Fill out the brief form below for access to the free report.
Bernard L. Weinstein, National Journal As with most issues, Congress is currently gridlocked when it comes to energy and environmental policy. Perhaps this is a good state of affairs. The last time we had an explicit energy policy was in the late 1970s during the administration of President Jimmy Carter. In the aftermath of the OPEC embargo, President Carter argued that reducing America’s dependence on imported oil was the “moral equivalent of war.” His energy advisors then fashioned the nation’s first comprehensive energy policy that turned out to be a set of laws that distorted the marketplace and wasted billions of taxpayer dollars on impractical and uneconomical alternatives to conventional energy supplies. The goals of the “National Energy Plan (NEP)” were to mandate efficiency in energy use, limit prices increases of all fuels, and allocate allegedly scarce energy resources to their perceived highest and best use. For example, natural gas was banned as a fuel for power generation or industrial boilers. (Not surprisingly, the coal industry was a big fan of the “fuel use act.”) Sometimes referred to as a "travesty in five acts," the NEP actually increased rather than decreased our dependence on foreign sources of supply. Read More
Bernard L. Weinstein is Associate Director of the Maguire Energy Institute and an Adjunct Professor of Business Economics in the Cox School of Business at Southern Methodist University. He has taught at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, the State University of New York, the University of Texas at Dallas, and the University of North Texas. He has authored or co-authored numerous books, monographs, and articles on the subjects of economic development, energy security, public policy, and taxation. His work has appeared in professional journals as well as the popular press. He earned an A.B. degree from Dartmouth College and an M.A. and a Ph.D. in economics from Columbia University.Full Bio
TARIFFIED: Trade Talk with Matthew Rooney
This week, trade relations between the U.S. and India are continuing to escalate. Earlier this month, the U.S. stopped granting India special trade privileges by taking away the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program, and India has responded by enforcing more tariffs of its own. The George W. Bush-SMU Economic Growth Initiative Director Matthew Rooney breaks down the trade conflict: For more information on trade groups and the global economy, visit www.bushcenter.org/scorecard.
How Trade Spreads Holiday Cheer
It is projected that the average American household will spend more than $1,000 during the holidays this year.
Deporting Salvadorans May Lead to Economic Decline
We should think carefully about a policy whose major impacts are likely to be reductions in employment and economic activity here at home, and increased instability and lawlessness along our borders.
Bush Institute's Laura Collins Talks Immigration on Good Morning Texas
Last week, Deputy Director of Economic Growth at the George. W. Bush Institute Laura Collins spoke with Good Morning Texas about immigration myths. During the interview, Collins had the opportunity to set the record straight and address common misconceptions about legal immigrants living in America today. The segment was inspired from facts released earlier this fall by the Bush Institute in the third edition of America's Advantage: A Handbook on Immigration and Economic Growth. Watch the full Good Morning Texas interview here.