 26-year high -- families, seniors on fixed-incomes and small businesses, now more than ever, cannot afford to pay even more for energy.

Independent energy experts and analysts agree that cap and trade will kill jobs and make America less competitive in the global economy. But for some reason, Sen. Graham believes he can secure enough carve outs, special interest carrots, and "green job" subsidies to broker a legislative deal on global warming, despite the fact South Carolinians would be left with even higher energy costs and fewer jobs.

Yes, Sen. Graham says he demands increased offshore drilling as one leg of the legislative stool. And he should fight for expanded access to domestic, job-creating energy that can be safely recovered offshore. Expanding offshore energy exploration could create more than 12,000 good-paying jobs and generate millions of dollars for South Carolina's struggling economy. Increasing supplies of homegrown energy will also help drive down and stabilize the price we all pay at the pump.

There is only one problem with Sen. Graham's newfound benevolence towards drilling in the OCS: he's a year too late. When oil shattered record highs in the summer of 2008, Washington reacted accordingly. The outdated congressional and presidential bans on offshore energy development were finally lifted.

In fact, so much of the OCS is now open that the plan Sen. Graham has mentioned would actually take offshore exploration backwards -- it would disallow drilling in 78 percent of the OCS, as opposed to the 85 percent currently available.

The only hurdle still standing between the American people and huge supplies of recoverable homegrown energy reserves offshore is the U.S. Interior Department, which continues to slow-walk the leasing process. So if Sen. Graham believes offshore energy production is so critical to our long-term energy security -- and it is -- why isn't he working tirelessly to convince the Obama administration to move forward with a common-sense offshore energy leasing program?

Sen. Graham is agreeing, at least rhetorically, to support cap and trade -- a policy that could increase electricity bills by over 50 percent, raise prices at the pump over 25 percent and kill 2.4 million American jobs -- in return for even less access to American oil and gas reserves offshore and an increase in nuclear power.

He could convince his Senate colleagues to combine cap and trade with a pot of gold for every South Carolinian and we would still face higher and more unstable energy prices, lose American jobs, thwart economic growth and irreparably damage our nation's ability to compete internationally.

This, and cap and trade, are a compromise that our South Carolina, and our nation, could do without.

Thomas J. Pyle is the president of the American Energy Alliance, a Washington, D.C., based advocacy group.