"The fact of the matter is that we should increase the supply of oil by allowing new refineries to be built, allowing companies to extract more oil so that supply will increase. That will bring down the price of oil. That will spur the economy leading to more development of alternative fuels."
I think you meant we should allow for more exploration and drilling to increase our supply of oil. And a second point you argue for more refinieries so more gas can be refined.
The problems are 1) There is a lot more demand for oil these days with India and China growing. Most of the easy to drill oil has alreadly been drilled and where there still is a lot of oil there is political instablity in those areas. There are other areas where oil may be found and drilled but it will require more work and expense to drill it. Hoping and praying that an easy supply will always exist with better technology isn't the route I'd like to go.
2) Oil companies have increased the capacity of the current refineries a lot. They are not really interested in building new refiniers where it wouldn't be easy to get the oil to the plant and out of the plant. Bush's plan for using old military bases is not really workable.
It is very important to get the US off its dependence of foreign oil. We import something like 12 million barrels a day and produce about 8 million barrels a day. We are beggers when it comes to our energy and that isn't a good thing. As supply does diminish, we need to look at all alternatives.
Nuclear energy looks like the best alternative. We need to build standardized plants and use France as a model.
We should also develop alternative energy such as solar, wind and others but no one really thinks they can be the substitute or replace oil for the majority of our energy supply. Coal is the worst.