… to increase America’s “dependence” on foreign chemicals, minerals and pharmaceuticals.
Seriously, that’s a tautological statement when paired with, “I have a plan for American energy independence …” Now you may want to argue that there are all kinds of national security reasons for wanting a country to be self-sufficient in energy. But becoming self-sufficient in producing energy means that we have to become LESS self-sufficient in producing something else. That is, of course, unless you believe in unicorns – which might actually be the case if you are a politician.
But since unicorns do not exist, pouring resources (even smartly) into energy in America means fewer resources into mining for minerals, developing drugs and making chemicals. And if we want those things, then all “energy independence” means is that we’d like to trade one kind of foreign dependence for another. I don’t think the following campaign slogan would sell well: “I have a plan to increase our dependence on Finland to get our vaccines!” But one implies the other. Necessarily.