The Democrat-controlled Congress is obstructing the flow of oil
Political pressure is one of the major influences on the price of oil. Democrats
in Congress need to have an endless series of crises to solve. The United States has
plenty of oil, but much of it has been placed off-limits by the Democrats in Congress and
(years ago) in the White House. To allow more drilling here at home would have the effect of
lowering gas prices at the pump. That would make the (Republican) President look like a
problem solver, and the Democrats can't afford to have that happen.
Democrats and environmentalists are
co-dependent. Democrats pretend that only they care about environmental issues,
and environmentalists help to maintain public pressure by creating an endless series of
environmental crises for the government to solve. Unfortunately, the federal government
almost never solves any problem. Problems keep bureaucrats employed, so real solutions are
out of the question. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency was established by President
Nixon at a time when air and water quality in this country was really poor in the big cities. Now
that those problems have been all but eliminated (airborne lead has been reduced by over 99 percent),
the EPA is still around, looking for more and more minute problems to solve. Other agencies
are the same way, and now there are hundreds of
busy-work bureaucrats.
Speaker
Pushing Stealth Renewal of Congressional Energy Embargo. Having failed to pass the required
measures to fund the government for the next fiscal year, Congress must now pass what is known as a
Continuing Resolution (CR) in order to avoid a government shutdown. A draft of the resolution contains
a provision taken from the recently passed House bill, H.R. 6899, to continue the ban on energy
exploration and production on nearly all of the taxpayer owned Outer Continental Shelf in the lower
48 states for another year.
"Use It or Lose It" Is
Not the Way Energy Markets Work. While Republicans have argued for drilling in the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), Congressional Democrats responded
with a counterclaim: oil companies need to use what they already have. To that end, House
Democrats have proposed "use it or lose it" legislation that would apply to leases on federal land.
Stop the War
on Poor Families. As Democratic Party delegates gather in Denver, America is repeatedly being
told that we must transform our economy to "green" energy. Our future is in wind and solar, liberal
Democrats and environmental activists insist. Oil, gas, coal and nuclear must go. American
citizens vigorously disagree. They know fossil and nuclear fuels built this country and created health
and living standards unprecedented in history. Over two-thirds support increased drilling.
Why Americans Can't Get U.S. Oil: At
last report, Democrats decided to allow the quarter-century ban on drilling for oil off the Atlantic and Pacific
coasts to expire. That's not the same as lifting the ban. Moreover, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer
(D-Md) is on record saying that, if the Democrats retain control of Congress, restoring the ban "will be a top
priority for discussion next year." So much for so-called "energy independence." When Democrats say
that, they are talking about wind and solar power, and biofuels, not oil, natural gas, and coal.
The Congressional Oil Embargo.
Congress and America united when we suffered from an Arab Oil Embargo in 1973. Now we're suffering from
a Congressional Oil Embargo. … The Arab Oil Embargo only lasted six months. The Congressional Oil
Embargo has lasted for decades and endures to this day.
House
Democrats to Let Ban on Drilling Expire. Congressional Democrats bowed to political pressure
yesterday [9/23/2008] and agreed to let the ban on offshore oil drilling expire, a decision that would allow
exploration just three miles off the Atlantic and Pacific coastlines unless the next president reinstates an
executive branch order that prohibits drilling.
Pedaling no-gas
options. Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives sent a message last week to
hard-working commuters forced to pay historically high prices for gasoline: Ride a bike. The
message was buried on page 255 of a 290-page bill the Democratic leadership introduced at 9:45 p.m.
last Monday night, forced through the Rules Committee at 10:00 p.m., and put up for a "debate" and
final vote — with no amendments allowed — on Tuesday evening [9/16/2008].
Congressional corruption: The
energy crisis comes to rest at the feet of the Democrats. For more than 30 years, the Democrats
have used whatever rules and procedures necessary to block or prevent the energy industry from keeping up
with the growing demand. Democrats have prevented the construction of a single nuclear plant, or a
single oil refinery, and the development of our domestic energy resources. It is the Democrats that
are now preventing even a reasoned debate.
The
drilling bill that bans drilling. This bill permanently bans all drilling within 50 miles
of the US coast, which just happens to be where most of the recoverable oil and gas reserves are. It
permits drilling between 50 and 100 miles out only if the adjoining states agree — which
they won't, since the bill denies them any share in the royalties the oil companies would have to pay, thereby
eliminating any financial incentive for a state to say yes. Virtually all the oil off the California
coast and beneath the Eastern Gulf of Mexico would be locked up for good.
Energy
Policy End Game. In 41 days, the long-imposed moratorium on offshore oil drilling and domestic
oil shale production is set to expire — gone. This happens automatically and can be stopped only if
Congress votes to re-establish the ban. Lifting the moratorium might free up as much as 100 years'
worth of oil and gas for domestic consumption. But keeping domestic energy supplies off limits is
something Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and their environmentalist allies desperately
want to do.
A Country At Mercy Of
Environmentalists. For several decades, environmentalists have managed to get Congress to keep
most of our oil resources off-limits to exploration and drilling. They've managed to have the Congress
enact onerous regulations that have made refinery construction impossible. Similarly, they've used the
courts and Congress to completely stymie the construction of nuclear power plants. As a result, energy
prices are at historical highs and threaten our economy and national security.
Where's
the Energy? Locked up, thanks to Speaker Pelosi. With complete disregard to the rights
of the minority party, the Democrat leadership in Congress will not allow a vote on drilling for America's
vast domestic resources. Producers have made great strides in minimizing ecological damage. Over
the past 25 years, 7 billion gallons of oil have been pumped to shore, without a single significant
spill. In fact, the last oil spill of any impact from a drilling rig off our shores occurred 37 years
ago. Yet, congressional Democrats refuse to acknowledge these facts, choosing instead to remain beholden
to the fringe environmental extremists who oppose advancement.
No Excuses For Not Drilling.
About 700 billion U.S. dollars flow out of this country every year for foreign oil and gas. Instead
of this obscene transfer of our wealth and standard of living out of the United States, why don't you let
the "Big Evil Oil Companies" invest their obscene, windfall profits right here in the United States and
then the let the taxpayers' dollars for energy stay here too? Here are the weak excuses I hear,
mostly from Democrats….
Nelson endorses Jennings, vows to block
offshore drilling. Democratic congressional candidate Christine Jennings on Wednesday [8/20/2008]
picked up the endorsement of Sen. Bill Nelson, a fellow Democrat who also vowed to prevent any expansion of
oil drilling off Florida's Gulf Coast.
Pelosi's
Energy Stonewall: Democrats appear ready to sacrifice their whole agenda, even spending, rather
than allow new domestic energy production. Or even a mere debate about energy. The Democratic
leadership is stonewalling any measure that might possibly relax the Congressional ban on offshore drilling.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid know that they would lose if a vote ever came to the floor, and they're desperate
to suppress an insurrection among those Democrats who are pragmatic about one of the top economic issues.
Pelosi won't limit
vote to offshore drilling. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday firmly rejected the idea of
a House vote solely on the issue of offshore oil drilling, calling it "a hoax on the American people" backed
by oil companies. ... "You want to drill? We want the royalties for the American people, and we want
that to pay for renewable energy resources," the San Francisco Democrat said in an interview for KQED television's
weekly news show, "This Week in Northern California." "We want to connect all that together."
The Editor interjects...
But Ms. Pelosi, those royalties are not yours to give away.
Let's See the Votes. Here is
information and a list of votes compiled by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), ranging from 1995 to 2008, on
off-shore drilling and drilling in ANWR. Take a look and decide for yourself who is to blame for
stopping drilling in the OCS and in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR).
No-Energy
Nancy's Phony Energy Plan: Our friends at the Institute for Energy Research (IER) posted a
devastating exposé of the Pelosi plan. As announced last week, the plan would:
• Permanently ban access to about 97 percent of the undersea oil lying within 50 miles
of the California coast.
• Continue the ban on energy production in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico.
• Impose a brand-new ban on oil and gas leases in Alaska's coastal waters out to 50 miles.
• Not allow states that approve new leases beyond 50 miles to share royalties with
the federal government, thus stripping any financial incentive for states to stand up to environmental
pressure groups, who will continue to agitate against any new oil and gas operations offshore.
The Democrats' Sham Energy
Bill: Republicans recognize expanded drilling for oil is a powerful issue working for them in
this election year. Voters paying record high oil prices in a country where long drives to work are
often mandatory favor expanded oil drilling. Speaker Pelosi's ruse was endangering too many of her
Democratic colleagues. Thus she resorted to Plan B.
Pelosi's Drilling Ruse:
When Democrats opposed every measure to increase domestic oil production, they angered millions of Americans.
And when they finally tried to claim they were for new drilling by producing two bills that allowed new
drilling only where there was little or no oil, Americans quickly picked up on the scam. On all of the
major issues of the past two years, the Democrats chose to play political gotcha instead of actually govern.
Democrats Still Aren't Serious About
Drilling. After a five-week paid vacation, Democrats are back in Washington and claiming that
they want to do something about oil prices. But the problem is that their plan, which passed the House
yesterday [9/16/2008] and will likely come up for a vote in the Senate later this week, will not produce a
single drop of oil. Why? Because it does nothing about environmental groups that are suing to
stop drilling.
Dems like $10 per Gallon Gasoline.
You have to see this video to believe it. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) was on the Senate
floor earlier today, attempting to get offshore drilling authorized. As you'll see on the YouTube shot, he
tried to get Democrats to agree to a trigger for it, at ever-increasing levels of gas prices. McConnell
was asking for unanimous consent, so the bill could pass immediately. Try as he might, Sen. Ken Salazar
(D-Co) objected no matter how high McConnell raised the ante. $4 a gallon? Salazar objected.
$7.50 a gallon? Again, Salazar objected. Finally, McConnell offers a trigger for offshore drilling
permission at $10 a gallon gasoline prices. And guess what? Salazar objected.
Bush Says
Drill, Drill, Drill — and Oil Drops $9! Democrats keep saying that it will take
10 years or longer to produce oil from the offshore areas. And they say that oil prices won't
decline for at least that long. And they, along with Obama and McCain, bash so-called oil speculators.
And today we had a real-world example as to why they are wrong.
'Rig' The Election. When
President Bush lifted the executive order banning exploration and drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf, two things
happened almost immediately: The world price for oil started to drop and the Democrats panicked. They
could no longer hide under the umbrella the order provided.
Washington's
Dry Well: President Bush ratcheted up the pressure on Congress this week to open the Outer
Continental Shelf to oil drilling by rescinding the executive order prohibiting such exploration. There's
just one catch: For the president's action to take effect, Congress has to lift its own ban, which has
been in place since 1983. And that's not going to happen.
Boehner
says majority of Congress wants to drill. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Congress
is ready to lift the ban on offshore drilling but is being blocked by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). "Nancy
Pelosi and the liberals here in the Congress, they worship at the altar radical environmentalism. The
last thing that that group wants is more drilling," said Boehner in an interview with Bloomberg TV Saturday.
Pelosi stands firm against offshore
drilling. Her voice carries considerable weight since, as speaker, Pelosi is in a position to
prevent a vote on expanded drilling from reaching the floor. And she and Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the
majority leader, appear intent on holding the line against calls to approve drilling in areas now off limits.
Pelosi blocks vote on Bush request to lift ban on
offshore oil drilling. A plan to lift the ban on coastal drilling is stalled on Capitol Hill,
for one simple reason: A Californian who opposes President Bush's proposal is calling the shots in the
House of Representatives. Despite growing public support for ending the ban, even in California,
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco said she won't allow the immediate vote the
president wants.
Blunt
blasts Pelosi for not allowing drilling vote. House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) on Sunday [7/20/2008]
strongly criticized Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) for not allowing a vote on a measure that would allow
offshore drilling. While acknowledging that Pelosi can prevent such a vote, Blunt said the Democratic
leader would have to live with that decision, which he argued "does not make sense to the American people."
America's
Energy Held Hostage. A recent CNN poll showed more than 73 percent of Americans in favor
of offshore drilling. But the House Speaker can keep the issue from even reaching a vote, and Pelosi
seems bent on just that. "(In California) We learned the hard way that oil and water do not mix on
our coast," she said back in 1996. Pelosi was referring, of course, to the famous Santa Barbara oil
spill of 1969, an event that serves as the Alamo of the anti-drilling cause.
The Editor says...
Nancy Pelosi has gotten a lot of political mileage out of that one oil spill almost 40 years
ago. The Santa Barbara incident was a blowout. Prior to the development of blow-out
preventers, blowouts were common and were referred to
as gushers.* In
other words, there's so much oil and gas out there, it can hardly wait to get out of the ground.
Democrats
Against Drilling. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and other liberal leaders on Capitol Hill are gripped
by cold-sweat terror. If they permit a vote on offshore drilling, they know they will lose when Blue
Dogs and oil-patch Democrats defect to the GOP position of increasing domestic energy production. So
the last failsafe is to shut down Congress.
Dems Over a
Domestic Barrel. On September 30 … the ban on fossil-fuel drilling off America's Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) and in the oil-shale fields of the West will expire. Democrats, who control
both houses of Congress, must pass an appropriations bill extending the bans. The onus, in other words,
is on them.
Democrats Should
Let Us Drill. Now that an executive branch ban on offshore oil exploration has been lifted, the time
has come for Democrats in Washington to lift their own ban on increased domestic supply. Americans are demanding
that Congress do something about record-high gas prices. They recognize that prices will not go down unless
supplies go up. And they also know that the only thing now standing in the way of more domestic supply is the
Democratic refusal to allow it.
The Futile Crusades of Dem Quixote: You
name the issue, and the party led by Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi has diagnosed it incorrectly and applied the wrong
remedy. Let's consider just a few of today's ills: oil prices, Iraq, and obesity.
Dems'
Doublethink on Drilling: High gasoline prices are good. A high price, imposed through
federal carbon taxes or carbon caps, is precisely the mechanism by which Democrats hope to curb carbon
emissions. … [But] High gasoline prices are bad. With constituents irate over gasoline prices
that are pushing $5 a gallon, Democrats complain that high prices are a bad thing.
The Democrats' No-Drill Energy Plan.
When it comes to domestic oil production, the Democrats and their Green/Left supporters are all singing from
the same deranged hymnal. In May, one of the choir leaders, Democratic Senator Richard Durbin of
Illinois declared, "We can't drill our way to lower prices."
The
Democrats' Energy Charade: Earlier this month the House of Representatives voted on an energy
bill called the Drill Responsibly in Leased Lands (Drill) Act. The good news, for those of us who
actually want to do something to lower gas prices, is that it failed. … The problem here came in the fine
print. The bill would have mandated that leasing be done in an undefined, "environmentally responsible"
way. We know from experience that such ambiguous language leads to lawsuits and delays.
How Wrong are
the Democrats on Drilling? A common response of the Democrats when confronted with citizens
advocating for increased offshore drilling is that the results are "years off into the future" and therefore
any relief on gas prices would be unlikely — at least in any sort of time frame that matters to voters
right now. They are wrong on many measures — foremost among them is that the same obstruction
deprived Americans all these years of domestic production which would have been in place but for Democratic
opposition. Also future prices would respond to the prospect of increased oil supplies and this
would have a depressive effect on oil prices — NOW.
Drilling
and Blissful Ignorance: Consider: 25 years ago, nearly 60 percent of U.S.
petroleum was produced domestically. Today it's 25 percent. From its peak in 1970, U.S.
production has declined a staggering 47 percent. The world consumes 86 million barrels a
day; the United States, roughly 20 million. We need the stuff to run our cars and planes and
economy. Where does it come from?
Shut Up and Produce Some Oil.
Liberals are flailing about looking for some political cover on energy and gas prices. For decades now,
they have supported the policies of extremists who have systematically sought to shut down every major
energy source for our economy. We can't drill for oil offshore, we can't drill in the frozen tundra
of north Alaska, we can't even develop oil shale on the mainland. Liberals are even opposing the
development of new oil discoveries in the Plains states.
Let's Drill.
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, the Mr. Magoo of American politics, stumbled onto the truth last week.
He discovered the law of supply and demand. "We want to put [more oil] on the market to increase supply
and lower prices," Reid said. "With oil and gas prices continuing to break record highs every day, much
more needs to be done." Indeed it does. But Reid won't allow it.
Loony Harry Reid. This nation is
in serious trouble because it has people in very powerful elected positions that say crazy things. Take,
for example, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) who is the Senate Majority Leader: "The one thing we fail to talk
about is those costs that you don't see on the bottom line. That is coal makes us sick. Oil makes
us sick; it's global warming. It's ruining our country, it's ruining our world. We've got to stop
using fossil fuel." [Italics in original]
Harry Reid's
Position Paper on Drilling: In a recent interview with Fox News Business Channel, Mr. Reid, who was
evidently fed up with questions about drilling, suddenly exclaimed: "Coal makes us sick, oil makes us sick; it's
global warming. It's ruining our country, it's ruining the world. We've got to stop using fossil fuel."
Mr. Reid's rant quickly became the No. 1 video on the Internet, approaching a half-million views.
Dems
oblivious on oil. Maybe the quickest way to lower oil and gas prices would be this: Immediately enroll
every Democratic member of Congress in an entry-level economics class. The lack of even a basic grasp of economic
concepts has led Democrats to oppose sensible policies that would begin to lower oil and gas prices. Instead, they
push hair-brained ideas that make no sense.
We're Not Addicts!
It's a confused and confusing debate but it can be boiled down to this: On one side are those who believe
the answer is for us to slash our demand for energy. On the other side are those who believe the answer
is to greatly increase our supply.
What Do The Democrats Take Us For?
The public wants more oil, but Democrats keep offering the same solutions, not one of which includes drilling and all of
which are asinine. Do they think the American people are fools?
Dems
Oppose GOP Call for Increased Domestic Drilling. Democratic senators are skeptical about new
efforts by Republicans and the Bush administration to increase offshore drilling, despite a government report
by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Land Management showing that there are 139 billion barrels of
oil in the United States (onshore and offshore combined).
Countering Democrats
on Drilling: The Democrats have a standardized talking point against any domestic drilling (in
ANWR, the Midwest oil shales and off-shore), settling on the comeback: "It won't help us today." … If
the voters see environmentalists, tree-huggers, and their Democratic political minions as causing $4 or
$5 a gallon gasoline, along with the rise in consumer prices across the board because of the increase of
the cost of oil used as an ingredient in many products, they will blame the Democrats. And frustration
with environmentalism is starting to show up in the polls, which are indicating an increasing call for
domestic drilling from the American public.
Domestic Drilling OK, Just
'Not in My State,' Senators Say. "There may be places that make sense, I am not saying, 'Let's not drill
anywhere,'" Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) said in response to the question. "But do I want to drill off the
California coast? No. Do I want to drill in the Arctic in endangered areas? No."
The Editor asks...
Uh, Senator, I have a question: What is an "endangered area?" Is that a place that might disappear
if we drill for oil there?
Fuelish Democrats:
[Democrats] promised in the 2006 campaign to offer a "common sense" plan to curb gas prices. They have yet to produce
one, and the price per gallon of gas has risen by more than $1.60 since Democrats took control of Congress in January
2007. … [But] John McCain is a problem. He opposes drilling for oil in the Alaska National Wildlife Reserve
(ANWR), though he has come around on increased domestic production in other areas (except off the coast of Florida).
Obama Unlikely
to Support New Oil Drilling in U.S.. A recent report by the Interior Department shows that there
are about 139 billion barrels of undiscovered oil on U.S. territory, onshore and offshore combined, much
of it restricted from extraction because of environmental regulations. Further, indications are that
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) does not support drilling for that oil and would not take steps to do so if
elected president.
Senate votes
to halt strategic oil stockpiling. Jittery about a political backlash over gasoline costs as
prices set yet another record Tuesday, Congress voted to halt deliveries to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in
defiance of President Bush. The action was expected to have a modest effect on pump prices, saving
motorists from 2 to 5 cents a gallon, backers said.
Democrats and High Oil Prices:
Investor's Business Daily has a continuing series on "Breaking the Back of High Oil", and today's edition
has a fascinating breakdown of some of the actions that the Democrats have taken over the last three decades or
so to ensure that our country has no defense against the effects of rising oil prices. While doing so,
they've made us all captives of OPEC and such tinpot dictatorships such as Venezuela.
Blame Congress for
High Oil Prices. If there is a villain in all of this, it is Congress itself. That
venerable body has made it impossible for U.S. producers of crude oil to tap significant domestic reserves of
oil and gas, and it has foreclosed economically viable alternative sources of energy in favor of unfeasible
alternatives such as wind and solar. In addition, Congress has slapped substantial taxes on gasoline.
Clinton: Drilling
not the answer. Exploring new sources of oil in the United States is not the solution to the nation's growing
energy crunch, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton said last week. There are places where
exploration and drilling can take place, such as the Gulf of Mexico, but it doesn't make sense to open up the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, Clinton said during an interview with the Argus Leader on Friday.
The Editor says...
In other words, Hillary Clinton wants to leave the oil in the ground and depend entirely on conservation to
achieve "energy independence." Anyone with an ounce of critical thinking will see immediately that her
plans cannot succeed, and that she will blame someone else when the ideas flop.
Turning Voters Into Morons:
Consider the Democrats' cruel exploitation of their supporters' hopes and fears regarding rising gasoline
prices. Both Clinton and Obama have talked as though those prices can be lowered. Clinton
specifically talks of lowering federal gas taxes during the summer. That will do it, but only for the
summer. The problem is that oil demand worldwide has exceeded supply. … Likewise the candidates are
deceiving their supporters when they promise to make the country "independent of foreign oil."
Obamanomics:
[Scroll down] It should be possible on the straight-talk express to devise some alternative to the patently cynical
promise of "energy independence." No such "independence" is within reach, as the successive failures of Presidents
Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and two Bushes to attain it should demonstrate.
Striking Out
on Energy. President George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain went to bat on energy policy this
week. And guess what? They both struck out. Mr. Bush went hat in hand to the Saudis to
ask for more oil production in order to bring down world prices. He whiffed. They said no for the
second time this year. ExxonMobil chairman and CEO Rex Tillerson said it's "astonishing" that Mr. Bush
keeps asking Saudi Arabia to pump more oil, rather than working harder for increased oil production at home.
Bush gets oil but no credit for
jawboning Saudis. President George W. Bush walked away from a meeting with Saudi King Abdullah
on Friday with a prize he has been seeking for months: a commitment from the world's big oil exporter to
boost output. But the news — which came the same day that U.S. crude oil futures hit a new record
of $127.82 a barrel — speaks less to Bush's success at "jawboning" the de facto OPEC leader on oil prices
and more to the kingdom's worry that high oil prices will dent demand for their own supplies, analysts said.
Dems 'Oil' Wet About
Gas Prices. Have you noticed that ever since the Democrats took control of Congress, oil and gas prices have
been going through the roof? The Dems won control of the House and Senate last year in part on the notion that sinking
billions of taxpayer dollars into corn-based ethanol would combat global warming; itself a dubious superstition that some
scientists say is part of the Earth's natural environmental changes over many eons.
Democrats Fumble Ball On
Energy. The price of oil has risen sharply since the Democrats, with their government-heavy
energy schemes, took control of the House. Since January 2007, the first month for the Democrats in
office, oil prices are up by more than 113%. … Congress, led by Democrats since January 2007, has
steadfastly refused to do anything constructive to bring down the price of oil. What truly is
frightening is Pelosi shows no sign of running out of bad ideas to ruin our energy-dependent economy.
Feckless To Reckless, Pelosi
Should Resign. Any leader with an energy record as derelict as Speaker Pelosi's ought to step
down. Where she once was just incompetent and irresponsible, she has now — with her latest
scheme to fix oil prices — become dangerous. Despite polls showing Americans in favor of
drilling more oil from America's huge untapped supplies, Pelosi won't allow it. She just wants to empty
our Strategic Petroleum Reserve for a short-term fix to get through Election Day.
Ann Coulter is a little sarcastic, but she has a point... This is Not a Drill. [Speaker of
the House Nancy] Pelosi announced that the Democrats also plan to push for "an historic investment in
biofuels, efficiency, conservation and the rest." The "rest" is apparently what she called our
"important and essential" investment in alternative energy. That certainly would be historic: We
would make history by throwing our money away on unproven energy boondoggles that have eaten up untold
billions since the 1960s without producing a single net kilowatt of power while we all starve to death.
Over to You,
Speaker Pelosi. Gas is still at $4 a gallon, but the good news is there's an emerging consensus
on a measure that would help: Drill for more oil here at home. President Bush dropped the
executive ban on offshore oil and natural gas exploration last week, and House GOP leader John Boehner
plans to lead a congressional delegation to Colorado and Alaska to highlight America's abundant energy
resources this week. Polls show more than two-thirds of the public support increased domestic
energy exploration and production. Guess who stands in the way.
Power of one: Pelosi vows
to block offshore drilling vote. A plan to lift the ban on coastal drilling is stalled on Capitol
Hill, for one simple reason: A Californian who opposes President Bush's proposal is calling the shots in the House
of Representatives. Despite growing public support for ending the ban, even in California, Democratic
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she won't allow a vote. "I have no plans to do so," Pelosi said Thursday
[7/17/2008].
Pelosi: 'I'm trying to save the planet'.
After promising fairness and open debate, Pelosi has resorted to hard-nosed parliamentary devices that effectively
bar any chance for Republicans to offer policy alternatives. "I'm trying to save the planet; I'm trying to
save the planet," she says impatiently when questioned. "I will not have this debate trivialized by
their excuse for their failed policy."
Drill Through The Floor.
Led by Reps. Mike Pence, R-Ind., Tom Price, R-Ga., and Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., and fully backed by House
Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, this GOP attack could smack unwary Democrats as hard as the blast of a
Texas oil gusher, because what Republicans are demanding is nothing more than a simple up-or-down vote on
drilling for domestic oil in a Democratic-controlled House of Representatives.
Five
Myths About Going It Alone on Energy: The idea that the United States, the world's single largest
energy consumer, can be independent of the $5 trillion-per-year energy business — the world's
single biggest industry — is ludicrous on its face. The push for energy independence is based
on a series of false premises. Here are a few of the most pernicious ones.
An awful oil bill. If you're
wondering why the Democrat-controlled Congress has lower approval ratings than President Bush, then look at the bill
that the House passed on mostly a party-line vote, 236-182. It scraps the tax deductions given to the nation's
oil companies, such as Exxon Mobil Corp. and ChevronTexaco. In light of the record profits these firms have
been racking up, not many folks will shed any tears for them. But perhaps they should.
The U.S. needs a
good oil plan. Americans in both parties need to get on board. That means opening up the
coasts of Florida and California to new offshore drilling for the first time in a quarter-century. That
means tapping into the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. That means easing regulations to allow
the industry to build its first new refinery in three decades. For too long, partisanship and
environmental demagoguery have blocked progress toward easing the nation's ever-growing reliance on
foreign oil.
The Oil Dependency Myth: To say that
the people of the United States are "dependent" upon foreign oil is also a misnomer. Individuals choose
to purchase oil from overseas producers because such an action is preferable to other alternatives. I
am "dependent" upon overseas oil in the same way that I am "dependent" upon Proctor & Gamble for my laundry
detergent or the local butcher for my meat. (This is not to absolve the U.S. government for engaging in
bad foreign policy in the hopes of convincing overseas producers to sell oil to Americans at cheap prices.
My purpose is simply to point out the absurdity of saying that voluntary economic exchanges are acts of "dependence.")
A Cartel Worse Than OPEC: This year
a very large reserve was located in the Gulf of Mexico, some distance from the shore line of Texas. There
is no shortage of oil or gas around the coast of the United States. Some 20 years ago, Phillips
Petroleum sought permission to drill wells in the Bridger-Teton National Forest (gasp!) in Wyoming. The
wells were to be capped and used only in case of a national emergency. Wyoming is one of America's
richest states in energy resources. The request was denied.
Mind their own
business. Global energy giant BP has been a leader of the so-called "corporate social
responsibility" movement. … Two weeks ago, the campaign broke down. BP shut down its Prudhoe Bay
oil field in Alaska's North Slope after discovering what a company press release called "unexpectedly severe
corrosion" in the pipeline. The company says it will replace 73 percent of the Prudhoe Bay
pipelines. The shutdown will cost the nation 8 percent of its output — 400,000
barrels of oil a day — at a time when consumer gas prices are hitting record highs and world
oil prices are soaring.
Addicted to
what? The first part of last Tuesday's State of the Union — on national
security — was tough, clear, principled, well reasoned. The second part was a
laundry list, reminiscent of the worst of Bill Clinton. I was nodding off when I heard the
President Bush say, "America is addicted to oil." Addicted to oil! That woke me
up. America is no more addicted to oil than it is addicted to bread, to milk, to paper, to
water, to computers….
America's Oil Weapon: President
Bush has bemoaned what he calls the United States' addiction to oil. He has demonized America's oil
use in speeches, and talked about the need to move beyond the petroleum-based economy. The president
is certainly correct to point out harmful side effects to our use of oil and the need for us to address
them. But in using the expressly negative language of addiction, the President not only cast a dark
cloud over the fuel that presently underpins a huge portion of our economy, he badly confused a set of
issues that demand clear thinking and fair analysis.
Editor's Note:
That America is "addicted to oil" is something you would
expect Al Gore to say,
not George W. Bush.
Addicted to Regulation. In
his State of the Union Address, President Bush said that "America is addicted to oil." But it would be
more accurate to say that America is addicted to opportunity, and oil and its products help us seize
it. … Some 40% of our oil consumption is for cars and light trucks; 32% for buses, railroads, ships,
trucks and agricultural machinery; and another 17% goes into petrochemicals to produce products
from plastic to paint. These uses represent opportunities, not addictions.
Oil Addiction Fiction: Bush's
"Addiction" May Be Rational Choice. In spite of President Bush's dire warning in his State of
the Union address that America is becoming "addicted to oil" — followed by "rehab" policies to
include renewables, hybrids and now CAFE standards — most Americans do not wish to break the
habit. Far from it: Americans want their government to find new sources of oil to increase
domestic supplies.
Nelson: Oil
rigs would interfere with military training in Gulf. U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson says the Bush
administration is "hell-bent" on offshore oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, with some gas rigs as
close as 25 miles from Florida's shoreline. But he says the military may prevent
it. Nelson told reporters in Tallahassee that the Pentagon needs restricted air space
south of Eglin and Tyndall Air Force Bases, to test new types of jets and even secret weapons. He
said the Navy also does some weapons testing in the area, and can't have oil rigs in the way.
Energy
insecurity — unreliable supply at an unreasonable cost — took
years to create. Solutions will take years as well. In the meantime, working with
the international community, Washington must develop better knowledge, more tools and greater
will to effectively address international petroleum supply issues in foreign and economic
policy. Focused activities, skillfully executed, in producing countries could bring
millions of barrels more to world markets. We would then have less to fear from Iran
or other threats.
The
21st century Boston Tea Party. On Aug. 1, Speaker Nancy Pelosi — without addressing
gas prices that continue to hover near $4 per gallon — adjourned Congress for five weeks, dimmed
the lights, turned off the microphones and C-SPAN cameras and attempted to remove the press and visitors from
the House chamber. Republicans refuse to leave the chamber because the issue is about much more than gas
prices. It is about much more than energy. It is about the U.S. economy, jobs and national
security. It is about who we are as a people.
How to lower gas prices: Produce more oil!
Let's Drill Our Way To
Lower Taxes. Opening our vast domestic resources, both on- and off-shore, to responsible oil and gas
development would produce an influx of tax revenue from additional lease sales and royalties, as well as from income
and excise taxes. These additional collections could be used, for example, to offset the alternative minimum
tax (AMT). The Congressional Research Service recently estimated the potential federal revenue from Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) oil development at $191 billion over 30 years — roughly $18.36 per
barrel, based on projections of recoverable reserves.
Drill and
Save, Now. The nation, it seems, now favors developing new sources over "saving the planet" by a hefty
3-2 margin. And get this: The biggest shift came among — yep! — liberals. Seems
sanctimonious tree-huggers and caribou-coddlers have their price: $4 gas.
What Part of 'Drill Now' do they Not
Understand? Out here in West Texas we love our guns, we support our troops, and we treasure
our freedom. … We also walk around on top of oil: yes it's far beneath us, but it's there.
And all these aspects of West Texas come together to our astonishment and anger over the fact that our
independence is limited by an intrusive federal government that tells us what oil we can and can't access
through drilling, and ultimately makes us dependent upon other nations for our own fuel supplies.
Most Americans support more U.S. oil
drilling. A push by U.S. President George W. Bush and Republican presidential candidate
Senator John McCain to lift a ban on U.S. offshore oil drilling could find plenty of support from Americans
weary of rising energy costs, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll. Some 59.6 percent of Americans
surveyed in the poll released on Wednesday [6/18/2008] said they would favour government efforts to boost
domestic drilling and refinery construction to cool record prices.
It's Time for Rage. We have a right to be angry,
but anger is no longer enough. It's time for rage — good, old American rage aimed at those elitist
Democrats who prefer to see the folks beggared by soaring fuel prices rather than take the action this very real economic
crisis demands. Drill.
Drill, Already.
High gas prices are finally curbing America's demand for the open road. Transportation Department statistics for
March indicate that the country just experienced its first year-over-year decline in miles driven since 1979. A
decrease in demand is one natural market response to rising gas prices. The other natural response —
an increase in supply — has not been as forthcoming, and the price of oil continues to rise even though
Americans are driving less.
Drill! Drill! Drill!
At this point in time, is there another country on the face of the earth that would possess the oil and gas
reserves held by the United States and refuse to exploit them? Only technical incompetence, as in Mexico,
would hold anyone back. But not us. We won't drill. California won't drill for the estimated
1.3 billion barrels of recoverable oil off its coast because of bad memories of the Santa Barbara oil
spill — in 1969. We won't drill for the estimated 5.6 billion to 16 billion barrels
of oil in the moonscape known as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) because of — the
caribou.
A Time to Drill.
In a remarkably short time, the public has changed from supporters of environmentalism to advocates of
drilling for oil and natural gas in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and/or in the ocean.
For the first time since the 1970s, liberals in both parties have found themselves responding to significant
demands for drilling. Their responses are meant to confuse the electorate in order to turn public
opinion back to their position on the environment.
Energy Myths: Many
in Congress seem either disconnected from reality or intentionally disingenuous about our energy crunch.
They have well-honed negative responses to common-sense ideas about solving our energy crisis, particularly
drilling for more oil. These responses are based on a number of widely held myths. Sadly, they've
become the backbone of the Democrats' energy policy. They include: "We can't drill our way out
of our energy crisis." Actually, we can.
Who
wants to help me start drilling for oil? I'm tired of this nonsense. I am not addicted to oil. I'm
not psychologically or compulsively compelled to pump gasoline. If my truck ran on maple syrup I'd use that instead.
But it doesn't. It is not my fault that the automobile runs on gasoline. I didn't invent it. I only bought
one because I need it for work like most of you do. I tolerated paying $2 per gallon, and I could handle $3. But
word came down on Wednesday that $4-a-gallon gas will be the norm through 2009.
'Just Drill,
Baby' — Governor Palin. Yes, my friends on the left, there are responsible ways to
drill for oil that will help us with our energy needs and not disturb your precious caribou. It's time
we started to look to solutions like this rather than Obama's wind farms….
Oil Crisis is
Solvable. There is only one way to drive down the rising cost of gasoline for the long term:
significantly increase the domestic supply of oil. We are the only nation in the world with access to
known oil deposits on our own land or off our shores that essentially refuses to tap those resources. The
main stumbling block is a lack of political consensus, which is in especially short supply in an election
year. Instead of coming up with real solutions to our growing energy crisis, the Democrats in Congress
would rather rail against the oil companies.
Just Drill, Baby.
Washington politicians will tell you this is an "energy crisis," but America's energy challenges are far more
political than substantive. First, we are not running out of oil. In 1920 it was estimated that
the world supply of oil was 60 billion barrels. By 1950 it was up to 600 billion, and by 1990 to
two trillion. In 2000 the world supply of oil was estimated to be three trillion barrels. The
U.S. has substantial supplies of oil and gas that could be accessed if lawmakers would allow it, but they
frequently don't.
The drill-nothing
Congress goes home. Democrats' insistence on blocking a vote on drilling has more to do with protecting
environmental special interests than really protecting the environment or solving the energy crunch. And for
that, they should pay a political price.
Everything but oil is subsidized.
Wind
($23.37) v. Gas (25 Cents). [Scroll down] An even better way to tell the story is by how much
taxpayer money is dispensed per unit of energy, so the costs are standardized. For electricity generation,
the EIA concludes that solar energy is subsidized to the tune of $24.34 per megawatt hour, wind $23.37 and "clean
coal" $29.81. By contrast, normal coal receives 44 cents, natural gas a mere quarter, hydroelectric
about 67 cents and nuclear power $1.59.
D1 Oils says
US subsidies have forced it to shut UK refineries. The enormous damage being done by "splash-and-dash"
imports of American biodiesel was highlighted yesterday when one of the UK's leading operators, D1 Oils, said
it was closing down all its refining operations in Britain after running up a £46m annual loss.
Big Oil: Hero or Villain?
Big Oil Democrats: Here is
how you know Republicans are on the winning side of the oil drilling issue. It's not that two-thirds of
the American people support offshore drilling. It's that the Democratic response has been to simply
point at Republicans and shout, "Big Oil!"
The
Onion Ringer. Congress is back in session and oil prices are still through the roof, so pointless
or destructive energy legislation is all but guaranteed. Most likely is stiffer regulation of the futures
market, since Democrats and even many Republicans have so much invested in blaming "speculators" for $4 gas.
Congress always needs a political villain, but few are more undeserving.
An Energy Sarbox.
While some kind of crackdown on the U.S. oil futures market is inevitable after so much political agitation, Congress has
begun to believe its own demagoguery. The Senate may vote on a bill this week that will drive commodities trading
overseas and decrease oversight and market transparency. Call it a Sarbanes-Oxley for energy.
Oil Rally Topped Dot-Com Craze
in Speculators' Mania. Crude rose 697 percent since trading at $17.45 a barrel on the New York Mercantile
Exchange in November 2001, and reached 28 record highs this year. The last time a similar pattern was seen in equities
was eight years ago, when Internet-related stocks sent the Nasdaq Composite Index up 640 percent to its highest level
ever, according to data compiled by Bloomberg and Bespoke Investment Group LLC.
In Defense of Oil and Gas Speculators:
Despite Congress' periodic hauling of weak-kneed oil executives before their committees to charge them with
collusion and price-gouging, subsequent federal investigations turn up no evidence to support the charges.
Right now oil company executives are getting a bit of a respite as Congress has turned its attention to crude oil
speculators, blaming them for high oil prices and calling for tighter control over commodity futures trading.
Dems
willing to criticize oil despite holding stock. More than a dozen Democratic members of
Congress critical of oil companies have investments in the industry, according to a review of lawmakers'
financial assets. At least 14 Democratic members of the House and one senator have holdings ranging
from several thousand dollars to hundreds of thousands of dollars in companies such as Exxon Mobil Corp. and
Chevron Corp. or partnerships such as Schlumberger and Hornbeck Offshore Services.
Why Big Oil is not to
blame for fuel prices: Anyone with an understanding of basic supply and demand economics knows well enough
that Big Oil is not the big player in the energy market. More often than not the oil majors are just as helpless in
the face of global market forces as any other consumer. Why are energy prices sky-high? In a word:
geopolitics. The rapidly expanding economies of China and India, with a joint population of over 2 billion, have
become increasingly voracious consumers of energy. China's economic growth alone is running at nine percent and, over
coming years, will only accelerate.
Unleash America's Energy Potential.
As any driver can tell you, the pain at the pump is pretty acute right now. It's a simple matter of
supply and demand. Demand is up (thanks, in part, to an increasing appetite for fuel in China and
India), and supply is low. And if there's one thing that makes the pain worse, it's knowing that supply
doesn't have to be this low. Are the ridiculously high prices we're paying the fault of the big, bad oil
companies? No, the lion's share of the blame goes to politicians, who have locked away vast amounts of
American energy — both oil and natural gas.
The 'Idle' Oil Field Fallacy.
Anyone with even the most basic understanding of how oil and natural gas are produced — and this
should include many members of Congress — knows that claims of "idle" leases are a diversionary
feint. A company bids for and buys a lease because it believes there is a possibility that it may yield
enough oil or natural gas to make the cost of the lease, and the costs of exploration and production, commercially
viable. The U.S. government received $3.7 billion from company bids in a single lease sale in March
2008. However, until the actual exploration is complete, a company does not know whether the lease will
be productive.
Idle Leases —
Or Addled Minds? Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Rep. Nick Rahall, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other members
of Congress who oppose producing more American oil are in a bind. They know voters are hurting from high
gas prices and overwhelmingly want the government to allow more American oil production. But they can't side
with the American people and risk upsetting their left-wing base. So they needed a way to make us think
they support more drilling — while effectively preventing us from ever drilling a single new well.
Obama's
Dry Hole: "I want you to think about this," Barack Obama said in Las Vegas last week. "The oil
companies have already been given 68 million acres of federal land, both onshore and offshore, to drill.
They're allowed to drill it, and yet they haven't touched it — 68 million acres that have the
potential to nearly double America's total oil production." Wow, how come the oil companies didn't think
of that? Perhaps because the notion is obviously false….
The Editor says...
The oil companies haven't been "given" anything. Oil companies have spent billions of
dollars for those leases.*
Oil Leases on '68
Million Acres' No Guarantee of Oil, Experts Say. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says a
Republican plan to expand domestic oil drilling — instead of forcing oil companies to drill on
the 68 million acres they've already leased — is a "hoax" and "unworthy of serious
debate." But the nation's oil producers say Pelosi is being disingenuous, because federal
regulations restrict their exploration on the leased land, while much of the 68 million
acres is already "tapped out" of oil.
Who's Hoarding America's Oil?
The truth is, over 96% of the lands that belong to the taxpayer haven't even been leased by the government so
that energy exploration might occur. Consumers are paying for this failure at the pump and in utility
bills. Some are even paying for it with their jobs. But instead of opening new areas to energy
exploration and production, some in Congress have taken to diversionary tactics. Take, for example, the
mysterious "68 million acres" myth.
Congress
returns to gridlock over oil drilling. Mrs. Pelosi last month said she will introduce energy
legislation in the coming weeks that might include opening portions of the outer continental shelf for
drilling — a provision Democratic leaders previously had opposed. The measure also would
include a "use it or lose it" provision that would force oil companies to surrender oil and gas leases on
federal land they're not drilling on, and prohibit these companies from acquiring new leases.
The Editor says...
In other words, "Find oil on the land you have leased, or you won't be permitted to look
elsewhere." The logic escapes me.
Facts beat talking points. The
problem with the energy debate is that most of the "facts" we hear on the radio and cable news are really just
talking points from folks who mostly don't know what they are talking about. The Democrats — as if
they all received the same e-mail Wednesday — are arguing that the oil companies have plenty of
places to drill, and isn't it very curious that they aren't?
Some wonder if speculators are fueling oil run-up.
With American motorists struggling to pay record-high gasoline prices, a debate rages in the halls of Congress and across the Oil
Patch over the role speculators may be playing in driving up oil prices. Crude prices have rocketed nearly $70 a barrel in
the past year. Some energy experts suggest speculation could account for $20 to $30 of that run-up.
"Windfall profit" taxes
Only the stockholders of an oil company are entitled to share its profits.
What
Is a 'Windfall' Profit? To pay for "stimulus" checks of $1,000 for families and $500 for
individuals, the Senator says government would take "a reasonable share" of oil company profits. Mr.
Obama didn't bother to define "reasonable," and neither did Dick Durbin, the second-ranking Senate Democrat,
when he recently declared that "The oil companies need to know that there is a limit on how much profit
they can take in this economy." Really? This extraordinary redefinition of free-market success
could use some parsing.
Please
define what a "windfall profits" tax is. Liberals like to bleat about the oil companies making
"windfall profits" as if there is some point when making a profit is bad. So the Wall Street Journal
asks what the definition is of a "windfall profit." This is important to know because Senator Obama has
proposed giving each American family a stimulus check of $1000 paid for by a windfall profits tax on the oil
companies.
More Taxes Will Mean Less Oil.
Democrats say there should be a limit to the profits oil companies can make. Should there also be a
limit on the taxes government can take? Just who's the profiteer here?
Windfall taxing big oil: how
to make the gas crisis worse. Yes, it's true that Exxon's recent quarterly profits were, at near
$12 billion, big. It's also worth noting that turnover was $138 billion, giving them a margin
on sales of 9 percent: which isn't really, anything much to write home about. … The reason the
profits number is a huge one is because the business itself is a huge one.
In Defense of 'Big Oil': Senate
Democrats last week sought to ingratiate themselves with voters, while doing nothing to produce more energy,
with a familiar attack on "big oil." They want to repeal $17 billion in tax breaks for the oil
companies over 10 years and on top of that impose a windfall profit tax on companies that don't invest
in new energy sources. This is political expediency at its worst.
Energy charade: There's no
way to put this politely. Raising taxes on U.S. oil companies and calling it an energy plan is just about
the dumbest idea the Democrats have come up with yet. Democrats call it "a windfall profits" tax, and it
is at the heart of their plan to deal with punishing oil prices nearing $140 a barrel and skyrocketing gas
prices that have crossed the $4-a-gallon threshold at the pump. Their proposed tax increase will not
produce a drop more oil. In fact, it will reduce supplies. And it will not lower oil prices, either.
It will make oil more expensive, because oil company costs would rise as a result of higher taxes.
Things I Don't Believe:
Didn't we try this with the Carter administration at the tag end of the 1970s? … The windfall profits tax of the Carter
years was, however, a dandy way to cap every small well in the country. And reduce production in general. (Why
produce more in order to have the profits taxed away?) A tax is a great way to cut down on supply and therefore
increase demand and, with it, prices.
The "Big Oil" Witch
Hunt: [Members of Congress] — themselves guilty of thwarting American energy independence — are
poisoning the minds of gullible Americans against the very oil companies that reliably supply us with essential fuels, and
would be producing even more (resulting in lower prices) if Congress weren't blocking them from doing so. When it comes
to energy, Congress is the problem and Big Oil is part of the solution. The longer it takes Americans to perceive
this, the longer our energy woes will continue.
Dumb or Ill-Informed?
What assumptions do congressmen make about the American people? Do they assume that we're dumb or
ill-informed about the energy problems we are experiencing? Every time there has been a huge spike in
gasoline prices, Congress hauls oil company executives before their committees to accuse them of greed,
obscene profits and price-fixing. One federal investigation after another of supposed oil company
misconduct turns up nothing to substantiate congressional allegations.
Out of
Energy. Colorado's $23 billion-a-year oil and gas industry is keeping the state's economy
afloat, but Governor Bill Ritter and his fellow Democrats are promoting new rules and tax hikes that would
drive business elsewhere. … Ritter and his allies in the environmental movement are also seeking to raise
taxes on energy producers. In many mineral-rich states, energy producers have to pay what is called a
severance tax on any oil or gas they take out of the ground.
Phony 'Emergency'. [Scroll
down] Sen. Obama seems to be trying to take advantage of reports that Exxon Mobil reported record second-quarter
income — indeed, the highest quarterly profit for any corporation ever. But the reality is
that as Obama and his equally unknowing friends push windfall taxes, Exxon Mobil has already given the U.S. a
massive windfall. As economist Mark Perry has noted, Exxon Mobil will pay more taxes this year to the U.S.
Treasury than the bottom 50% of all taxpayers — combined.
Obama and
McCain Spout Economic Nonsense. Why should we stop with oil companies? They make about
8.3 cents in gross profit per dollar of sales. Why doesn't Mr. Obama slap a windfall profits
tax on sectors of the economy that have fatter margins? Electronics make 14.5 cents per dollar and
computer equipment makers take in 13.7 cents per dollar, according to the Census Bureau. Microsoft's
margin is 27.5 cents per dollar of sales.
The Wrong Way
to Kick An Oil Habit. High oil prices, like a walk under the summer moon, can drive normally
rational people to do foolish things they later regret. For Barack Obama, it is a fling with a windfall
profits tax on American oil companies — one of the most thoroughly discredited economic policies of
the past few decades. A 2006 Congressional Research Service report found that Jimmy Carter's version of
the tax generated less than one-fourth of expected government revenue while depressing domestic oil output
between 1.2 percent and 8 percent and increasing dependence on imported oil between 3 percent
and 13 percent.
Putting Up The 'For Shale' Sign.
Democrats will say Exxon and its unindicted co-conspirators still make obscene profits. The fact is that American oil
companies in 2007 had an 8.3% profit margin, compared with 8.9% for all U.S. manufacturing. The cigarette and beverage
companies' profit margin was 19.1%. Drug companies made 18.4%.
Thank you, Big Oil. Before you
get all excited about tearing down the energy industry, stop and think for a moment about what makes your comfortable life
possible. Your heat and most of your electricity are provided through the burning of oil and natural gas. The
thousands of plastic items in your home, car and office are all made from crude oil. Much of your clothing is woven of
fibers made from petroleum. Without the hard work and ingenuity of the men and women who work for the energy companies,
we would be living in the 17th century….
Windfall-Profit Nonsense:
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama want to raise the price of oil, as well as most everything else, and lower the value of the pension
and mutual funds that union members and retirees depend on. Of course, they don't describe their plan that way.
Instead, they call for a windfall-profits tax on the oil companies. But it's the same thing. Taxing a "windfall"
sounds appealing, but stock prices are based on expected profits.
GOP nixes Democrat-backed tax on oil
companies. Senate Republicans today successfully blocked a vote on a Democratic- written energy
package intended to slap the major oil companies with a new windfall profits tax and roll back other tax breaks
the industry now enjoys.
$4
Gasbags: Anyone wondering why U.S. energy policy is so dysfunctional need only review Congress's
recent antics. Members have debated ideas ranging from suing OPEC to the Senate's carbon tax-and-regulation
monstrosity, to a windfall profits tax on oil companies, to new punishments for "price gouging" — everything
except expanding domestic energy supplies. Amid $135 oil, it ought to be an easy, bipartisan victory to lift
the political restrictions on energy exploration and production.
Stop Whining And Blaming Oil Companies.
First, the bad news: Nothing — and I mean nothing — the U.S. government does can stop the rise in the
price of oil in the short run. Stopping buys for the emergency stockpile will have no effect at all. These
purchases are less than one-tenth of one percent of daily worldwide demand. Cancelling the purchases is precisely
the same as not paying life insurance premiums when you're worried about money. It is nonsense.
The
"Problem" Of Human Freedom: Could it be that a foolish and abusive use of governmental power is a causal factor
with our energy woes? Could it be, as [Bill] O'Reilly suggested, that our government's (and Mrs. Clinton's) prohibition
of domestic energy development is part of the reason we are now held hostage to the "monopoly" of OPEC? Not so, for
Hillary. In her leftist world, the problem is that American citizens are enjoying too much freedom. "Consumers"
and "drivers" behave badly, they drive too much, and they drive the "wrong" vehicles; and American oil corporations (just
as President Carter told us in the 1970's) are once again raking in "windfall profits."
One for you, 19 for me. On Saturday
[8/4/2007], the House passed $16 billion in new taxes on oil companies, while providing billions of
dollars in tax breaks and incentives for renewable energy and conservation efforts. "We are turning
to the future," announced House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The goal, obviously, is to make it less
attractive to drill or import oil, and more attractive to try and supply our energy needs with solar
panels and windmills, as well as to shift millions of acres to the production of corn for ethanol
(while continuing to block the import of cheap ethanol from Brazil).
Oil companies spend more on
taxes than on oil supply development. Over the last several the major oil companies have been driven away
from investing money in future exploration and production. The so-called Supermajors, Exxon, BP, Shell, Chevron.
Conoco, and Total have paid more in taxes than they have invested in the oil business. For the three year period, 2005 to 2007 these companies have paid $292 billion in
taxes and invested $265 billion in capital projects.
No
such thing as obscene profits. Profit isn't a shameful accident for corporations — it's
their very reason for being. Big profits help them do more of what they did to make the profit in the
first place. In the case of oil companies, that means more exploration, development, drilling, pumping,
refining, transporting and marketing of the oil that fuels every aspect of our economy. … Of course,
at the moment it's frustrating to pay more at the pump, but oil profits aren't the culprit, nor would
punishment of the energy companies help to bring down the cost of fuel.
Strangling Oil:
As any economist will tell you, "price-gouging" per se doesn't exist. There is only supply and
demand. … To add more dependable sources, the U.S. should be developing oil in the Alaskan National
Wilderness Reserve (sic) and on the continental shelf, where literally billions of barrels of oil await. But
we aren't. That's the supply side.
The Editor says...
Good article, but ANWR is the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Is Oil the Root of All Evil?Lives
per Gallon gratuitously excoriates the oil companies and places blame for every conceivable ill facing the
world — from air pollution to thievery — on their product. Replete with homilies to past
civilizations, such as the Rapa Nui, and fearsome examples of devastated ecosystems like Pacific
Ocean kelp beds, Tamminen assaults not only petroleum, but modern technological-based life.
Oily
politicians. If there is anything worse than partisan demagoguery, it is bipartisan
demagoguery. Republican leaders have now joined the Democrats in blaming the oil companies
for the fact that prices rise when demand expands more than supply. Prices have been rising
under these conditions for thousands of years, long before there were any oil companies. This
has happened with everything from food to furs and it has happened among people in every part of
the world.
Oily
politicians: Part II. World demand for oil has risen out of all proportion
to the amount of oil supplied. That is the problem and prices are a symptom of that problem.
Oil Is Well. I see that the
media and the left-wing foundations are in a state of hysteria over oil company profits. Exxon Mobil
reported profits of about $10 billion for the last quarter of 2005, and this has driven certain people who
don't really know a lot about the oil business … insane.
Governmental Viscosity
Breakdown: Members of Congress, such as Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter, who … manages to
exude split-atom energy when it comes to cheerleading for bad ideas, are calling for a windfall profits
tax on the oil companies. Of course, the tax would be passed on to consumers, but Congress will deal
with that later — it'll be good fodder for calling for the federalization of the oil
industry. In a Beltway culture that confuses motion with action, windfall profits
taxes are but flailing victims in the quicksand of lunacy.
Clinton
Seeks 'Energy Revolution' Fueled by Tax on Oil Profits. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) Tuesday
[5/23/2006] called for an "energy revolution" based on greater fuel efficiency and a $50 billion
research fund financed largely through higher taxes on oil company profits. A GOP spokesman responded
that the plan is just "partisanship, political pandering and yesterday's mistakes."
Control Freak:
Hillary Clinton says our trade deficit and reliance on foreign investors are big problems, and wants to fix
them. But her cure would be far worse than the disease, and should be rejected out of hand.
We are all Marxists
now. National Public Radio's Juan Williams, appearing on Fox News Sunday, insisted repeatedly
that "supply is at an eight year high" as proof that the oil companies are cheating us. He kept
repeating the phrase, as if that would make it a more sensible statement. It didn't. … Frustrated
by his inability to convince others of his nonsense, Williams then insisted that there is no connection
between supply and demand.
Big awl and
gasbags. Though some of the stated bases for the alarmism of the Sixties and Seventies may have
changed (example: from global cooling to global warming), their bogeymen/targets remain the same.
No matter what environmental scare they have sported from time to time, the culprits are always the same.
The foremost villain, of course, is America, home of the rich, greedy, and voracious consumers of the earth's
resources. Next, are big corporations, whose favorite sadistic pastime is to pollute.
You Can't Always
Get What You Want. Calling for a probe of oil companies for possible manipulation of gas
prices is Bush's latest nonconservative position. … He could have said, no, the free market is working
properly. That, while basically true, would no doubt have further injured his political standing.
Instead, he moved to take control of the issue and protect himself politically. Two days later, the
president conceded he had "no evidence that there's any ripoff taking place." Of course he
hadn't. That wasn't the point of his intervention.
Punishing
big oil: Intended to punish the oil industry for making so much money, the provision
actually would increase American dependency on foreign oil producers.
Senate Approves $5 Billion in New Oil
Company Taxes. The U.S. Senate on November 17, 2005 voted to impose nearly $5 billion
in taxes on oil companies in response to record oil company profits. The Senate rejected three
amendments that would explicitly assess "windfall profits" taxes on the oil industry, but nevertheless
changed longstanding accounting rules in ways that are expected to add $5 billion to the oil
companies' tax burdens over the next two years.
Oil Industry Posts Record Profits
in 2005. "You need to make money to spend money," said oil industry analyst John
Parry, senior vice president of John S. Herold, Inc. of Norwalk, Connecticut. "If we
go back to the 1990s, the oil companies were making less than 5 percent on their
capital. If you were to average profits over about a 10-year period, which
is the cycle of investment, they have not earned excessive amounts. This is a
cyclical industry. You may have seven or eight down years and two or three good years.
MoveOn Targets McCain on Offshore
Drilling and 'Obscene' Oil Profits. MoveOn.org, the liberal grassroots group, has unveiled a
television ad campaign on energy that is an attack on presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John
McCain and his support for offshore drilling. But free-market critics say the ad reflects more about
MoveOn's ignorance of economics than it does politics.
Refineries
Republican
Bill Would Encourage New Refinery Building. House Republicans [are trying to] drum up
support for a bill that would "expedite" the construction of new oil refineries in the United
States. … But environmental groups and others oppose the bill….
Our Thorny Oil Patch.
When America's biggest oil refiner contemplates putting almost a third of its refineries on the market, Congress
should sit up and take notice. The business climate it has created is hurting our economy.
Kuwait
May Build Oil Refinery in Louisiana, Boost U.S. Capacity. Kuwait, the Middle East's
fourth-largest oil producer, is seeking a "mid-sized" U.S. partner like Marathon Oil Corp. to build a
refinery in the U.S. with as much as 400,000 barrels a day of output….
Blended fuels may spike the price at the
pump. Record crude oil costs are largely responsible for today's $4 gas prices, but regulators
continue to study another factor blamed for regional price spikes in the past — the high number of
unique fuel blends used to fight air pollution. These so-called "boutique" fuels arose from various
federal and state laws enacted since the early 1990s. The blends — more than a dozen
nationwide — are designed to help curb emissions in some of the largest U.S. cities, including
Houston.
Why
I'm Voting for John McCain: Democrats insist that we shouldn't drill off the Pacific coast or
in Alaska or in the Dakotas because they claim we wouldn't get a drop of oil for at least 10 years.
And that's true, but only if the same left-wing idiots who are more concerned with moose than with people
won't allow the oil companies to build new refineries. Also, even if it were true that we wouldn't be
any better off for an entire decade, what do you suppose they'll be saying in 2018, when gas is going
for 25 bucks a gallon?
