THE OBAMA administration has launched an aggressive media campaign to counter the perception that the US president is responsible for rising petrol costs, a dangerous development in his re-election campaign.
The price of petrol has risen 30 cents in the past month to an average $3.80 (€2.90) per gallon. As Barack Obama notes, the main reason for the increase is “loose talk” of war in the Middle East.
That has not stopped Republican presidential hopefuls from blaming Mr Obama’s policies, particularly his veto of a Canada-to-Texas pipeline.
The other cause for the rise in prices has been the removal of one million barrels per day from world markets due to circumstances beyond Mr Obama’s control: Japan’s increased reliance on oil after closing down its nuclear power plants, and rising demand in China; as well as lower production in Sudan, Yemen, Syria and Libya because of upheavals there.
Public dissatisfaction showed in a poll published yesterday by the New York Times and CBS News, showing that Mr Obama’s approval rating dropped from 50 per cent to 41 per cent in the past month.
Two other polls published on Monday showed a less significant decline, but the trend in all polls was downward.
The fall in approval ratings was particularly sharp among low-income voters, who are Mr Obama’s strongest constituency, and who are harmed most by rising fuel costs.
Fifty-four per cent of respondents said the president could do a lot to control petrol prices, while 36 per cent said it was outside his power.
The US economy has added some 200,000 jobs monthly for the past three months, helping to allay voter concern about high unemployment. But that positive development has been counterbalanced by attacks on Mr Obama’s energy policies.
“As long as gas prices are going up, people are going to feel like I’m not doing enough,” Mr Obama told a local television station in Florida on Monday, in one of eight interviews he gave on energy policy that were concentrated in swing states.
“I understand that,” the president continued, “because people get hurt when they are going to that gas station and seeing those prices rise every day.”
The White House publicised its Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future, drawn up by six federal agencies and showing a 10 per cent decrease in US dependence on imported oil last year.
The same report says the Obama administration has increased drilling on federal land by 200,000 barrels per day compared to the last two years of the Bush administration.
Mr Obama also boasts of having set auto fuel efficiency standards of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025 and of approving 29 renewable energy projects, including 16 solar, eight geothermal and five wind.
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney sought to undermine the White House offensive in classic Romney fashion: by sub-contracting the task to his policy director, Lanhee Chen, who issued an academic-style three-page rebuttal.
Mr Chen contradicted the government report, arguing that in fact the Obama administration had decreased leases and permits for oil exploration on federal land, and that off-shore production had declined.
“Oil dependence is declining,” Mr Chen agreed. “As [Mr Obama’s] Energy Information Administration points out, the ‘chief’ reason for declining dependence is ‘a significant contraction in consumption’ that ‘reflects the downturn in the underlying economy’. At least that is something he can take responsibility for.”
Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich criticised Mr Obama’s energy policy at a Gulf Coast Energy Summit in Mississippi.
The extra zeros on the petrol pump meter stood for the “O” in Obama, Mr Santorum said.
Mr Gingrich has been the most vociferous critic of Mr Obama’s energy policy, repeatedly mocking the president’s mentions of algae as an alternative fuel and promising to bring the cost of petrol down to $2.50 a gallon by dramatically increasing US production.
Mr Obama told interviewers there was “no silver bullet” to bring petrol prices down. Mr Gingrich’s promise was a lie, he said: “Nobody believes that. They know that’s just politics. Anybody who says we can get gas down to two bucks a gallon just isn’t telling the truth.”
“Newt Gingrich has the White House running scared and running on empty,” was the riposte from the Gingrich campaign.
“Polls show the American people reject President Obama’s excuses and fantasy solutions like algae.”
