Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Democrats Are Going To Lower Gas Prices By Making It More Expensive To Produce Gasoline

No kidding.

Democrat House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer took the floor today in support of new energy legislation.  He prefaced his comments by griping about high gas prices:

“This morning’s headline in the New York Times states the harsh reality: ‘Gas Prices Soar, Posing a Threat to Family Budget.’

“The fact is, the nationwide average for a gallon of regular gasoline was $3.14 this week - an increase of 19 cents in just the last two weeks - and some energy experts fear gas prices could hit $4 a gallon this spring.

“Diesel prices are hitting new records daily, and oil hit a record high of $100.88 a barrel on Tuesday.

Then goes on to rattle off a whole slew of new government spending on alternative energy schemes, all of which does nothing to lower actual gas prices (something the government shouldn’t be in the business of doing anyway) while significantly increasing our tax burden.  Meaning not only does our energy situation not change in any really significant way, at least as far as gasoline is concerned, we’re also stuck paying for massive new government spending projects.

“This bill is nothing less than a critical investment in the low carbon economy of the future that will result in the creation of millions of new jobs.

“It extends the production tax credit for wind, geothermal and other renewables to 2011, and renews the investment tax credit for individual homeowners and businesses to maintain incentives for solar energy through the end of 2016.  Without the prompt extension of these tax credits, renewable energy project work stoppages could cost 116,000 jobs.

“Furthermore, this bill will spur the commercialization of the next generation of automobiles by establishing a $4,000 credit for the purchase of a plug-in hybrid.

“It will encourage investments in cleaner fuels, creating economic incentives to invest in bio-fuels, including bio-diesel and cellulosic ethanol.

“And, it will close the ‘Hummer’ tax loophole, which encourages taxpayers to buy gas-guzzling SUVS.

“In addition, this legislation will create incentives for the construction of energy-efficient buildings and the retro-fitting of existing homes, which will reduce pollution and energy use.

“Finally, the energy conservation bonds included in this bill will spur investments in efficiency, create jobs, and reduce carbon emissions.

To cap off this alleged solution to high energy prices, Hoyer announces that the legislation would end “subsidies” for oil industry.  Subsidies meaning, in liberal speak, tax relief.

“Now, in keeping with this Democratic Majority’s commitment to fiscal responsibility, this legislation will not add to the deficit.

“Rather, the tax incentives contained in this bill are offset by repealing $18 billion in unnecessary tax subsidies over the next 10 years that otherwise will be enjoyed by the largest oil and gas companies in America.

“Last year alone, the five largest oil companies had a combined profit of $123 billion – which only provokes this question: Do these companies need and deserve these taxpayer subsidies?  The answer, of course, is no.

Actually, the real question is “Does the government need these massive new tax revenues.” And the answer is, of course, “No.”

But here’s what I don’t understand: If the oil industry, which pretty much every American depends on to maintain the quality of life we’ve all come accustomed to, doesn’t deserve subsidies because of high profits why should the green industry - including companies like GE - get subsidies?  Are those companies not equally as guilty of those nasty profits Democrats hate so much?  Is it really that the oil companies make too much money or just that they’re the wrong kind of company for liberals?

I, personally, am not really in favor of the government giving any particular company or industry special treatment, but the Democrats could at least be honest with their intentions here.  It’s not about reducing oil prices or creating alternative sources of energy.  It’s about granting government largess to their preferred companies as opposed to those preferred by Republicans.

Comments

I just can’t wrap my mind around the fact that every story doesn’t hammer the greens and the government for failing the American people.  We need new refineries and new drilling for domestic oil, gas, and coal. 

Clinton locked up in a national monument 7 billion tons, the first or second largest deposit of the cleanest burning coal in the world.  It is in Utah (1 trillion dollars worth) that partially belonged to the Utah School Trust and by making it a national monument it was completely removed from the market.  This happened and Clinton received illegal campaign money from Lippo Group, they control the next largest deposit of this type of coal.
http://laissez-fairerepublic.com/indocoal.htm

We haven’t built a refinery for 30 years, we can’t drill off our own coast but Castro can, we can’t drill in a part of a refuge we set aside FOR DRILLING when we rhetorically fenced it in.

Yet Democrats complain about the price.  There will be a price for fuel that will force this recognition and it will bite the Dems in the ass one day.
DKK

LifeTrek on February 27, 2008 at 08:43 pm

Corporations don’t pay taxes; their customers do.
Customers of gas station will pay more taxes, thanks to congress.

Kevin on February 27, 2008 at 09:29 pm
Avatar for patriotfirst

No wonder Congress gets a lower poll rating than President Bush. I almost bet that the fanatical liberals are scratching their heads on this one? How does this make sense again? My wife was telling me that right now we have more oil in our reserve than we ever did, but Congress (Dem Controlled by the way) will not release any of this. Dems say they want us not to be dependent on foreign oil, but unless those tree huggers let us start doing our own drilling, we are always going to be dependent on foriegn oil, some of those countries we are dependent on do not like the US at all (but like our money). That right there is a National Security issue.

patriotfirst on February 28, 2008 at 01:25 am
Avatar for Osama Obama

patriotfirst,

There was a post here on sayanythingblog earlier that dealt with the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and it’s alleged impact on prices.  In fact, as new petro is pumped into the reserve, old petro is pumped out to be sold on the market.  The only time there is more put in than taken out is when the size of the reserve is expanded to increase the amount available in times of crisis. 

As for Hoyer’s idiocy,

Let’s makes sure people understand that the price of their food goes up with the increased use of bio fuels, and that the “loopholes” he’s closing will actually increase our price at the pump and that solar and wind energy are dependent on the weather, and that Hoyer and his wealthy pals don’t have to get up and put gas in the car, don’t have a work truck, don’t have a family requiring a mini-van, don’t worry about where the thermostat is set, whether a light was left on, etc, etc.  They are in love with the sounds of their own voices and serve the interests of their campaign contributors.  And they think this bull crap is being done for our own good so they’ll never releant in their torment of the average joe.

Osama Obama on February 28, 2008 at 05:01 am

Democrats have been trying to do this for 40 years.


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on February 28, 2008 at 05:53 am
Avatar for Attilla

Doesn’t anybody understand the term “PROFIT”..That’s what a company acquires after ALL other production expenses are subtracted, including paying off the right politicians, research, developmentand construction of new wells,advertising, payroll,etc.  It’s what is left over! There is no shortage of crude. The price is driven by speculators who buy oil for a certain price, hold it off the market until the price goes up and then sells it.What makes us victims is the reality that we are addicted to the use of fossil fuels.  Even if they opened up the alask oil fields, it wouldn’t change a thing. The speculators would buy up those bbls as well.  There is no limiot to how much people will pay for gasoline. None! Think about it.

Attilla on February 28, 2008 at 07:01 am
Avatar for Attilla

The bottom line is that human beings will pay whatever is necessary ro maintain their ability to exist, be it health care, transportation, food etc.  Unfortunately we’ve allowed those commodities to be controlled by greedy uncaring individuals.  It’s the same formula that brought about communisim.

Attilla on February 28, 2008 at 07:06 am

Thank God for profits!  And for “speculators” as well, without whom there would be no investments, no profits, and no gasoline.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on February 28, 2008 at 07:08 am

Unfortunately we’ve allowed those commodities to be controlled by greedy uncaring individuals.

I suppose this “explanation” is sufficient for those who know as much about markets in general, and fungible commodities in particular, as they do the sex lives of sea urchins.  But the fact is that being greedy and uncaring has nothing to do with it at all.  Those adjectives are merely the pejoratives of the uninformed.  Nor do the markets care whether a person is young or old, male or female, left-handed or right-handed, or Republican or Democrat.

In fact, the last greedy, uncaring person to try to control an international market was George Soros.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on February 28, 2008 at 07:30 am

What currency is oil and most commodities priced in?
Has the value of that currency dropped?

Free Image Hosting at allyoucanupload.com

Drilling for more oil will not increase the value of the USD.
Copper is so expensive vacant homes are being stripped of it. Should we open up more copper mines?

Or should we increase the value of the currency that these commodities are priced in.

Gas will hit $4 a gallon b/c a barrel of oil has gone from $52 to $100 a barrel in a 12 month period and the profit margins of the refineries has decreased.

And Ben is gonna drive the USD even lower next month which will increase the price of commodities priced in it.
In simpler terms........Oil is gonna skyrocket.


“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar.....
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

Mark D on February 28, 2008 at 08:18 am

All excellent reasons to increase drilling,pumping,and refining more oil/gasoline. Thanks for helping clear that up.


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on February 28, 2008 at 08:22 am

2h,
Will that bring the price of oil down?


“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar.....
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

Mark D on February 28, 2008 at 08:26 am

Yes, it will.


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on February 28, 2008 at 08:43 am

Yet Democrats complain about the price.  There will be a price for fuel that will force this recognition and it will bite the Dems in the ass one day

LT-

The Dems have long played this game—set the stage for failure and then blame someone else.  They set the stage for failure in Vietnam by portraying military victories as defeats, beating the defeat drum, undermining support for the war here at home and undercutting the effort via Congressional action.  The Dems never really did take any heat for any of that.  Blame was left at the feet of Nixon and all the evil war-mongering, corrupt Republicans.

Every Mass Public Shooting is a result of a combination of Leftist programs: stringing our kids out on SSRI’s, teaching them classes on Wiccan practices, death and nihlism, coupled with complete victim disarmament.  The bad guys know they can rack up the biggest body counts where victims can’t shoot back and will be assured a place in history via an MSM that will hype the story.  The Dems never take heat for that either, but can reliably be counted on to blame Rush, guns and to call for yet more gun control.

As posters have pointed out, Dems have set the stage for this failure as well.  Our dependence upon foreign oil is assured, as is the associated pain.  Tree-hugging policymakers reason that this pain will be an incentive to develop alternative energy.  In the meantime we mortgage our future to foreign debt and ensure that we have to become embroiled in the affairs of oil-producing nations.

And the Leftist MSM will spin like a top to make sure the blame is deflected away from the guilty parties and laid upon the bad-guy of the week (who ever the figurehead Republican, most likely)

What will bring down the price of oil?

A couple possibliities.

1) Seize the oilfields, or at least install puppet governments (Nigeria, Venezuela, Iraq, Iran, etc… ) of those controlling the oilfields.

But that is a stretch.  Red China’s newfound voracious appetite for energy and raw materials will be a growing source of tension between the US and Red China for the foreseeable future.  Perhaps even a cause for future armed conflict.

2) Develop domestic sources of energy.

Go ahead and start drilling here, moving all Dem protestations aside.  Re-introduce nuclear energy. Looking at the Leftist complexion of government, especially the likely presidential candidates, again, not likely.

3) Develop alternative sources of energy.

This may be achievable.  I wonder how much of the urban legend that oil companies buy up the patents to alternative energy solutions and spike them is true or not.  If it is, there is a fairly straightforward solution—amend the laws on intellectual property to require ‘use it or lose it. ‘ Some countries follow such a regime, since the entire concept of intellectual property law is to encourage the useful arts.  There is no incentive to invent if your invention is spiked and cannot be put into use.  (see Where can I put the meter? )

One area that I am very interested in is fusion research, which incidentally may be why the US, the old Soviets and now the Red Chinese have a sudden interest in returning to the moon.  Analysis of lunar samples turned up strong deposits of Helium-3, an isotope, which when mixed with deuterium has the strongest reaction yet towards fusion break-even.

Fusion scientists are working on both super-heated, magnetically confined fusion reaction as well as cold or table-top fusion, but controlling the process once it starts has been a nagging problem.

Still, it holds promise, and other forms of energy, maybe none by themselves, but if many forms are used (solar, geothermal, tidal, wind, etc...) a big chunk out of our energy needs might be met with them.


...for great justice

Move_Zig on February 28, 2008 at 09:25 am

Zig Zag.....That’s 2 frickin funny.

1) Seize the oilfields, or at least install puppet governments (Nigeria, Venezuela, Iraq, Iran, etc… ) of those controlling the oilfields.

I like how you left out the Saudi’s

Free Image Hosting at allyoucanupload.com

Oil is priced in $$$$$$$$

That’s why we pay $100 a barrel for oil from Alaska and the gulf.
OPEC will most likely cut production on March 5th due to the value of the USD.

Hey Zig....how about if China decides to seize our corn fields and install a puppet gov over here....


“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar.....
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

Mark D on February 28, 2008 at 09:42 am

Oh and Zig.....that dude that dubya is havin so much fun with.....he’s one of the worlds worst dictators.


“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar.....
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

Mark D on February 28, 2008 at 09:45 am

Does not look like Saddam. Is it Bashir Assad?


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on February 28, 2008 at 10:06 am

I agree 2H, increasing the production volume and production capacity can and does drive down prices.  It’s simple supply and demand.



A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

dougee on February 28, 2008 at 01:43 pm

Pomeroy’s statement on the floor. Hard to believe he represents a state that owes much of its current economic health to the oil industry. Screw you, says Earl:

Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, this debate has been quite extraordinary for my friends on the other side of the aisle. They create a picture of great concern: poor, poor oil companies. Oil priced globally at over a hundred dollars a barrel. Prices at the pump approaching record levels, certain to hit record levels at the time the North Dakota farmers have to go to plant their crops. Oil companies reporting record profits. Now, not just record profits relative to their earnings and profits of years past. I mean with ExxonMobil, the biggest profit ever posted by a corporation in history.

And yet, when we look at trying to break this stranglehold on imported oil and build renewable sources of energy so that our economy is not so dangerously dependent upon imported oil, we look to using as a pay-for for these renewable energy incentives a tax provision exploited by oil companies beyond what was ever intended by the Ways and Means Committee. You have the White House threatening veto. You have House Republicans screaming tax increase. I’ll tell you, that is an energy policy completely out of gas. We need to move, and move now, to renewable sources.

Take, for example, one, wind power. You know, we are now into a period of time where the wind production tax credit expires at the end of this year. The consequence relative to new products put online is already going to be felt. A recent study by the Solar Energy Industry Association, American Wind Energy Association estimates that if this credit expires, it will cost 6,000 megawatts of new wind energy production, nearly 77,000 jobs, 11.5 billion in economic impact, all in 2009.

This is the group on the other side when they were in the majority that allowed the wind production tax credit to expire three times since 1999. They extended it an additional five times. Now, how in the world can we build a renewable energy system when you have got a tax credit that maybe there isn’t there, you can never get your financials right, to make the move this country must make to renewables with wind power playing the major role.

We need to pass this bill and break this lock that oil companies have had on policies coming out of this Chamber.

Pomerdorgrad on February 28, 2008 at 03:24 pm

Not to mention that OPEC will immediately take steps to force down price in order to maintain elevated volume of sales.


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on February 28, 2008 at 04:39 pm
Avatar for ch_ssg

Well what I can tell you is, the search for alternative fuels has hurt many businesses, especially the one my company supplies. My company makes feed for domestic catfish farms(I book the grain used to make the feed)and in the past 6 months grain price have increased so much that finished feed prices have gone up 64%, and we(my company ) have not increased our profit margin IN ALMOST 9 YEARS!!! Also , the owner’s manual for my car says I may see as MUCH AS A 30% DECREASE IN FUEL MILEAGE if I use E 85.!! WOW, that will save money!!!!!

ch_ssg on February 28, 2008 at 05:43 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.