Lee Davidson reports that Congressman Jim Matheson is pushing the bill to regulate futures markets to stop "speculation" (July 24). Many informed and honest appraisals of this plan conclude that it will have no impact on supply and little, if any, impact on price.

Perhaps Matheson agrees and wants to drill, as well as develop alternative fuels, but I don't hear him advocating such. He owes us an explanation of where he stands. Specifically, does he favor developing oil shale, quickly displacing coal with wind and solar, continuing the prohibitions on drilling, developing nuclear power, breaching dams, diverting food and feed crops to ethanol production, increasing government direction and taxation, reducing carbon emissions regardless of the trade-off against economic costs, and cap and trade or a carbon tax?

We need to know what his plan would be, how long each element would take to get online and what the economic and environmental costs would be — in clear and understandable terms.

Scot Wallace

West Valley City