AHC: Ralph Nader leds citizen movement on energy policy in 1973 & ‘74?

1_46e49233d6c8fd741d24cd18d80f3465.jpg

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/1974-nader-ralph-activist-edward-cole-424927284

Okay, so a younger, more centrist Nader.

And it is amazing that the U.S. Congress took so long to enact effective energy policy, in large part due to entrenched interests.

Tell me how Nader leads a citizen movement to cut through this! :p
 
1_46e49233d6c8fd741d24cd18d80f3465.jpg

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/1974-nader-ralph-activist-edward-cole-424927284

Okay, so a younger, more centrist Nader.

And it is amazing that the U.S. Congress took so long to enact effective energy policy, in large part due to entrenched interests.

Tell me how Nader leads a citizen movement to cut through this! :p

I think it's an interesting idea, but could you provide a little more background on this? Did Nader ever actually attempt to lead an energy movement? Was the idea suggested to him, or written about at the time?
 
Well, the issue of energy reform was one in which the big idea of the day, nuclear energy, was about to get a pretty nasty punch in the nose with Three Mile Island. Of course, as France has proven, it works, but that isn't always what matters at the time. Nuclear plants, after all, require a ton of fixed investment to get up and running, and in the cash depressed mid 70s, that is a tough sell.

The most successful energy reform you could probably push through would be an end to energy rationing. People in general hate rationing, and in the 70s, as you start to get a more individualistic and less collectivist culture in the United States, a politician pushing for an end to energy rationing via regulation would be popular. You saw this with the populist anti-tax message in California that won referendums, for example.

However, at the same time, Canada was having a pretty nasty fight over energy on the horizon. Perhaps a movement to deepen energy trade ties with Canada could arise in both countries.
 
. . . The most successful energy reform you could probably push through would be an end to energy rationing. People in general hate rationing, and in the 70s, as you start to get a more individualistic and less collectivist culture in the United States, . . .
We did not have WWII-style direct rationing. If you're talking about regional allocations based on historic norms, "new" vs. "old" oil being treated differently, etc, all amounting to the same thing, okay, there's a case to be made.

I do agree price is the most direct way to communicate the value of a resource.

But after the Oct. ‘73 OPEC embargo in which the price of oil quadrupled over a couple of months from about $3 a barrel to about $12 — holy cow, we’re going to have problems even if we have the smoothest functioning price system in the entire universe!

And where I part company with a purist capitalist approach . . . Well, I'm very open to things like John Anderson's 50-50 plan in 1980. A 50 cent additional tax on each gallon of gasoline, but at the same time a 50% reduction of Social Security FICA tax up to a certain threshold. Also, around (?) 2009, there was actually a cash-for-clunkers program, I don't know the details, although it was advocated by economist Alan Blinder who had also been vice-chair of the Federal Reserve. I’m open to such approaches because I want avoid so much of the burden falling upon persons currently low-income.

We may or may not agree on some of this.

Where I suspect we might more agree would be the role of “captured” regulatory agencies, the frequent reality of govt. as the junior partner of industry, and the role of long-time politicians such Sen. Russell Long (D-Louisiana), who by the early 1970s had been there forever and hell, yes, was going to guard and protect Louisiana oil interests.

---------------------------------------------------------

On Oct 17, 1973, OPEC decided to (1) embargo the U.S. for its support and resupply of Israel during the Yom Kippur War, (2) reduce overall supply by at least 5% and an additional 5% for each month Israel continues to occupy the West Bank, Golan Heights, and Sinai Peninsula, and (3) continue to supply "friendly" nations at monthly averages for another nine months.
https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2196&context=jil
(top of page 260)

Now, they were still selling on the world market.

And, at another meeting on Nov. 4, 1973, OPEC voted to ramp up the pressure by reducing supply a full 25%, and reducing an additional 5% Dec. 1 and each month thereafter.

—-

On March 18, 1974, at a meeting in Vienna, OPEC voted to end the embargo, but to still keep the $11.65 price per barrel.
 
Last edited:
Ralph-Raiders-2-330.jpg

Ralph Nader and his “Raiders” – law, medical and engineering students – on the steps of U.S. Capitol in late summer 1969.

https://www.pophistorydig.com/topics/naders-raiders-1968-1974/

Naders-Raiders-FTC-280.jpg







In the late '60s and early '70s, "Nader's Raiders" were a big deal.

1) They may have forgotten that the coin of the realm as far as effective activism is to ever-so-slightly understate your case, and

2) May not have followed what Martin Luther King, Jr, Ralph Abernathy, and SCLC did with Birmingham in '63 and Selma '65 which is, yes, have your big programmatic endeavors, but at the same time, be willing to majorly shift gears based on what's happening in the real world.
 
Last edited:
Top