One last zinger to Mr Chilton, who states Obama's "energy policy will
— long after he is out of office — cut by half the amount we all pay
for fuel by requiring more efficient vehicles (54 miles-per-gallon by
2025)." So shall it be written, so shall it be done. All praise the
Mr Chilton praises President Obama'a request for "an end to tax breaks
for oil companies who have made record profits." These tax breaks are used
by many non oil companies throughout the country, but I guess they are not
making enough 'record profits', so only oil companies deserve to have
the tax break eliminated.
From 6/23/08 till Obama took office in 1/20/09 gas prices were driven down by
speculators from 4.58/gal to 2.06/gal in California, because of worldwide
recession concerns. No one complains when speculators push prices down only
when they drive them up. These moves are always due to actual economic concerns
or threats to production like unrest in the middle east, not some group of
speculators trying to corner the market.
We used to regulate gas prices and we should do it again. We could tax the
exports of any gas product to make it to high to export. We could open more
refineries but the EPA will not allow it. We could make only 3 blends of gas so
that they gas could be moved around state to state instead of 29 blends. There
is no free enterprise only greed the economy is about dead again and the main
reason is gas prices. A barrel is under $100 and we are paying $4 a gallon. In
2008 a barrel was $148 and we were paying $4 a gallon. Every company out there
is trying to keep cost low and compete with other companies but not big oil.
Any talk about regulating gas price along with drilling would bring down the
price. We have democrats in bed with environmentalist who want gas $6.50 a
gallon and republicans in bed with oil companies that just wan't big cash
donations and us voters who in 50 days could fire all of the house and the
president by not voting for anyone in office.
Patriot.... you crack me up. The prices fell... yeah, they fell all the way up
to $150 a barrel just one year before the election I would really double check
your sources. Unless your source is the IEA, I would really question the
source.Right now, the threat of disruption in the middle east is the
number one factor in prices being what they are. Prices were low before war was
injected into the region. The prices fall when there is the threat of stability
there. Every time some hot shot politician talks about escalating the wars in
the region, or opening up new conflicts like with Iran, the price jumps, only to
fall when everyone stands down from the rhetoric.I would really love
to see this list of economist that think that think the US can drill baby drill
its way to lower prices in any near time frame.... please list these for us all
to share in this instight.
patriotYou made the claim that Bush's threats directly led to
the reduction in gas prices. It falls upon you to prove you statement, not upon
others to prove it didn't happen.The fact that you became
belligerent and defensive when called on your claim pretty much shows that you
posted your opinion as fact, but have nothing to support it.For
example, you claim that 'every single economist' you've heard
supports your statement. Fine, name one of them.
re:JoeBlowProve it !!! All I know is after Bush threatened to open
up drilling the price began to drop and every single economist I have heard
agrees. There is no way some global slowdown would push gas prices down that
fast and that far. That is ridiculous. Liberals are always straining at ways to
stop drilling ... that is in case we are talking about a foreign country in
South America and then liberals are all for encouraging and even paying for the
drilling down there. Makes you wonder why liberals are so much against American
"It's not my fault, blame Bush.' That only goes so far. This
president takes credit for bin Laden, an effort which started during the
previous administration, yet he takes blame for nothing. The liberals including
Nancy Pelosi blamed Bush for gas prices during his presidency. How have things
changed, Madam Speaker?
"Bush threatened to open up more offshore drilling and that alone drove
prices lower. "The gas prices went sub $2 under Bush for one
reason. There was a worldwide economic slowdown and the demand for gas
dropped.Based on your logic Patriot, please tell me why gas was more
than $4 in July 08 and less than $2 later in the year?
The national market, and even the international markets, understand supply and
demand. When there is more of the commondity on the market, it drives the
price down. Bush encouraged domestic drilling and production. Obama has not
encouraged it. Domestic production has increased, but not because
of anything Obama has done. He is tightly controlled by the greenish members on
his team and party. If he would encourage more leasing and drilling, and we got
an extra 250,000 barrels production per day in the US, the probability of lower
prices increaes considerably. He is not for this. Activity on
public lands and offshore has dropped. REgulation and uncertainty in the
permitting process has risen.
not true - absolutely not true. Bush threatened to open up more offshore
drilling and that alone drove prices lower. The threat alone and speculation
that went with it did the trick. By the way - how in the world would Obama and
his bunch know ANYTHING about what does or doesn't work about lowering gas
prices since all the man has done is lock out drilling on public lands. No new
exploration and no new wells. It is fine to stand up there and belch out a bunch
of bull about how drilling won't help IF you actually TRY IT!!!
Roger Terry - The northern gateway pipeline (Hardisty to Prince Rupert) has not
been 'refused' in canada. Hearings are still ongoing; first nations
groups are the ones most opposed to it. At the government level, the most fuss
right now is between BC and Alberta governments over revenue sharing. While
pipelines go through the approval process a great deal more oil is being
transported west in canada via rail. In any case, the president really
doesn't have much control over gasoline and oil prices. We just don't
have the production capacity to modify world price, and no one is seriously
interested in dealing with the demand side of the equation. What something like
the XL pipeline will do is add to the political stability of the US supply by
giving us greater access to the largest remaining deposit on earth. Trust me,
buying from the oil sands will be a far greater benefit to the US than buying
from the middle east.
@RiflemanLast year the US produced 9.2 million barrels of oil per day. We
consumed 8.6 million barrels of oil per day. Yet we export and import much more
than that. So why would that be? Well, it's because we have private
enterprise running our oil industry, so they sell to the highest bidder, the oil
is not exclusively held in this country. The only way we could keep all of that
oil is a socialist oil company. Also, how does the Canadian oil pipeline affect
oil production in the US? Oil imported from Canada is still an import.
Excellent explanation of both commodity pricing and long-range government
policy. And Rifleman, the Keystone Pipeline is a huge environmental disaster in
waiting. There's a reason Canada refused to run it across their own land to
the West Coast.
A couple of misleading things in the article.First, long-term
policies advocated by a president certainly can (and do) affect gasoline prices.
That includes the monetary policy that devalued the dollar, responsible for
much of the high oil prices (in dollars) today. Opening up the really big oil
reserves in Alaska and offshore would demonstrate to the markets a resolve to
develop domestic reserves, which in turn would lower oil prices a bit on the
world market.Second, lumping all "energy" in one bucket is a
common but misleading tactic of politicians and reporters. Electricity and what
fuels it has little relation to transportation fuels. Just because we export
coal does not mean we are becoming independent regarding oil.Third,
the boom in natural gas development (which is lumped as "domestic
energy") is being done in spite of the Obama administration's obstacles
and discouragement, not because of anything positive they have done. The
administration openly opposes petroleum drilling and has shut down or slowed the
most important exploration in America.
President's can control gas prices. Just not this year or now. Clinton
affected the gas prices during Bush's years by permitting Detroit to make
SUVs (to help the labor unions) and forcing smaller refineries to close so that
"Big Oil" could make be more profitable while still having the money to
produce cleaner fuels. Obama will lower oil prices because he has increased the
fuel economy requirements of cars. We can thank him in 2025.
Obama was personally for killing the Canadian Oil Pipeline Project that union
workers wanted. Canada has since said they will sell that oil to China.Why does the liberals insist that the United States remain dependent on
foreign oil when we have vast untapped reserves on our own soil?
@ Hellooo, you give us political rhetoric, not facts. Our friend
"ThatsSoUtah" got it right. The embargo against Iran, increasing
consumption in China and other developing nations, other international issues,
the shut down of a major California refinery, and similar issues have a
cumulative effect, all of which no President can control. Politics may be fun,
and you may not like our current President, but this is not about who is in the
White House. Remember the gas shortage under Nixon? Was that his fault? I
never blamed him, nor any other subsequent Administration. And on it goes.
I love the cherry picking required in order to fault a president concerning gas
prices.We hear how "When Obama took office gas was under $2 and
now it is approaching $4"However, when one looks at July 2008,
before Obama was even elected, and after having Bush in office for 7 1/2 years,
the price of gas was well over $4.Was THAT caused by a "lack of
an aggressive energy policy" also.Or, in that instance, were
there other factors at play?Presidents dont control or affect short
term energy prices. That goes for both R and D presidents.
@Hellooo"The Obama administration has abandon oil..."That is simply not true. US oil production is up. The data shows
that domestic oil production is in fact at its highest level in eight years. In
January 2012, the U.S. produced 188.9 million barrels of oil, the largest
monthly output since August 1998.Oil prices tend to have more to do
with civil unrest in the middle east. The endless talk of wars and civil
uprising along with actual conflicts causes a fear of reduced supply.
The future's market is based on expectations about supply and demand for
commodities. The lack of an aggressive energy policy to meet America's
current and future demand for oil is directly related to the price of gasoline.
The Obama administration has abandon oil and failed to promote reasonable
alternatives, which is a reason current and future prices are up.