Thirty plus years ago, in 1978, California state senator H.L. (Bill) Richardson) wrote a small book with the intriguing title, “What Makes You Think We Read The Bills?” in which he describes how politicians are actually elected by a very small percentage of the voters in their district, about one or two percent, and as a result, officeholders really listen only to that small constituency. The title of Senator Richardson’s book also aptly describes the way the U.S. Congress functions today in writing and voting on new legislation.

The surge of bills that have been disgorged by Congress since Obama was elected further illustrates Richardson’s thesis, as a succession of major new laws have been approved without being read by most of the legislators who voted on them.

Legislation that moves through Congress without any legislative language is called a “vapor bill.” The term was derived from the word Vaporware, an expression coined during the dot-com era to describe all-singing-all-dancing software that had not yet been written.

A recent example of a “vapor bill” is the Senate’s 2,000 plus page Health Care Reform act, which had no legislative language and was amended in the Senate Finance Committee, where none of the committee members had read the actual bill. At the time, the Washington Post reported that “President Barack Obama’s push for a sweeping health care overhaul is going to be voted upon in the Senate Finance Committee…and nobody has read the actual bill yet.” The Washington Post also headlined, “Senate Finance Committee Releases Its Final Text of Health-Care Bill,” but if you clicked on a link to the “Bill” hat was referenced in the Post article, all you got was a 262 page description of the legislation…no actual legislative language (was) being given to Senators, Staff or the American Public.”

Aside from the obvious inappropriateness of having legislators vote on bills they have not read, one of the most significant problems with vapor bills is that the Congressional Office of Management and Budget (OMB) can’t “score” the legislation, that is, estimate what such bills are likely to cost. The fiscal impact of any bill cannot be evaluated without the actual legislative language, and the health care bill that was approved by Congress was over 2,000 pages of what was essentially nothing more than an outline of the proposed law.

Vapor bills are not submitted to Congress by accident. They have actually been a key element of the current Democratic Leadership’s strategy, which has been to put incomplete proposed legislation before the members of Congress without having to disclose the details, to make it possible for just a few insiders to write the actual language of the bill behind closed doors.

Having successfully shepherded the president’s health care plan through Congress with a vapor bill, the Democratic leadership continued this strategy for other major legislation, such as the A.I.G. Insurance Bonus Bill and more recently the new Banking and Finance legislation. Lawmakers were also given just hours to examine the $789 billion stimulus plan, sweeping climate-change legislation and a multi-billion dollar bailout package before final votes were taken.

For example, the stimulus bill was 1,100 pages long and made available to Congress and the public just 13 hours before lawmakers voted on it. The bill failed to provide the promised help to the job market, and there was outrage when it was discovered that the legislation included an amendment allowing American International Group, a bailout recipient, to give out millions in employee bonuses.

Four major pieces of legislation have been passed by Congress using the same procedure:

• House Energy and Global Warming Bill: passed June 26, 2009, 1,200 pages. Available online just 15 hours before vote.
• $789 billion stimulus bill, passed June 26, 2009, 1,100 pages. Available online just 13 hours before debate.
• $700 billion financial service sector rescue package, 169 pages, passed October 3, 2008. Available online just 29 hours before vote.
• USA Patriot domestic surveillance bill, passed October 23, 2001. Not available to the public before debate.

The Sunlight Foundation, which lobbies Congress to bring more transparency to government, has begun attempting to get Congress to post bills online 72 hours before lawmakers vote on them. Lisa Rosenberg has noted that “It would give the public a chance to really digest and understand what is in the bill and communicate whether that is a good or a bad thing while there is still time to fix it.”

Good suggestion, but as the oft-quoted saying advises: “Don’t hold your breath.”

© 2010 Harris R. Sherline, All Rights Reserved

Read more of Harris Sherline’s commentaries on his blog at www.opinionfest.com

The recent oil drilling disaster in the Gulf of Mexico has once again brought cries from modern Luddites to stop all drilling for oil everywhere in the United States. And, President Obama quickly responded by closing down all drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska, to prevent other potential disasters in the future.

Never mind that almost every nation throughout the world will continue to drill, including (in no particular order): 17 nations in Africa; Australia; New Zealand; 15 nations in Europe (including the UK, Norway, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany and Russia); the Middle East (Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates and Yemen); 31 of the 50 U.S. states; Canada and Mexico; 15 South American countries, including Brazil (which the U.S. recently helped finance).

You can be sure none of these countries will stop offshore drilling for oil because the U.S. has shut down any or all of its own oil drilling activity in any particular area.

However, by adopting another “feel good” policy in a critical activity, the U.S. will only make itself more dependent on other oil producing nations, most of which don’t regulate their own drilling nearly as strictly as we do and many of which hate us. Thus, we will reduce or stop drilling and increase the amount of oil we must buy from other nations, thereby making us increasingly dependent on oil sources that we cannot regulate, to say nothing of the effect that have on the prices of gasoline and other oil based products.

Such kneejerk policies only serve to make our enemies stronger. While we hand them the rope with which to hang us, they must be laughing at our stupidity. We make them richer and put them in a position to dictate our foreign and domestic policies, setting the prices we pay for oil and the many products that are made from it, while we pat ourselves on the back for saving the earth.

According to the California Energy Commission, “One barrel contains 42 gallons of crude oil. The total volume of products made from crude oil based origins is 48.43 gallons on average – 6.43 gallons greater than the original 42 gallons of crude oil…due to the additional other petroleum products…that are added to the refining process to create the final products:”

• Finished Motor Gasoline, 51.4% = 24.89 gallons
• Distillate Fuel Oil, 15.3% = 7.41 gallons
• Jet Fuel, 12.3% = 5.96 gallons
• Still Gas, 5.4% = 2.62 gallons
• Marketable Coke, 5.0% = 2.42 gallons
• Residual Fuel Oil, 3.3% = 1.60 gallons
• Liquefied Refiner Gas, 2.8% = 1.36 gallons
• Asphalt and Road Oil, 1.7% = 0.82 gallons
• Other Refined Products, 1.5% = 0.73 gallons
• Lubricants, 0.9% = 0.43 gallons

“Additionally, California gasoline contains approximately 5.7% by volume of ethanol…that brings the total processing gain to 7.59 gallons…”

From another perspective, the price of gas is comprised of the following costs: Crude oil, 72.7%; 11.5%; Refining, 10%; Distribution, 5.8% and Taxes, 11.5%. (“Paying Through The Hose, Santa Barbara News Press, page B4, May 27, 2008).

Over half of each barrel is used to make such products as (in no particular order): solvents, ink, floor wax, ballpoint pens, football cleats, upholstery, sweaters, boats, insecticides, bicycle tires, sports car bodies, nail polish, fishing lures, dresses, tires, golf bags, perfumes, cassettes, dishwasher parts, tool boxes, shoe polish, motorcycle helmets, caulking, petroleum jelly, transparent tape, CD players, faucet washers, antiseptics, clotheslines, curtains, food preservatives, basketballs, soap, vitamin capsules, antihistamines, purses, shoes, dashboards, cortisone, deodorant, footballs, putty, dyes, panty hose, refrigerant, percolators, life jackets, rubbing alcohol, linings, skis, TV cabinets, shag rugs, electrician’s tape, tool racks, car battery cases, epoxy, paint, mops, slacks, insect repellent, oil filters, umbrellas, yarn, fertilizers, hair coloring, roofing, toilet seats, fishing rods, lipstick, denture adhesive, linoleum, ice cube trays, synthetic rubber, speakers, plastic wood, electric blankets, glycerin, tennis rackets, rubber cement, fishing boots, dice, nylon rope, candles, trash bags, house paint, water paints, hand lotion, roller skates, surf boards, shampoo, wheels, paint rollers, shower curtains, guitar strings, luggage, aspirin, safety glasses, antifreeze, football helmets, awnings, eyeglasses, clothes, toothbrushes, ice chests, footballs, combs, CDs & DVDs, paint brushes, detergents, vaporizers, balloons, sun glasses, tents, heart valves, crayons, parachutes, telephones, enamel, pillows, dishes, cameras, anesthetics, artificial turf, artificial limbs, bandages, dentures, model cards, folding doors, hair curlers, cold cream, movie film, soft contact lenses, drinking cups, fan belts, car enamel, shaving cream, ammonia, refrigerators, golf balls, toothpaste. And, this is just a short list.
Americans consume petroleum products at a daily rate of three-and-a-half gallons of oil and over 250 cubic feet of natural gas per capita. But, as noted above, petroleum is not just used for fuel.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration reports that the total U.S. petroleum consumption of liquid fuels and other petroleum products averaged 20.7 million barrels per day in 2007 – about 24% of total world production. (“Short-Term Energy Outlook,” May 6, 2008).

So, while our political leaders shut down as much offshore drilling as they can, they seem to be OK with drilling in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Indonesia, Mexico, Venezuela, Russia and the former Soviet Union, China, etc. Why aren’t they as concerned about polluting the environment in the rest of the world? Or are residents of the good ol’ U.S. of A the only people in this world who should be protected from eeeevil capitalists and big business? Besides, aren’t we being told that pollution spreads through the atmosphere? So, are we in America also at risk from the effects of oil drilling in other parts of the world where there are only minimal, sometimes no environmental controls?

In 1973 we imported 34.8% of our oil, today it’s over 60%.

Perhaps those who oppose all drilling for oil everywhere will tell us which products they would like to do without.

Opponents of unfettered oil and coal usage extol the merits of alternative sources of energy and conservation – and they are right, to a point. Free market thinkers, who seem to believe the search for oil and independence from world energy politics must go forward with no holds barred or we run the risk of becoming a third-world country – may also have a point. But, above all, the American public should stop allowing themselves to be blindly led down either path – both of which have the potential of ending in a national disaster. What America needs at this point is more reality-based cooperation and long-term planning and less sloganeering and finger pointing.

As for President Obama’s claim that easy to access oil is becoming increasingly scarce, Heritage’s David Kreutzer notes that “billions of barrels of ‘easily accessible’ oil have been turned into ‘impossible to access’ oil by federal regulations and moratoria that block any access.” That includes oil off the coast of California and 10 billion barrels of oil in ANWR.

Of course if we drill off the coast of California there will be oil leakage. But, Santa Barbara has experienced natural oil seepage washing up on its beaches since long before there were any oil wells.

Shutting down all drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico is not the answer to avoiding risk, just as not building any new nuclear power plants or stopping all coal mining will avoid all risk. It’s impossible to avoid all risk. There is no such thing as no risk, notwithstanding kneejerk reactions to the contrary.

© 2010 Harris R. Sherline, All Rights Reserved

Read more of Harris Sherline’s commentaries on his blog at www.opinionfest.com