What did we elect new leaders to do?  They will govern us, but to what end?  What do they understand is the purpose of government?  These questions are central to our ability to hold politicians accountable for the decisions they make over the next several years.

In the early 1600’s the political theorist, John Locke, who had a significant impact on shaping the thought of our Founding Fathers said that people without law are in a “State of Nature.”  Thomas Hobbes a social contract theorist advised that people in the “State of Nature” would “war every man against every man” and life would be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”  In the Federalist Paper #15, Alexander Hamilton comments, “Why has government been instituted at all? Because the passions of men will not conform to the dictates of reason and justice without constraint.”  Most people would agree with Hamilton that some form of law or government is preferable to anarchy.

The question then becomes what form of government is best?  Throughout history, many forms have been tried and re-tried with varying degrees of success.

Our Founding Fathers deliberately established our nation as a Republic, not a Democracy.  A Democracy starts with the foundational principle that the government gives rights and that a majority of the people (at least half-plus-one) voting will determine which rights are given and which rights are withheld from the people.

A Republic starts with the foundational principle that all rights are given by God and the government’s primary responsibility is to protect the God-given, unalienable rights of the people and to provide the liberty to exercise those rights.

Politics, according to Daniel Webster’s 1828 Dictionary is, “the science of government; that part of ethics which consists in the regulation and government of a nation or state, for the preservation of its safety and prosperity…and the protection of its citizens in their rights, with the preservation and improvement of their morals.”

Politics in modern America may be re-defined as; “the science of persuasive speech to manipulate the electorate by promises of enlarging entitlements and granting rights and paying for those entitlements by taxing the resources of those who produce them and redistributing them for the benefit of the many.”

In the Bible, Romans 13 lays out two fundamental purposes for civil government and for those who are appointed to positions of authority: 1) to punish evil, and 2) to condone what is good.  This is the basis for Webster to define politics as a part of ethics or the preservation of the morals of the people.

One of the unique things about our American form of government is that the government is designed to protect the rights we have received from God and to give us the liberty to exercise those rights as each individual sees fit. The purpose of our elected leaders is to protect our God-given rights for us, punish evil and preserve the good.

If our newly elected leaders aren’t doing what we elected them to do, when the next election rolls around, it will be time to elect different leaders that will.

Theory A, which most of us are familiar with, claims that oil is an organic “fossil fuel” created by decomposition of plants and dinosaurs over a long period of time.  This theory taught in most schools promotes the concept that “fossil fuel” deposits are limited in quantity and are found near the planet’s surface.  In fact, most Americans believe this theory without question.  Fossil fuels such as coal, petroleum and natural gas are referred to as non-renewable resources, meaning that they cannot be produced, grown or generated faster than their consumption rate.

Theory B, which is less known, claims that petroleum and natural gas are continuously generated by natural processes in the Earth’s magma. The theory that oil is abiotic in origin has over 50 years of intense scientific inquiry and predicts deep oil reserves, refillable oil fields, migratory oil systems and spontaneous venting of gas and oil on the surface of the earth.

If Theory A is correct, have you ever wondered how plants and dinosaurs could have decomposed in big pools a mile or more below the earth’s surface?  How about those oil discoveries in the Gulf of Mexico?  The deep wells are found under one mile ocean water and then several thousand feet under the ocean floor. How did dinosaurs decompose down there?

Dale Allen Pfeiffer, identified as the Contributing Editor for Energy, has written: “There is some speculation that oil is abiotic in origin — generally asserting that oil is formed from magma instead of an organic origin.” He continues, “These ideas are really groundless.”

The starting place for most people when discussing America’s energy future is to assume that oil is not a renewable resource -that we are running out of oil. This hypothesis was first formulated in 1931 by Harold Hotelling. He developed an economic model called Hotelling’s Rule that started with the assumption that fossil fuels were a depleting or non-renewable resource and their heavy use would have a significant impact on the sustainability of future economies.

From Hotelling’s Rule most Americans have just assumed his theory was right. There was not a lot of research about oil in 1931, so fossil fuel theory seemed reasonable.

The definition of a non-renewable resource is a natural resource which cannot be produced, grown, generated, or used on a scale which can sustain its consumption rate. These resources often exist in a fixed amount, or are consumed much faster than nature can create them. Fossil fuels such as coal, petroleum and natural gas are examples. In contrast, resources such as timber, when harvested and replanted or metals which can be recycled are considered renewable resources.

If Theory B is correct that oil is abiotic, then oil is a renewable resource. This would change the whole debate about renewable energy. Oil would, by definition, be one of the most plentiful sources of renewable energy in the world.

Theory B would also turn the debate on the Cap and Trade Tax. The only question then would be is carbon a pollutant and is global warming man caused. We will save that for a later issue. The energy discussion is critical because Americans are going to be taxed for their use of one renewable resource and forced to use less efficient sources of sources of energy. Under one scenario, rates could jump by as much as 63% from 2012 to 2030, according to Midwest Consumer Utilities, a group that includes Madison Gas and Electric Co.

That is a pretty steep price to pay to be faddish on energy policy that may be based on a false assumption.