Politics & Policy

‘Bootleggers’ and ‘Baptists’ Agree on Energy

(Kelpfish/Dreamstime)
Producers of dirty coal celebrate Obama’s Clean Power Plan.

In June of this year, EPA administrator Gina McCarthy announced the Obama administration’s far-reaching, anti-coal-burning Clean Power Plan. It drew wide support from the environmental community for its promise to reduce carbon emissions and mitigate climate change.

Speaking for environmentalists worldwide, McCarthy said: “This plan will clean the air we breathe while helping slow climate change so we can leave a safe and healthy future for our kids.” Put another way: Those who love their children and the environment would surely leap on President Obama’s anti-coal bandwagon.

And, by the way, so would natural-gas producers, nuclear-power plants, manufacturers of solar cells and wind generation equipment, and, get this, producers of dirty coal. As we see it, McCarthy was speaking on behalf of the “Baptists” in a bootlegger–Baptist effort to obtain a much-valued set of command-and-control regulations. Let us explain.

Both bootleggers and Baptists have historically supported laws that shuttered corner liquor stores one day a week. The Baptists felt better knowing that the corner liquor stores were closed on the Sabbath. Meanwhile, the bootleggers loved having the Sunday market to themselves.

Our bootlegger–Baptist theory of regulation claims that politically successful command-and-control regulation, like the newly proposed Clean Power Plan, will be supported by two disparate special-interest groups. The “Baptists” give the politician moral justification for the action being taken. The “bootleggers,” on the other hand, are in it for the money, aiming for monopolization of the market, but happily share some of the regulatory gains with politicians when campaign time rolls around. Meanwhile, rank-and-file voters have no idea why their electricity bills are heading northward.

Producers of natural gas love it when regulators sock it to coal producers, their rivals, and so do manufacturers of nuclear reactors, solar cells, and wind generators. These producers might even take the opportunity to sing a few environmental hymns themselves.

But what about producers of dirty coal? How are they benefiting from Obama’s anti-coal plan? Explaining this is a bit complicated, but here’s the basic logic. The administration’s rules call for coal-fired electricity plants to use costly scrubbers to satisfy the stricter clean-air standards.

Before the imposition of the new requirements, producers of clean coal, which comes mainly from Wyoming and Montana, were in the catbird seat because their clean coal met high air-quality standards without the use of expensive technology. But now, with the new technology required, coal-burning plants can burn cheaper, dirty coal. Sellers of dirty coal see their business growing faster while the pace for clean-coal shippers is weakening.

All this gets more interesting when it turns out that dirty-coal producers in Obama’s home state of Illinois are chief among the bootleggers laughing all the way to the bank as they ship trainloads of coal to generators far and wide.

The Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan has made lots of people happy — environmentalists, producers of clean-power technologies, and producers of dirty coal. We think the plan should receive a medal for bringing together such a disparate set of bootlegger–Baptist interests, provided it can clean the dirt off, of course.

— Adam Smith is assistant professor of economics at Johnson & Wales University. Bruce Yandle is Alumni Distinguished Professor of Economics Emeritus at Clemson University. They are authors of Bootleggers and Baptists: How Economic Forces and Moral Persuasion Interact to Shape Regulatory Politics.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More
Elections

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More
U.S.

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More