"Current American energy policy is a recipe for catastrophe because is designed to fill what will be a growing gap between the amount of oil we want to use and the decreasing supply that will be available as a result of peak oil…We should take steps to transition to a far more efficient and sustainable use of energy."

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, The Legal Times, June 12, 2006

"A discussion of fuel economy standards is a better approach, or anyway it's better late than never. After all, if fuel economy standards had been raised a decade ago, less of this flurry of activity would be necessary today."

The Washington Post, April 29, 2006

"Again, if [Bush] were completely honest, the president would tell Americans that the main reason fuel prices are higher in this country is because demand is growing -- and one reason for growing demand is that people drive inefficient cars. They drive inefficient cars because public policy, long shaped by the president and by Congress, has made it advantageous to do so. Until that changes, little else will."

The Washington Post, April 27, 2006

"Bush's plan to suspend deposits into the National Petroleum Reserve and to push for more lenient pollution standards would have little impact. Just as useless are calls for a tax on oil company profits and the partisan finger-pointing of many in Congress."

USA Today, April 27, 2006

“Most observers agree, however, that with the House Republicans deeply divided on the topic, the Senate's ANWR amendment will probably dies the same death it did last year. One Republican staff member called it the Groundhog Day amendment.” 

Time, March 27, 2006