Leadership Quote by Jon Corzine

The line works because it sounds like common sense while quietly doing the hardest thing in politics: turning a messy web of economics, security, and lifestyle into a single moral imperative. “Shouldn’t” isn’t a policy; it’s a scold. Corzine doesn’t say “we can’t” or “we won’t,” which would invite an argument about feasibility. He says “we shouldn’t,” casting dependence as a national bad habit - something undignified, even irresponsible.

“Dependent” is the key tell. It frames the United States not as a superpower making choices in a global market, but as a vulnerable consumer with a problem. That word smuggles in a security narrative (foreign oil as leverage) and an identity narrative (self-reliance as virtue). It also creates an easy villain without naming one: “foreign” gestures toward OPEC, the Middle East, unstable regimes, and the post-9/11 fear that dollars at the pump might flow into conflict. You don’t need to specify; the audience fills in the map.

The context is an era when “energy independence” became a bipartisan incantation - especially during price spikes, recession anxieties, and the Iraq-war hangover. For a Democrat like Corzine, it’s also a bridge between constituencies: environmentalists hear renewables and efficiency; centrists hear national security; labor and industry hear domestic drilling and infrastructure jobs. That’s the subtextual trick: one sentence that can mean “drill,” “build wind,” “raise fuel standards,” or “all of the above,” depending on who’s listening.

Its power is also its dodge. The quote demands less dependence without admitting the trade-offs: higher short-term costs, political fights over drilling, or the fact that “foreign oil” is partly a stand-in for our own consumption.