Gas prices rise, Democrats demagogue

Though they (as the article below notes) seem to understand that there is virtually nothing that they can do about the problem, Democrats have taken to trying to make political hay out of the recent rise in gas prices. One has to ask one self though, if the Democrats hadn't stonewalled drilling in ANWR, would the situation be better, the same, or worse?

Meanwhile, prices for gasoline do continue to rise, but thankfully most people are smart enough to realize the rise isn't because of anything that the President and the Republicans in Congress are or are not doing. (Notice I said most people, not all. I'm sure there are plenty of Democrat Underground types that are more than willing to blame Bush for everything).

Anyway, I hope most people are smart enough to see that any hearings that are held will do nothing but perhaps bring a little attention to the refiners and the oil companies. Perhaps the Refiners should turn the tables back on the Congress critters and ask them what they are willing to do to help limit liabilities, lower costs, and make the thought of opening more refineries a reality. Much like the larger issues of energy policy in the U.S.A., where we have not opened a new Nuclear Power Plant since the Three Mile Island incident, we have restricted ourselves thanks to environmental regulations, safety regulations, liability issues, and many other negative inducements to anyone that would consider getting into business to help provide more energy in the U.S.A.


Article follows. Headline is linked. Enjoy.





Democrats turn up heat on US pump prices

By Chris Baltimore

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Senate Democrats turned up the heat on the White House on Friday to act in the face of record-high U.S gasoline pump prices.
The same day, the Senate Energy Committee set a September 8 hearing on what's behind the prices, which hit a record $2.55 a gallon this week.
That's about 68 cents higher than just a year ago and the biggest weekly increase on record, which has triggered fears that high energy costs could hurt U.S. economic growth.
Lawmakers admit there is no short-term fix to pain at the pump, but are nervous about political fall-out. Gasoline prices are sure to be a hot topic when Congress returns from its recess next month.
Wal-Mart, the world's biggest retailer, warned this week that high gasoline prices have stunted U.S. consumer spending.
"Today's gasoline prices are taking a severe toll on Americans' pocketbooks," said Republican Sen. Pete Domenici of New Mexico, energy panel chairman. "Consumers are anxious."
The hearing will focus on global oil demand, refinery capacity constraints and the impact of futures market speculation on energy prices, Domenici said.
The panel said it has not set its witnesses.
Meanwhile, Democrats urged the White House to act.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid on Friday said the Bush administration should require U.S. oil companies to disclose their fuel pricing policies and production costs.
In a letter to the White House, Reid also said the Federal Trade Commission should investigate instances where a state's retail prices rise 20 percent in any given week "to determine if the price of gasoline is being artificially manipulated."
Past FTC probes into U.S. oil company pricing policies have found no sign of abuse.
"This one has already being done," White House spokesman Trent Duffy said. "The FTC and the Justice Department have been keenly watching for this type of activity for the past two years."
Duffy also said that Democrats' attempts to prevent oil drilling in the Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, or ANWR, have kept supplies tight.
"Commonsense steps we've tried to take, like increasing domestic oil production by allowing drilling in a small portion of ANWR, have been blocked by Democrats for years," Duffy said.
Separately, Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida said the White House should ask oil companies for a voluntary, temporarily freeze on prices that they charge gasoline distributors.
Duffy said that price controls in any form are "terribly toxic to the economy" but added he had not seen the specific proposal.



... more at linked article
7,970 views 35 replies
Reply #1 Top
In keeping with my Mellow Left-Winger philosophy, I am not concerned about oil or gas prices. We drive a sedan and don't usually go very far (if you go too far, you hit ocean).
Reply #2 Top
We drive a sedan and don't usually go very far (if you go too far, you hit ocean).


Thats the best response you can take TW. By far.

Honestly, I'm doing the same myself. Cut down on trips I don't need (where possible). Run my truck until the tank is empty (lowering the weight as it goes, which pushes up gas mileage a bit), keeping the truck well tuned, the air filters cleaned and replaced when necessary, etc.

Just cutting back on unnecessary trips helps a lot. It has been helping me combat the higher prices a bit, and has left more money in my pocket (or bank account) over the last few weeks.
Reply #3 Top
The high price of gasoline is the result of inaction for over twenty years. Bush is responsible for almost 5 of thoes years. He has done NOTHING but try and drill in Alaska which will not solve the problem. If Bush had pushed higher gas mileage for cars, suv's and trucks sold in the US when he took office, we would be seeing some help today. If he had helped add refineries and nuclear plants in 2001, they could be comming on line about now. Bush did just what every other President did since 1973 - NOTHING.
Reply #4 Top
At least in your trolling you remembered that "every other President ... since 1973" did "NOTHING."

It's not just (and really isn't at all) the President. Congress sets those CAFE standards which require the manufacturers of cars (not trucks, which are specifically excluded) in this country (or at least the sellers of cars) to meet certain standards. Congress could have raised those standards thanks to an effort by, say as an example Al Gore, or as another example John Kerry, or even currently thanks to leadership by Harry Reid or even Hillary Clinton. There are tons of Republicans that could go on the same list (including Bob Dole, Jack Kemp, Dick Cheney, Trent Lott, and Bill Frist), but as it turns out, Congress has not made any real efforts at increasing the CAFE standards, nor actually applying the standards to the vehicles that many U.S. citizens are driving -- the SUVs of the Soccer Moms, the large SUVs of the business men, and more.

It's laughable that either party would start to politicize the prices of gasoline when neither party has really done anything to help the situation. If CAFE standards were increased, we could cut back on a great percentage of the gasoline we use. Sure, it might mandate that the car/truck manufacturers move to Hybrids earlier (not necessarily a bad thing), or it might make them think twice about making large wasteful vehicles like the Expedition, the Suburban, the Hummer, the new International Harvester SUV and others. It might mean more people are driving around in smaller vehicles (such as happens in most of Europe, especially in the U.K. where a Ford Focus is considered a luxury car), lighter vehicles made with more plastics (which are not as safe as larger, heavier vehicles, especially not when they meet them in an accident on the highway). But it would definitely mean saving fuel, and cutting our dependence on foreign (and domestic) oil.

But again, both parties are responsible, and everyone in Washington has had a hand in the problem. And remind yourselfs that Democrats controlled the Senate for a while early in W.'s administration, and have enough weight in both the House and the Senate to get something done about this issue if they really want to. Unfortunately they don't want to, never have really, and seemingly never will. Don't want to kill of manufacturing jobs back home, don't want to hear from families that want choices in what to buy and drive, and don't want to do anything that might harm a vote in the future. Just give the problem lip service and make the public think you care. Learned well over the years. Practiced to an art by Bill Clinton (who admittedly seemed to immitate the Gipper somewhat in doing so).
Reply #5 Top
how many domestic oil extractors (extraction as opposed to refining) are getting over $60 a barrel now for what they were happily collecting half that much last year? how many large extractors are associates of the bush family?

and in an unrelated question, why shouldnt i buy gas from the crips instead of the other gangs?
Reply #6 Top
and in an unrelated question, why shouldnt i buy gas from the crips instead of the other gangs?


Excellent point!
Reply #7 Top
how many domestic oil extractors (extraction as opposed to refining) are getting over $60 a barrel now for what they were happily collecting half that much last year? how many large extractors are associates of the bush family?


And how many FOB's (Friends of Bill Clinton) have made tons of money in hundreds of assorted and sorted ventures in the last several years?

Besides trying to throw mud at the Bushies, what was the point of your comment?
Reply #8 Top

And he also doesn't seem to understand the laws of supply and demand. Demand up = price up. Supply down = price up. Demand up + Supply down= Prices WAY up.

Democrats never did understand that law, nor will they.

To add to Little-Whip's comment, you want the price to go down?  Quit using it.  Demand down = Price down.  Simple part of the law of Supply and demand.

Now what does not bring the price down.  Hot air from DC = No affect on Price.  False allegations against Politicians = No affect on price. 

Reply #9 Top
what was the point of your comment?


you're so busy constructing excuses & explanations for the rising price of gasoline that you seemed to overlook (except for that lil jingo thing bout drilling in alaska) the role oil extractors play in making the market. i'm asking a very simple question. why should domestic extractors be charging double the price they received at this time last year? what operational cost has gone up to justify that increase?

He rarely has a point to make.


i really try to aim em low enuff for you to catch em but...wasn't it you who claimed iraq ain't really sitting on that much oil anyway?

And he also doesn't seem to understand the laws of supply and demand. Demand up = price up. Supply down = price up. Demand up + Supply down= Prices WAY up


i understand em well enuff to know the market is being heavily manipulated and who is gonna benefit financially as a result. i also know who's gonna be picking up the 6.9 billion dollars it's gonna cost to buy enuff spot gas to keep iraqis pumping their cars fulla $.05 a gallon fuel. well except for the tons of gas that seeps into the black market and heads for kuwait, turkey, syria and iran.
Reply #10 Top
It's not just (and really isn't at all) the President


except when he's doling out tax breaks that amount to the government paying half the cost of every 50k hummer (the kind that suck gas) purchased for use by a business.
Reply #11 Top
Since I saw this hike comming last year and now have a honda hybrid in place getting 47 miles to the gallon now {engine broke in} I am not feeling the pinch as much as you gas hogs are. hahahahahahaha

In the spirit of privategene constant bitching I will join in and say, if not for the liberals restrictive stupid conservation practices making it impossible to open new refineries and nuke plants, we would not be in this perdicament.
Reply #12 Top
Even though no Prsident has acted in our best interest with respect to energy, Bush is in charge now as well as his supporters in Congress. Why are they not interested is helping solve this problem? Are the supporters of Bush, Cheney and the GOP in congress getting something from not solving this problem? The increase in the gas and heating oil prices are FAR WORSE then ANY tax increase.
Reply #13 Top
Ignoring Kingbee's constant trolling, I'll respond to the C.O.L.'s trolling instead...

What part of the fact that environmentalists, and NIMBYs out there keeping new refineries from opening do you not understand?

For that matter, the same problems apply to conservationists and environmentalists that don't want more drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and other potential domestic sources.

And a reminder (even to the Kingbee of trolling) that the President of the United States, nor the domestic oil companies themselves really set the prices that are paid for barrels of oil. The market sets the prices that those who extract the black gold get. If the market doesn't need the stuff, or at least can sincerely act like they don't need the stuff, then the prices fall in response. Gasoline sales have to come down, and yet for all the bitching that is going on about prices of same, I don't see that many fewer SUVs out on the roads. I don't see that many more Toyota Prius and Honda Insights out there. Or Hybrid Ford Escapes either.

People can bitch, and politicians who think they can make some noise can join the bitchin' or help lead it, but over-all the issue of high gasoline prices comes down to personal responsibility. Stop driving so damn much, stop boating so damn much, stop flying so damn much, and prices will fall. When winter rolls around, turn down the thermostat a bit and put on more clothes, and again, the prices may fall a bit more.
Reply #14 Top
Ignoring Kingbee's constant trolling, I'll respond to the C.O.L.'s trolling instead


aint nothin like the real thing baby.

And a reminder (even to the Kingbee of trolling) that the President of the United States, nor the domestic oil companies themselves really set the prices that are paid for barrels of oil. The market sets the prices that those who extract the black gold get. If the market doesn't need the stuff, or at least can sincerely act like they don't need the stuff, then the prices fall in response


i know who sets the bbl price...our good ol opec buddies. i also know there's plenty of refinery capability to produce the 6.9 BILLION dollars worth of gasoline the iraqi government is gonna buy this year in order to subsidize the sale of gasoline to its citizens at five cents a gallon. since iraq isn't earning any money, i'm pretty sure i know who's gonna be giving iraq that 6.9 BILLION....and if you're honest with yourself, you do too.

which wouldnt be all that terrible i guess if there werent hourslong gas lines in baghdad because the gas we're paying for is being diverted to places where they'll pay $.79 a gallon for it. like kuwait and turkey.

what it all boils down to is this: bush and his family have a decades-long relationship with both domestic and foreign extractors, all of whom are reaping money faster than dope dealers thanks to the shortage caused by not having enuff troops on the ground in iraq to keep the insurgents (who are also buying gas for a nickle a gallon) from blowing up the fuckin pipelines.

those who said this war was all about oil may have been wrong in believing the plan was to seize control of iraq's oil...but they may not have been wrong about it being all about those who profit from blood for oil.
Reply #15 Top

i understand em well enuff to know the market is being heavily manipulated

Now, why dont you prove that. 

Reply #16 Top

i'm pretty sure i know who's gonna be giving iraq that 6.9 BILLION....and if you're honest with yourself, you do too.

Now back that up with solid facts as well.  Nice (not) rhetoric, no meat and no facts.  And not even a viable theory either.

Reply #17 Top
The major reason oil prices are up is demand. Bush refuses to curtail the low mileage cars, trucks and SUV's which have done more to increase US demand then anything. If Bush had pushed higher mileage for new vehicles in 2001, we would be feeling the results today. Alaska drilling is NOT the answer and other then giving Billions to the oil companies, Bush has done nothing. He was so hiper about the Cheney commission that he withheld even the names of the people on the commission. His Energy policy has been 100% ineffective! When he was running in 2000, he said if oil prices were to increase he would just talk to the producers and lower the prices. Another Bush policy that DID NOT WORK! If you were giving a grade to the Bush Energy policy it would be an "F"
Reply #18 Top
Bush refuses to curtail the low mileage cars, trucks and SUV's which have done more to increase US demand then anything


Again, you seem to be completely incapable of placing the blame where it really lies.

CAFE standards are set by whom? For the answer, check here: Automobile and Light Truck Fuel Economy: The CAFE Standards
Be sure not to miss this nugget:
The current standard is 27.5 mpg for passenger automobiles and 20.7 mpg for light trucks, a classification that also includes sport utility vehicles (SUVs). An attempt in the 102 nd Congress to raise CAFE proved too controversial and was dropped from omnibus energy policy legislation before it could pass (Energy Policy Act of 1992, P. L. 102-486). The Clinton Administration supported greater fuel efficiency, but indicated in 1993 that an increase in the CAFE standards was not the option likeliest to be embraced first.


Notice that mentions whom please? And don't cry foul because this seems to be placing blame on Clinton. It's not his fault, it's not Bush's fault. It's Congress' fault. They don't have the balls to fix the problem, never really have (except for the period when gas lines were all the rage, and Jimmy Carter had us all wearing sweaters and turning down the thermostat in Winter and up in Summer).

Admittedly the reference above is dated. Let me find you something newer.

How about this nugget which completely disputes your idiotic statements and again places things back in perspective: Bush plan to overhaul CAFE standards is a mixed bag
Which includes these nuggets:
While these efforts drew lots of media attention, there was one recent car-related announcement that the Bush administration slipped under the radar, and this one is likely to have much broader effects. On Dec. 22, the Bush administration proposed a major rewrite of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program. One notable outcome of the proposal would be the closing of a loophole that currently exempts vehicles over 8,500 pounds, such as the Hummer H2, from any fuel-efficiency standards whatsoever. But despite this welcome tidbit, few environmentalists were pleased with the proposal as a whole.
"The loophole the Bush administration proposes to close may move us one step forward," said Daniel Becker, director of the Sierra Club's global warming and energy program. "But their proposal also includes another loophole for the auto industry that will move us three steps back."
The big concern, according to Becker, is that the Bush administration would regulate the fuel economy of light trucks by dividing them into weight or size classes instead of using fleet-wide efficiency targets. While the current CAFE program has two automotive classes -- cars and light trucks -- the new proposal would create additional truck weight classes, with different fuel-economy standards for each classification. In a nutshell, said Becker, the system would produce an incentive for companies to add weight to their cars to bump them up into higher classes and qualify them for looser efficiency restrictions.
Something similar happened in response to the original CAFE rules. "Those rules were written in 1975 when no one imagined that vehicles would ever have a weight over 8,500 pounds," said Becker. But as consumer demand grew for bigger, fatter cars, automakers began exploiting that loophole by putting out models such as the Ford Excursion and the Hummer that weigh in just over the 8,500-pound limit. There's no reason to think they won't continue this trend of up-weighting when there are more truck weight classes, Becker argued.


Oooops, yet again, we see the problem of unintended consequences here. The environmentalists and leftists cry foul because the Bush administration was proposing something that would probably encourage the production of heavier models so that the manufacturers could hopefully still escape the CAFE standards.


Again, the fix for this lies with the Congress. They pass the laws, and they can set the standards. Set standards that apply to real farm equipment, and not Bubba's big fat SUV (aka, the Expedition, Suburban, Excursion, Hummer, and other grossly obese large vehicles) that he owns because he can, not because he's a farmer that needs a Ford F350 to carry his goods to the market with.

Allow exceptions for Farmers, and others that really require them, but make those individuals qualify based on a number of factors, and not some b.s. that lets people skate on the standards.

We can either wait until the market solves the problem on it's own or we can demand that the congress critters do something to force us, and others in our society to migrate in the direction we need to here.
Reply #19 Top
Aw hell terp. Now the col going to go off and tell you that the congress is run by the GOP and it'll still be GW's fault!
Reply #20 Top
drmiler

Yes Congress has been acting on the Bush policies and when Congress does not quickley pass his policies he uses political pressure with the conservatives to get Congress to pass his ideas. Almost ALL of the Bush policies have been passed by the slim GOP majority.
Reply #21 Top
If Bush had pushed higher mileage standards the way he pushed for his tax cuts, CAFTA etc, we would have higher mileage standards. It starts with Bush and continues with his conservative supporters in Congress. The bottom line is NOTHIONG GETS DONE and the Average American get the SHAFT. Today the Dept of Energy said Americans should expect a 20% increase in the cost to heat their homes this winter. WAY TO GO GEORGE AND YOUR CONSERVATIVES IN CONGRESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply #22 Top
Oh yeah C.O.L..... It has absolutely nothing to do with constituents that beg, plead and demand that the cost of their vehicles not go up, doesn't it?

It has absolutely nothing to do with people that want to drive bigger and heavier vehicles because they are safer in crashes and hold up better over time....

It has nothing to do with people that refuse to cut back on their vehicle usage, and their own usage of gasoline...

In your world personal responsibility doesn't count at all. Just blame Bush. It's always his fault.

Give it up already, you know your tiltin' at a windmill that doesn't even exist. If you're feeling a breeze blowing, it's from all the hot air you dispense in your diatribes.
Reply #23 Top
You have just given the reasons why government at times must pass laws to protect the well being of the people. The point is that the President should help make sure the welfare of the majority is protected. The current increase in Oil and gasoline harms EVERYONE and creates the greatest problems for the low and moddle income workers who can least afford the increased cost. How than cay you claim it is not up to Bush to provide policies to prevent or at least moderate the negative impact of higher energy prices? Last year Bush CUT the home heating assistance to the poor. GREAT JOB GEORGE!!!!!!!!! He not only does not provide leadership to prevent the problem but then cuts the help to people that have no choice or money to afford the higher prices!
Reply #24 Top
When I was a kid, I used to troll for fish.... It seems the C.O.L. just trolls for attention....
Reply #25 Top
When you were a kid you most likely spent a lot time in playing make-believe. When you grow up it is time to deal WITH REALITY. That is what Bush and his supporters need to begin doing. I can assure you trolling is not what I am about.