"I think America understands that energy security is a very important part of our national security. But if we are going to address energy security in a meaningful way going forward, we need to do it in a new manner. We cannot just be doing the same old thing"
About this Quote
Van Hollen is selling a pivot without naming the pain. By tying "energy security" to "national security", he borrows the gravitas of defense policy for a topic that usually collapses into gas prices and partisan trench warfare. It is a familiar Washington move: frame the issue as protection, not lifestyle change, and you can ask for bigger government action while sounding like you are simply being prudent.
The real work happens in the hedging. "I think America understands" is less a statement of consensus than a preemptive argument with skeptics: if you disagree, you are out of step with the country. "In a meaningful way" signals impatience with symbolic gestures, yet it also gives him room to define "meaningful" later, after the coalition math is done. That vagueness is strategic. Energy policy is where every solution has a constituency and a casualty.
"We need to do it in a new manner" is the classic reformer line that avoids the specifics that trigger backlash: new manner could mean renewables, efficiency standards, grid modernization, nuclear investment, domestic drilling with tougher rules, or all of the above. The closer is the most political sentence of all: "We cannot just be doing the same old thing". It reads as common sense, but it is also an indictment of entrenched interests and bipartisan inertia, delivered in a way that does not pick a single enemy.
Context matters: this kind of language thrives in moments of volatility oil shocks, war, climate-driven disasters, or electoral pressure when "security" is the only bipartisan vocabulary left.
The real work happens in the hedging. "I think America understands" is less a statement of consensus than a preemptive argument with skeptics: if you disagree, you are out of step with the country. "In a meaningful way" signals impatience with symbolic gestures, yet it also gives him room to define "meaningful" later, after the coalition math is done. That vagueness is strategic. Energy policy is where every solution has a constituency and a casualty.
"We need to do it in a new manner" is the classic reformer line that avoids the specifics that trigger backlash: new manner could mean renewables, efficiency standards, grid modernization, nuclear investment, domestic drilling with tougher rules, or all of the above. The closer is the most political sentence of all: "We cannot just be doing the same old thing". It reads as common sense, but it is also an indictment of entrenched interests and bipartisan inertia, delivered in a way that does not pick a single enemy.
Context matters: this kind of language thrives in moments of volatility oil shocks, war, climate-driven disasters, or electoral pressure when "security" is the only bipartisan vocabulary left.
Quote Details
| Topic | Vision & Strategy |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Chris
Add to List
