Search Fishin.com

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 17

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    .
    Posts
    111
    Post Thanks / Like

    Talking House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    House Conservatives Vote Against Release of Reserve Oil While Swimming in Oil Contributions

    By Daniel J. Weiss, Alexandra Kougentakis

    August 6, 2008

    .

    Americans are burdened with the highest gasoline prices ever. These debilitating prices have worsened consumer pain by contributing to higher costs for food, clothing, and other essentials. They can be traced back to record oil prices linked to demand growing faster than supply, the relative inelasticity of gasoline demand (people buy it regardless of cost), and speculators driving up prices.

    The fastest way to lower oil and gasoline prices is to significantly increase supply by selling a small amount of oil from the 97 percent full Strategic Petroleum Reserve. This would also burst the speculative bubble by upending the expectation that oil supplies will remain limited. Unfortunately, a minority of conservatives in the U.S. House of Representatives blocked such a measure in a vote on July 24. Not surprisingly, these same members received significantly more campaign cash from Big Oil companies compared to supporters of selling a small amount of the oil in storage. Oil companies have made record profits due to record prices. No wonder their congressional defenders want high prices to continue.

    Representatives Nick Lampson (D-TX), Ed Markey (D-MA), and John Barrow (D-GA) introduced the Consumer Energy Supply Act, H.R.6578, which would require the sale of at least 60 million barrels of sweet crude oil from the reserve, and eventually replace it with heavy crude. Although it passed by 268-157, it fell 16 votes short of the two-thirds majority required when bills are on the suspension calendar.

    Opponents of the bill argue that selling a small amount of our oil reserves would harm national security and would not lower prices. Both arguments don’t hold water. The reserve has 707 million barrels of oil in it, with a capacity of 727 million barrels. Selling 60 million barrels will leave it 89 percent full, and H.R. 6578 requires that oil companies replace the sold oil. Nonetheless, Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA) claimed that “draining the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is short-sighted, foolish and hurts our national security.”

    The White House and other opponents claim that selling reserve oil won’t lower prices. At a press briefing presidential press secretary Dana Perino claimed: “What we have seen in the past when people have tried to use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to affect price is that it hasn't worked.” In fact, her boss President George W. Bush sold reserve oil after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and it lowered gasoline prices. This move saved families an average of $125 over 100 days. President Bush’s father, President George H.W. Bush, sold reserve oil beginning on the eve of the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Families then saved an average of $65 dollars from lower gasoline prices.

    Opponents of releasing this government oil have received average lifetime contributions from oil and gas interests of $133,605. In contrast, representatives who voted in favor of reducing current gas prices have average lifetime contributions of $42,341. This 3-1 oil industry fundraising advantage indicates that opponents of selling reserve oil have much more oil industry support. It makes sense that these big oil allies would oppose the sale of this oil since it would lower prices and therefore oil company profits.

    Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO) falsely claimed that the bill would “drain our nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve.” He received $362,248 from the oil industry in campaign contributions. Representative Boustany, who made the above-mentioned remark about national security, received $281,530. And a constituent of Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) wondered whether his opposition to selling extra oil has “something to do with the $45,000 in contributions he's received from Big Oil?”

    Many of the opponents of selling some stockpiled oil instead favor the expansion of offshore oil drilling in the protected Outer Continental Shelf. This ignores the Department of Energy analysis that determined that opening the OCS to offshore drilling “would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.” Three of every four barrels of oil offshore of the United States are in areas already available for drilling.

    Selling oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to promptly increase supplies and decrease prices is a short-term fix for record prices. For the long term, the most effective policies would decrease the use of oil by making vehicles go significantly further on a gallon of gas, develop sustainable alternative fuels, and dramatically increase the affordability and accessibility of public transit.

    Enhanced fuel-efficiency standards would significantly reduce oil consumption, yet House Republican leaders blocked enhanced fuel economy standards from 1995 to 2006, and many opposed them in 2007. Had the House not defeated a 2001 bipartisan proposal to make light trucks like SUVs meet the same standards as passenger vehicles, Americans would be using 1 million barrels of oil per day less in 2008.

    Better fuel economy standards or immediate relief due to the sale of reserve oil are not the only energy measures that most of these members opposed. They also voted against requiring oil companies to develop the oil leases that they already posses, reining in speculators who have driven up oil prices to make a quick buck, and ending tax breaks for big oil and investing the money in clean energy. These members have chosen “none of the above”—except for drilling in protected coastal areas—for their energy policy.

    With gasoline prices still near record highs, President Bush and Congress must act to provide immediate help to lower pump prices. The only policy that would accomplish this goal quickly is selling some of our extra oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. As prices drop, the real work of investments in super-efficient cars, non-oil fuels, public transit, efficiency, and clean energy must begin in earnest to prevent a recurrence of skyrocketing prices and promote the sensible policies for energy Americans want.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    11,442
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    Barry gets money from the oil companies as well. I heard today it was around 500k. So he is just alittle bit in their pocket...eh?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Evansville Area of Southern IN, USA.
    Posts
    1,170
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    Good Job Larry:

    It's obvious that some of the oil supported GOP Congressman are in the pocket of big oil and will favor keeping oil prices high so that the Oil Companies continue to make record high profits.

    It's a shame that the American People are so easily fooled by their false reasons to not open up and sell some of the Petroleum Reserves oil

    We all know that if you increase the supply you can drop the price of oil and gasoline in the short run

    That's exactly what Bush's Daddy did in 1991 and it worked then. And it worked after Katrina too.

    It's time that we elected some congressmen who voted in favor of the American Public and not for the Oil Company's Profits.

    Quote Originally Posted by PL View Post
    House Conservatives Vote Against Release of Reserve Oil While Swimming in Oil Contributions

    By Daniel J. Weiss, Alexandra Kougentakis

    August 6, 2008

    .

    Americans are burdened with the highest gasoline prices ever. These debilitating prices have worsened consumer pain by contributing to higher costs for food, clothing, and other essentials. They can be traced back to record oil prices linked to demand growing faster than supply, the relative in-elasticity of gasoline demand (people buy it regardless of cost), and speculators driving up prices.

    The fastest way to lower oil and gasoline prices is to significantly increase supply by selling a small amount of oil from the 97 percent full Strategic Petroleum Reserve. This would also burst the speculative bubble by upending the expectation that oil supplies will remain limited. Unfortunately, a minority of conservatives in the U.S. House of Representatives blocked such a measure in a vote on July 24. Not surprisingly, these same members received significantly more campaign cash from Big Oil companies compared to supporters of selling a small amount of the oil in storage. Oil companies have made record profits due to record prices. No wonder their congressional defenders want high prices to continue.

    Representatives Nick Lampson (D-TX), Ed Markey (D-MA), and John Barrow (D-GA) introduced the Consumer Energy Supply Act, H.R.6578, which would require the sale of at least 60 million barrels of sweet crude oil from the reserve, and eventually replace it with heavy crude. Although it passed by 268-157, it fell 16 votes short of the two-thirds majority required when bills are on the suspension calendar.

    Opponents of the bill argue that selling a small amount of our oil reserves would harm national security and would not lower prices. Both arguments don’t hold water. The reserve has 707 million barrels of oil in it, with a capacity of 727 million barrels. Selling 60 million barrels will leave it 89 percent full, and H.R. 6578 requires that oil companies replace the sold oil. Nonetheless, Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA) claimed that “draining the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is short-sighted, foolish and hurts our national security.”

    The White House and other opponents claim that selling reserve oil won’t lower prices. At a press briefing presidential press secretary Dana Perino claimed: “What we have seen in the past when people have tried to use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to affect price is that it hasn't worked.” In fact, her boss President George W. Bush sold reserve oil after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and it lowered gasoline prices. This move saved families an average of $125 over 100 days. President Bush’s father, President George H.W. Bush, sold reserve oil beginning on the eve of the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Families then saved an average of $65 dollars from lower gasoline prices.

    Opponents of releasing this government oil have received average lifetime contributions from oil and gas interests of $133,605. In contrast, representatives who voted in favor of reducing current gas prices have average lifetime contributions of $42,341. This 3-1 oil industry fund-raising advantage indicates that opponents of selling reserve oil have much more oil industry support. It makes sense that these big oil allies would oppose the sale of this oil since it would lower prices and therefore oil company profits.

    Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO) falsely claimed that the bill would “drain our nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve.” He received $362,248 from the oil industry in campaign contributions. Representative Boustany, who made the above-mentioned remark about national security, received $281,530. And a constituent of Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) wondered whether his opposition to selling extra oil has “something to do with the $45,000 in contributions he's received from Big Oil?”

    Many of the opponents of selling some stockpiled oil instead favor the expansion of offshore oil drilling in the protected Outer Continental Shelf. This ignores the Department of Energy analysis that determined that opening the OCS to offshore drilling “would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.” Three of every four barrels of oil offshore of the United States are in areas already available for drilling.

    Selling oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to promptly increase supplies and decrease prices is a short-term fix for record prices. For the long term, the most effective policies would decrease the use of oil by making vehicles go significantly further on a gallon of gas, develop sustainable alternative fuels, and dramatically increase the affordability and accessibility of public transit.

    Enhanced fuel-efficiency standards would significantly reduce oil consumption, yet House Republican leaders blocked enhanced fuel economy standards from 1995 to 2006, and many opposed them in 2007. Had the House not defeated a 2001 bipartisan proposal to make light trucks like SUVs meet the same standards as passenger vehicles, Americans would be using 1 million barrels of oil per day less in 2008.

    Better fuel economy standards or immediate relief due to the sale of reserve oil are not the only energy measures that most of these members opposed. They also voted against requiring oil companies to develop the oil leases that they already posses, reining in speculators who have driven up oil prices to make a quick buck, and ending tax breaks for big oil and investing the money in clean energy. These members have chosen “none of the above”—except for drilling in protected coastal areas—for their energy policy.

    With gasoline prices still near record highs, President Bush and Congress must act to provide immediate help to lower pump prices. The only policy that would accomplish this goal quickly is selling some of our extra oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. As prices drop, the real work of investments in super-efficient cars, non-oil fuels, public transit, efficiency, and clean energy must begin in earnest to prevent a recurrence of skyrocketing prices and promote the sensible policies for energy Americans want.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    11,442
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    You guys are right. Al Gore and Barry wishes to keep the gas prices high so we can suffer ourselves into alternative fuel. Well Barry said he just wishes the price didn't go up so fast but going up is ok. Like I said so we can suffer....not them.
    Nancy P. doesn't care so she went on vacation (bet she used a bunch of fuel going somewhere) The war between the parties has and will drag us down. Meanwhile the Russians are coming on strong and if we are not careful we will be buying oil and natural gas from them.
    Wonder how Barry will spend his oil money???

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    .LaGrange
    Posts
    10,742
    Post Thanks / Like

    Talking Re: House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    Quote Originally Posted by DJD View Post
    You guys are right. Al Gore and Barry wishes to keep the gas prices high so we can suffer ourselves into alternative fuel. Well Barry said he just wishes the price didn't go up so fast but going up is ok. Like I said so we can suffer....not them.
    Nancy P. doesn't care so she went on vacation (bet she used a bunch of fuel going somewhere) The war between the parties has and will drag us down. Meanwhile the Russians are coming on strong and if we are not careful we will be buying oil and natural gas from them.
    Wonder how Barry will spend his oil money???
    He'll spend it on tire gauges and air filters to solve the energy crisis, LAMOL.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    2,378
    Post Thanks / Like

    Moose and PL

    Do you guys ever post any of your own original thoughts, or just cut and paste stuff from ultra liberal web sites? The site you got this from has a link to educating young Americans about the damage Supreme Court Justice Alito has done. For cryin' out loud guys try harder! At least C & P your drivel from Move On dot org like real liberals do.

    BTW, PL you can thank Justice Alito for his ability to read and interpret the constitution. Were it not for his and other conservative judges' overriding the liberals Bill Clinton appointed in a recent supreme court decision, you'd no longer have a 2nd amendment right. Ironic ain't it?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Greenville,IN
    Posts
    3,027
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    Devil's Horse:

    A liberal with an original thought does not exist.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    2,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyme2fish View Post
    Devil's Horse:

    A liberal with an original thought does not exist.
    On the contrary, openness to new and different ideas is one of the hallmarks of true liberalism. What I find to be in short supply are conservatives who can tolerate original thought in others.
    Last edited by RoadToad; 08-08-2008 at 11:43 AM. Reason: spelling

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    2,378
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    Really.

    I've found just the opposite. I've found true liberals to consider themselves superior to those who don't buy their morals and ideas. Anyone who disagrees is basically intolerant, ignorant, or hateful.

    For example, if you disagree with gay marriage you must be a backwards homophobic bible thumper instead a decent person who believes men marrying men, or women marrying women is wrong.

    For another example Barack Obama has said people who didn't vote for him were bitter, clinging to their guns and religion. In other words they were too backwards and ignorant to embrace his message. (Whatever that is)

    Let's say you don't trust Muslims/Islam because of their proven and undisputed record of death and destruction to each other and to anyone who doesn't share their beliefs. Maybe you look at how they treat women and are disgusted by it. For those reasons you don't agree with their culture being integrated into our country, and are willing to do what it takes to stop it. First thing a liberal will tell you is you're an absurd hate monger, and of course ignorant.

    To a true liberal, war, or any form of violence is just wrong, plain and simple. You should be able to talk things through no matter what the situation. To think otherwise makes you a hawkish throwback, someone better suited to living in a cave. Never mind that this country wouldn't even exist, and the globe would probably be speaking German right now if true liberals had always made the decisions.

    IMO, true liberals are the most naive, intolerant, and yes, ignorant people on earth. Not to mention downright annoying.

    Okay your turn...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Kentucky Lake
    Posts
    1,393
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    There is no point in arguing with you devil horse. You are obviously too closed minded to understand (I did not say accept, just to understand) any views that may differ from your own.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    11,442
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    Quote Originally Posted by Col Forbin View Post
    There is no point in arguing with you devil horse. You are obviously too closed minded to understand (I did not say accept, just to understand) any views that may differ from your own.
    I don't see Jim as closed minded at all (if he is then I'm proudly shoulder to shoulder with him). He has excellent points based on facts of what has happened not what should happen from this point forward.

    Col, we just live in a different mindset than you. As a teacher you are trained to think your way through the problem and be careful to not hurt any feelings along your quest for the proper answer and that takes time, we have learned from our previous engagements, and cut to the chase. In the end you end up where we are it just takes you longer! LOL.

    The only way to deal with a bully is to beat their buttocks into submission. Then they will realize that they woke the sleeping giant. Talk is cheap. JMO

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Evansville Area of Southern IN, USA.
    Posts
    1,170
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: House Defenders of the Big Oil Agenda

    Birds of a feather ... flock together... even the blind ones...

    You all have a good weekend!

    -------------------------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by DJD View Post
    I don't see Jim as closed minded at all (if he is then I'm proudly shoulder to shoulder with him). He has excellent points based on facts of what has happened not what should happen from this point forward.

    Col, we just live in a different mindset than you. As a teacher you are trained to think your way through the problem and be careful to not hurt any feelings along your quest for the proper answer and that takes time, we have learned from our previous engagements, and cut to the chase. In the end you end up where we are it just takes you longer! LOL.

    The only way to deal with a bully is to beat their buttocks into submission. Then they will realize that they woke the sleeping giant. Talk is cheap. JMO

Similar Threads

  1. My house
    By Tyme2fish in forum "Off Topic" Posts
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-23-2011, 09:38 AM
  2. Boat House
    By Tyme2fish in forum "Off Topic" Posts
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-17-2011, 08:16 PM
  3. AGENDA 21 Sustainable Developement
    By Catfish Bob in forum "Off Topic" Posts
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-30-2010, 12:35 PM
  4. MSNBC pushing their SOCIALIST agenda.....
    By GeoFisher in forum "Off Topic" Posts
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-15-2009, 02:22 PM
  5. Getting out of the house to KY lake.
    By WacoWildcat in forum Kentucky Discussion Board
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-08-2006, 05:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •