Yes, the United States should actively pursue the ability to become energy independent. Notice how I said the ability and not to ultimately go through. We talked before about the large amount of political influence we gain buying oil as well as the necessity for oil price and checkpoint security. These tie into our decision of staying non independent and the reading “Making Sense of ’Energy Independence'” definitely bases its opinion heavily on staying that way but makes one key flaw. The opposing argument doesn’t actually want full independence only the ability to do so which is a much more costly threat. Republicans preach about the jobs the industry will create and opportunity it will create, but the deeper strength their aiming for is pressure on the global-economic status of the country.
Micro-economics has taught us through trading we can create more in unison with other countries then independently through trade even if they are third world country status through comparative advantage. Meaning trading with these countries we get both political and economic perks but adding in the threat of independence prevents another recession like in 1973. The reading points out that even US prices went up in 73 when we only were 1/3 reliant on outsourced oil, but we have policy and job security that would prevent this especially with the ever-increasing movement for natural, clean power. Additionally, we get 1/3 of our oil from land locked countries Mexico and Canada. Untimely, with true energy security, we gain a political tool and the ability to diversify on the oil market as both a producer and consumer.
In conclusion, both sides of the argument want alliance with the international system but we want to still hold a form of power and leverage and should seek energy interdependence to create a long term stable market. Focusing on letting competition do its thing and not allowing international groups to lobby creating big highly politicized policy. While continually focusing on the environmental concerns.
As a side note we talked about states signing their sovereignty in the lecture. I’ve always believed in states rights so if anyone has a counter argument Id love to hear it.
Ethan C Zimmerman
Arizona State University
