NDPeople.org Don’t Want What’s Right For ND’s Economy

A reader emailed me a link to this new website from ND People. There aren’t a lot of details about the group on the website (aside from the fact that it was designed by someone going under the handle “geeksmakemehot”, which is totally professional), but the address/phone number information on the contact page are the same as those for the ND Progressives…so either that group has changed its name or they’ve created some sort of subsidiary organization.
I’d say it’s probably the former given that the old ND Progressives domain name doesn’t load any more.
Anyway, the group is starting a radio ad campaign against Fargo Republican Rick Berg who proposed a tax benefit for oil companies in March of 2005.
You can listen to their ad by clicking here. It’s about what you’d expect. Rick Berg is a bad guy because he wanted to encourage growth in North Dakota’s oil industry by giving oil companies a tax benefit.
But Berg’s tax benefit for the oil industry never became law. After the House passed it the Senate made some modifications and then changed it to a study and that’s as far as it has gotten. According to ND People that’s because the majority Republicans realized “how it would look to give oil companies a tax break while the price of crude oil shot up over $50/barrel.” In reality, the high price of oil made the tax cuts unnecessary. What Berg was trying to do is encourage growth in North Dakota’s economy, especially in the western part of the state where the oil resources are. When gas prices shot up the oil companies didn’t need tax breaks as an incentive to expand oil production in North Dakota.
Really, though, one has to wonder why any group of North Dakotans would be opposed to the oil industry expanding production in North Dakota. Throughout the nation the oil industry has been re-investing the “windfall profits” liberals are always complaining about into places like North Dakota in order to expand domestic production of oil to keep up with demand. That re-investment by the oil industry here in North Dakota has resulted in more jobs and increased tax revenue, which in turn is one of the major factors behind this state’s half a billion dollar budget surplus.
ND People are trying to paint Berg as greedy and insensitive to North Dakotans paying high gas prices, but in reality Berg had North Dakotan’s best interests at heart. As I’ve just indicated, a resurgent oil industry in North Dakota is a boon for the whole state. Berg’s tax benefit, had it been passed, would have been helpful in that resurgence.
As far as I’m concerned, I still think they should pass it to encourage the oil industry to keep this economic boom in North Dakota going.

Tags:


«
»
  • http://www.freerepublicans.com/ FreeRepublicans.com

    Rick Berg’s stated purpose was to increase oil production. The number of oil wells increase from 19 to 41 in the year and a half since Berg proposed his tax break for oil companies. Obviously they didn’t need the tax break.

    What obviously? Maybe it would be 65 instead of 41.

    I may accuse them of shady dealings, but at least I don’t want to outright stiffle them.

  • http://www.flickertailjournal.com/ Ryan

    You’re really reaching in this post to criticize. The website theme was designed by “geeksmakemehot” and Kashaul Sheth, as it says if you’d bother to read the whole thing – just like the mention you make at the bottom of your website. It’s common courtesy. I have the same thing at the bottom of my blog.

    Rick Berg’s stated purpose was to increase oil production. The number of oil wells increase from 19 to 41 in the year and a half since Berg proposed his tax break for oil companies. Obviously they didn’t need the tax break.

    The worst thing about it is how Berg fought against tax breaks for people that could really use them – college students, working families, etc.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    You may have thought that you were merely being snarky, but that’s a provocative post.

    When petroleum is high (and it stays high) there would be no need to encourage alternative sources of energy.

    However if the price of petroleum goes below say $40, then those alternative energies are not economically viable. The problem is that investors will NOT invest due to the uncertainty.

    So the question becomes, do we want energy independence or not? (I think 75-80% independence would be good enough) For national security (not economic reasons, I think we need to become independent.

    So I think we should develop our domestic sources like ANWR and encourage other alternative energy sources.

  • AnotherBlogReader

    Then I guess we shouldn’t give tax breaks to wind, ethanol, biodiesel, etc. If oil production is up without tax breaks, it’s obvious that we don’t need them for other forms of energy either.

  • http://www.freerepublicans.com/ FreeRepublicans.com

    Wait… you think we’re stifling the oil industry by not giving them preferential tax breaks while the rest of us suffered through $3/gallon gas?

    Taxes stiffle growth, yes, there is no arguing that point.

    And I am in favor of dropping the gas tax when it is expensive as well which helps the consumer.

    You’re funny. :)

    Thats what they say.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    Ryan says, Obviously they didn’t need the tax break.

    Do you see the galling hubris in this comment of yours Ryan?

    Just who are you to decide whether a person or company “needs” their own money?

    The worst thing about it is how Berg fought against tax breaks for people that could really use them – college students, working families, etc.

    You’re lying here and I can say that because I know that you’ve been told this before: you’re equating a “tax break” with welfare. Berg fought against welfare, not letting people keep their own money.

    Without lying, you have no defendable position Ryan.

  • http://www.flickertailjournal.com/ Ryan

    Wait… you think we’re stifling the oil industry by not giving them preferential tax breaks while the rest of us suffered through $3/gallon gas?

    You’re funny. :)

  • http://www.freerepublicans.com/ FreeRepublicans.com

    Searching the PAC and Non-Profit lists at nd.gov I could not find an entity named NDPeople.

    It is linked to the ND Center for the Public Good.

    So when it says “Paid for by NDPeople.org” at the end of the ad, if there is no registered org by that name, then they could be in violation of some sort of campaign finance law. (I haven’t researched this yet.)

  • Rick

    Mr Berg flat out did not know what he was talking about when he said that the oil exctraction tax in ND was too high. Check out the taxes in MT and WY they are both higher than ND

  • puzzlefeet

    ANd they did it without the extra tax breaks.

  • aNONOMISLY

    GET on it FreeRepublican. ..earn you paycheck, lol

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Wait… you think we’re stifling the oil industry by not giving them preferential tax breaks while the rest of us suffered through $3/gallon gas?

    Ryan, you do know that the oil industry has hired so many people in western North Dakota that people can’t find houses or apartments to live in in Williston, right?

    And you also know that oil drilling has fueled ND’s budget surplus, right?

    You just don’t get it, I’m afraid.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    ANd they did it without the extra tax breaks.

    Right, Puzzle, but remember that when the tax breaks were suggested gas prices weren’t what they have been just recently. You can see what the increased oil production in the state has done for our economy, the tax breaks would have had the same impact.

    Why do you oppose what is best for ND’s economy?

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development