(3 of 3)
DC: Well, the fact of the matter is that we have to do both. There's no question, but we need to have adequate supplies of energy if we're going to have a fully functioning economy that meets the needs and desires of the American people for [an]ever-improving standard of living. At the same time, we have a strong national commitment to wanting to make sure that we pass on the environment to our kids and grandkids in better shape than we found it. But there's no reason in the world we can't do both. And an awful lot of the technology that's been developed in recent years, and I think will be developed in the future, is aimed specifically at allowing us to produce the energy we need while at the same time improving the environment.
If you go back and look at what's transpired with respect to the last several years in terms of our energy consumption, we've done a lot to reduce the pollutants coming into the atmosphere as a result of energy production. We've actually significantly increased our overall level of economic production. We've increased our consumption of energy. But at the same time we have reduced the amount of pollutants released into the atmosphere as a result of things already on the books and new technology. When we get into areas of meeting these energy needs, I think it's a false choice for us to say either we're going to have a clean environment or we're going to have adequate supplies of energy. I think there are folks out there who want to try to make that case. But it's increasingly difficult to make because our technology has gotten so good at allowing us to do both.
MW: During the campaign you emphasized how some places like West Virginia were left out of the winners column in the Clinton Administration. What are the politics of coal, in your view?
DC: Well, I think coal, from a political standpoint, is important partly for the consumers because it is one of the most affordable sources of energy we've got. Secondly there's a very large supply out there. We've got huge coal reserves in this country. And we know where they are, and we know how to develop them relatively cheaply. We've got the infrastructure there in terms of transport and so forth. At the same time, there are clearly a number of areas where we've gotten a number of jobs connected with the coal industry. People who are actively involved in that business in mining and transporting and processing the coal. So it does have important considerations there, but you know you wouldn't look at it purely in political terms. I think good politics is a sound energy policy, and that's what we intend to have.
AZ: One last point. Obviously, as you outlined when you began your remarks, this is not a softball situation; you've taken on a tough challenge because you feel it needs to be addressed. Going forward politically, what kind of a reception do you expect from Congress and the American Public? Are there going to be some controversial proposals coming out, what some people would describe as strong medicine?
DC: I think this is frankly the beginning of a debate that's likely to last for a long time. There isn't any one particular piece of legislation you can go pass and say, "There, we've solved that problem." What we're trying to do is to put together a set of governmental policies, and in many cases make certain that policies that are already in place are being implemented in a way that lets us move forward in terms of making sure that we've got the kind of energy supplies we're going to need in the future. I mean, look at California. California is a good example of how to get in trouble with unwise polices. We ended up there with an unwise regulatory scheme that created significant problems for the power industry. We ended up trying to maintain price controls on the consumer.
The ultimate outcome of course was that you had a 24% increase in demand and virtually no increase in the generating capacity over the last several years. So they lost the cushion they had, and now we get into a tough year like this year and all of a sudden they're faced with the possibility of rolling blackouts and power shortages. They could have a significant adverse economic consequence, not only for California but the country. So we know what happens when we don't do it right. And what we're trying to do is get our act together so to speak as a government and be able to move forward in terms of pursuing intelligent policies that give us the energy supplies we need but at the same time pays due regard to our legitimate concerns about making sure we take care of the environment. But we can do both.
MW: Mr. Vice President, is there anything you want to add?
DC: No, I think, as I say, I think we're off to a good start. It should be an interesting debate and dialogue. I find members of Congress are eager to join in at this point. And I think we'll have a good package.