INSIGHT: Next US president will be one of three

07 February 2008 10:13  [Source: ICIS news]

By Joe Kamalick

 

WASHINGTON (ICIS news)--Now that the number of US presidential contenders has narrowed to three short-listed candidates - Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and Republican John McCain - it’s appropriate to see where each stands on issues crucial to chemicals producers and business in general.

 

First, some might reasonably argue that while Senator John McCain of Arizona is now the Republican frontrunner, the contest for that party’s nomination is by no means over. 

 

That is to some extent true, but unless McCain gets struck by lightning it is extremely unlikely that either of the other two Republican contenders, former governors Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, can overtake McCain to seize the nomination.

 

As a result of this week’s Republican primary elections in 21 states, McCain has expanded his total of dedicated delegates to the Republican convention to 613, Romney has raised his delegates count to 269 and Huckabee has jumped to 190.

 

However, with 613 delegates already in his pocket, McCain has 51.5% of the 1,191 convention votes needed to win the party’s nomination as its presidential candidate. 

 

In the Democrats’ nomination contest, New York Senator Clinton emerged with 812 delegates while Illinois Senator Obama expanded his delegate count to 720.

 

Clinton’s delegate total equals 40% of the total of 2,025 delegates needed to capture the Democrat Party’s nomination.  Obama now holds a 35.5% share of that goal. 

 

Conceivably, in the remaining Democrat primaries, either senator could take the lead - but just now their contest is too close to call.

 

So, one of these three - Clinton, McCain or Obama - will be the next US president. 

 

Below, each candidate’s position on key issues is outlined, based on campaign policies and speeches available on their official websites along with analysis provided by the US Chamber of Commerce and the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association (SOCMA).

 

ENERGY: This issue is crucial to US chemical producers, which are heavily dependent on natural gas as a feedstock, and a broad array of other manufacturers who use gas as an energy source.

 

Clinton would eliminate tax incentives that US energy companies now have for exploration and development, raise production royalties on public lands and oblige producers to invest in alternative energy projects. She is opposed to expanded oil and gas drilling in the resource-rich Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and any further federal support for nuclear power. She wants the country’s utility companies to produce 25% of their electricity output from renewable sources such as wind, solar and geothermal by 2025. Clinton would set a goal of 60bn gal/year of biofuels production by 2030 (compared with 2007 bioethanol output of some 7bn gal/year).

 

Obama similarly is opposed to more drilling in the ANWR and wants electric power to be 25% renewable by 2025. Also like Clinton, Obama’s energy policy is focused on conservation, improved efficiency and rapid and extensive acceleration of biofuels production to 60bn gal/year by 2030. He said he would use federal funding and tax incentives to ensure widespread commercial-scale production of cellulosic ethanol by 2013. With these policies and energy efficiency and conservation plans, he wants to reduce US oil consumption by 35% or 10m bbls/day by 2030.

 

McCain also is opposed to drilling in the ANWR but he supports exploration and development of vast US oil and gas resources in outer continental shelf (OCS) areas now closed to drilling - providing there is coastal state support. He backs improved energy efficiency plans, such as higher automobile fuel standards, and he advocates market-based policies to accelerate advanced energy technologies, such as more nuclear power.

 

ENVIRONMENT: The US chemicals sector boasts of having lowered its emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) more than any other industry, but chemical companies worry that new government-mandated environmental policies would cause them harm, not least by raising power costs and increasing demand and pricing for natural gas.

 

Clinton supports a cap and trade system that would cut US GHG emissions by 80% below 1990 levels by 2050 and require industry to purchase emissions permits through an auction. She wants to raise average US automobile engine efficiency standards to 55 miles/gallon (mpg) by 2030 compared with the new current standard of 35 mpg set for 2020. Clinton wants to require chemical companies to prove that their products are safe before they are introduced into the market - the precautionary principle - and she backed legislation to revive a special tax on chemical firms to support Superfund remediation of contaminated sites.

 

Obama here too has policy goals very similar to Clinton’s, supporting a cap and trade mandate with permits auctions and GHG reductions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. He would raise automobile fuel efficiency to 50 mpg by 2025 and wants the US to work within the UN to enlist all major GHG-emitting nations in combating global warming. Both Clinton and Obama cite their energy efficiency and conservation policies (above) as factors in improving the environment.

 

McCain has sponsored legislation for a mandatory cap and trade system and says that while global warming cannot be ignored it should be approached with common sense policies to limit GHG emissions by harnessing market forces and, as in his energy policy, increasing use of nuclear power. He would bring the US into the Kyoto climate treaty if China and India agreed to participate. McCain did not cast a vote on the energy bill passed by Congress in late 2007 that, among other things, raised the auto fuel efficiency standard to 35 mpg and set a new biofuels mandate of 36bn gal/year by 2022.

 

CHEMICAL SECURITY: The US Department of Homeland Security has begun implementation of the nation’s first federal mandate for controlling anti-terrorism security at high-risk chemical facilities, the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS). However, new legislation pending in Congress would expand that mandate, and the next president could have broad impact on how that legislation is completed.

 

Clinton was an original co-sponsor of chemical site security legislation favoured by Democrats but not fully reflected in the 2006 CFATS statute engineered by the then-majority Republicans in Congress. She supports an expanded chemical facility security measure that would include a federal mandate to impose inherently safer technology (IST) as part of security requirements at production sites.

 

Obama also sponsored chemical site security legislation and shares Clinton’s support for mandated IST requirements as part of site security enforcement.

 

McCain voted against several chemical site security legislative proposals, according to SOCMA. McCain’s security policies focus more on maintaining strong US intelligence and military forces to uncover and combat terrorist plots before they are launched, and he supports a commitment of resources “to protect critical infrastructure and our borders against attack”.

 

On broader issues, such as taxes, trade and healthcare, Clinton and Obama again have much in common. 

 

Both Clinton and Obama want to let the Bush administration’s 2001 and 2003 personal and business tax reductions expire in 2010 and use that increased revenue to support an unspecified healthcare programme. Obama would raise capital gains taxes and retain the so-called death tax. McCain would make the Bush tax cuts permanent, would exempt most estates from the death tax and opposes any increase in capital gains or other taxes.

 

On trade, Clinton and Obama both voted against the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and opposed extending the president’s trade promotion authority (formerly known as fast-track trade authority). Clinton wants a “time-out” for new trade deals and joins Obama in supporting tougher environmental and labour standards in future trade agreements.  McCain has supported CAFTA and all trade deals negotiated by the Bush administration, and he opposes using trade agreements to impose labour and environmental standards on trading partners.

 

The US will select a new president in the 4 November 2008 national elections.

 

By: Joe Kamalick
+1 713 525 2653

For the latest chemical news, data and analysis that directly impacts your business sign up for a free trial to ICIS news - the breaking online news service for the global chemical industry.

Get the facts and analysis behind the headlines from our market leading weekly magazine: sign up to a free trial to ICIS Chemical Business.

Printer Friendly