As Long As The World of Politics Remains Machiavellian, It’s Foolish To Hope for Government Support of a Sustainable Energy Policy

Niccolò Machiavelli was born on this day in 1469, a man best remembered for his work called “The Prince,” a set of suggestions for heads of state that can be summarized as follows, according to the Writer’s Almanac:

(Machiavelli) wrote that morality was irrelevant when it came to running a state. He didn’t advocate evil for its own sake, and believed rulers should stick to the good whenever possible. But he also said they should be willing to perform evil acts when it became necessary to hold onto their power and maintain the security of the state.

Note that this is essentially what we have today in the U.S. Congress: people whose actions are entirely unrelated to the welfare of the people they represent.

I’m reminded of a conversation I had with Dave Belote a few years ago, a gentleman who had enjoyed a long and distinguished military career. He was the commander of Nellis Air Force Base (sitting on 14,000 acres and employing over 12,000 people) before trading in his uniform for a suit, and working at senior levels in the Department of Defense. He spoke at a conference on renewable energy finance, and talked specifically about the U.S. military as a customer for renewable energy, during which he referred to the fact that certain Congress-people are dead-set against clean energy.

After his presentation, I asked him what he thought laid behind this. He told me, “There are few people in government who fairly and honestly look at the world in terms of what’s best for the people. Almost all look through the lens of the interests of the people who got them elected.”

Sadly, his observation here is not mere opinion. Here are a few facts that came from a recent presentation that Harvard Law professor and Mayday founder Lawrence Lessig gave to a large and earnest audience.

• According to surveys of thousands of Americans, we almost unanimously agree on two things: a) money has too much influence on politics, and b) there is nothing that can be done to change this.

• 5.4 million Americans (a little under 2%) made cash donations to a politician in the last election, but the top 100 gave more than the bottom 4.75 million.

• A study from Princeton University shows an almost 100% correlation between Congressional votes and the interests of these Top 100.

• The same study shows that the decisions that Congress makes on the variety of issues are completely independent of the will of the people. Whether 20%, 40%, 60%, or 80% of the electorate supports a certain subject, this has no statistical bearing whatsoever on how the Senate and the House will vote on the matter.

As I wrote when I first pointed this out:

My hat’s off to Lessig. A brilliant and extremely accomplished human being, he could be doing anything he wants to with the rest of his life, but he’s chosen to restore meaning to our democracy, which means extracting corruption from U.S. politics, a task not unlike pulling half an antelope out of a lion’s mouth.

Yet, unless he (or someone else) is successful in addressing this task, we’re very foolish to think that a sane energy policy (or any of the other goodies we all want) is in the offing.