Can Alaska And Washington Learn From Alberta and Ottawa?

Yes.  But Are They Likely To Learn.  No.

1.  Calgary Herald by James Wood.  As Prime Minister Trudeau and Premier Notley hosted a roundtable meeting (Video) in his first visit to Calgary since becoming prime minister, he told a group of top energy executives the government wanted to hear ways Ottawa “can be a better partner in helping you through this difficult time.”

2.  Alaska Headlamp.  … Rep. Mike Hawker, asked why Governor Bill Walker wants the Legislature to completely reverse its tax credit policy. A Senate working group convened last year by Sen. Cathy Giessel, recommended careful adjustments to protect advancing projects.  Headlamp agrees with Sen. Giessel—protecting ongoing projects should be a principal goal of any tax plan the Governor puts forward this session. Pulling the rug out from….

3.  Politico by Michael Grunwald.  …the president will propose more than $300 billion worth of investments over the next decade in mass transit, high-speed rail, self-driving cars, and other transportation approaches…. To pay for it all, Obama will call for a $10 “fee” on every barrel of oil, a surcharge … paid by oil companies but … presumably … passed along to consumers.

In the sidebar (1.), readers will first note that Canadian provincial and federal leaders are asking the oil industry how the two interests can cooperate in the current low-price environment.

Farther down (2.), readers will appreciate Alaska Headlamp's viewpoint; Alaska officials who have created a more oil-dependent government than Alberta are less inclined to support the rejuvenation of that economic engine.

At the bottom of the sidebar (3.), we note that the U.S. federal administration continues its harsh and hostile attack on America's principal, bedrock creator of wealth.

The Canadian politicians, though liberal and heavily biased in favor of 'climate change energy policies', seem at least to realize that without fossil fuel wealth producers, the entire Canadian economic infrastructure is threatened.

Alaska's governor, in contrast, has shown a propensity to attack and dictate to the oil industry — even in a low oil price environment — rather than reaching out to identify areas of cooperation.

And the U.S. president's whole term of office has been identified with blocking access to energy exploration, over regulating energy and natural resource wealth production in general and disapproving the massive, multi-billion dollar job producing Keystone XL Pipeline.  And now, as if that assault were not sufficient economic assault to totally kill the traditional energy industry — the president proposes a $10/barrel oil tax increase, thus increasing the current per barrel cost by a third — a new, de facto fuel tax on consumers that will actually make American crude oil less competitive on the world market.

We don't know whether Canadian provincial and federal outreach efforts will produce workable policies going forward for the oil and gas industry. But we and Canada's oil and gas producers are hopeful.

On the U.S. side, we are less hopeful.  With the type and intensity of opposition and hostility aimed at America's oil and gas industry, the current Alaska and Washington leadership legacies can only be characterized by historians as "intentionally anti-development or downright unintelligent".

Kudos, Canada!  

Wake up, U.S.!