Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Americans Blame Congress for Gas Prices, Consumer Reports Survey Shows
CNSNews.com ^ | June 30, 2008 | Keriann Hopkins

Posted on 06/30/2008 12:59:03 PM PDT by kingattax

(CNSNews.com) - A Consumer Reports survey reveals that Americans are blaming Congress for high gas prices, which are compelling them to make shifts and sacrifices in their consuming habits.

The Auto Pulse Survey, conducted by Consumer Reports National Research Center, showed that 77 percent of consumers single out the government's failure to implement an effective energy policy as a root cause for high gas prices; 75 percent of consumers blame oil companies; and 70 percent blame foreign oil producers.

When asked about actions the federal government could take to reduce fuel costs, 81 percent want to allow more drilling in the United States and offshore and 90 percent support increasing alternative energy development.

Among the respondents, 84 percent want to negotiate lower prices with oil-exporting nations, and 83 percent want to encourage conservation through tax incentives or alternative transportation.

In 2007, Consumer Reports found the "tipping point," at which motorists said they would drastically reduce driving, to be $3.50 per gallon of gasoline. According to the Department of Transportation, Americans have driven 20 billion fewer miles this year compared to the same time period in 2007.

Compared with last year, more people walked or bicycled (31 percent) this year, carpooled (24 percent), worked from home (18 percent), used more public transportation (16 percent), and even moved closer to work (10 percent).

But the rising gas prices affect more than just the transportation decisions. Some troubling trends show 45 percent of respondents have been putting less money into savings accounts; 34 percent have cut back on essentials like food or healthcare; and 17 percent have charged more expenses on credit cards.

In addition, consumers are willing to make significantly more sacrifices when buying new cars. A full 54 percent of car owners would pay more for a vehicle with greater fuel-efficiency, and 80 percent are considering a diesel, flex-fuel or hybrid vehicle. That is up from 2007, when only 47 percent were interested in purchasing vehicles with alternative engines.

More than one-quarter of consumers have considered down-sizing to two-wheeled vehicles - 18 percent have considered motorcycles and 14 percent have contemplated scooters. Most of these respondents were men ages 18-34.

The Consumer Reports National Research Center interviewed by telephone a nationally representative probability sample of 884 people who drive a vehicle or whose household owns at least one vehicle.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 110th; anwr; congress; democratcongress; democratparty; democrats; drillheredrillnow; drilling; electionpresident; elections; energy; gasprices; greenparty; greens; guilty; offshoredrilling; oil; outoutout; pelosi; reid
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last
When asked about actions the federal government could take to reduce fuel costs, 81 percent want to allow more drilling in the United States and offshore and 90 percent support increasing alternative energy development.
1 posted on 06/30/2008 12:59:05 PM PDT by kingattax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kingattax
84 percent want to negotiate lower prices with oil-exporting nations

the quality of education in this country sucks

2 posted on 06/30/2008 1:01:13 PM PDT by misterrob (Obama-Does America Need Another Jimmy Carter?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: misterrob

We can’t even negotiate with our own Congresscritters.


3 posted on 06/30/2008 1:02:59 PM PDT by WOBBLY BOB (Conservatives are to McCain what Charlie Brown is to Lucy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: misterrob

Wonder if that idiot Governator of Kalifornia will ever get a clue?


4 posted on 06/30/2008 1:04:07 PM PDT by AxelPaulsenJr (300 Million People Going Bust Over High Gasoline Prices and Hussein Obama Wants to Hug Trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WOBBLY BOB

It’s good to see they blame the Democrat congress.

Nancy Pelosi bit off more than she could chew when she said Congress would give us lower gas prices, if only we would give control of Congress to Democrats. Sometimes campaign promises backfire, Nancy.


5 posted on 06/30/2008 1:04:16 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
The People get it ...


If it is going to take 10 years,
shouldn't we get started?

Drill here, drill now, pay less


6 posted on 06/30/2008 1:07:35 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (If it is going to take 10 years, shouldn't we get started? Drill here, drill now, pay less.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

If Congress wants to force us through higher prices to use less oil, they should at least have the guts to raise taxes on gas themselves rather than interfering in the market and preventing new drilling. And for the record, I’m not in favor of them raising taxes, just saying...


7 posted on 06/30/2008 1:08:11 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
It’s good to see they blame the Democrat congress.

WHERE does it say they blame Democrats? Just because they are to a large part to blame, doesn't mean the average dummy makes the connection.
8 posted on 06/30/2008 1:09:19 PM PDT by Kozak (Anti Shahada: There is no god named Allah, and Muhammed is a false prophet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

No, obviously you’re just a simple minded conservative redneck who doesn’t get it. We need these higher prices to FORCE Americans to drive alternative-fuel vehicles and save the environment. THE TIME IS NOW!! CHANGE! HOPE! UNITY!!! BAWEJHHFEVLSDLADHALRDHIFB!!!!!


9 posted on 06/30/2008 1:10:47 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
Correct to place blame on Congress. But, incorrect to propose drilling as a solution. No cheap way out exists now. Congress has failed for 35 years to direct Dept of Energy to produce alternative fuels. Coal to liquid plants producing 12 million bpd or the equivalent in shale oil plants could have been constructed with the funding provided for 35 years to DoE, and will have to be done now at huge expense or the situation will only deteriorate.
10 posted on 06/30/2008 1:11:30 PM PDT by RightWhale (I will veto each and every beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

The dems are going to need more adverts with that W impersonator...


11 posted on 06/30/2008 1:11:52 PM PDT by Hoffer Rand (0bambi: the audacity of hype)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: misterrob
Let us not ignore the idiocy manifest in the rest of that sentence:
...and 83 percent want to encourage conservation through tax incentives or alternative transportation.

12 posted on 06/30/2008 1:12:28 PM PDT by the anti-liberal (Write in: Fred Thompson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
and 83 percent want to encourage conservation through tax incentives or alternative transportation.

Why? Aren't high prices a good enough incentive?

13 posted on 06/30/2008 1:12:48 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

As they rightfully should blame Congress.


14 posted on 06/30/2008 1:13:05 PM PDT by wastedyears (Obama is a Texas Post Turtle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kozak

Every Republican running for Congress should show the video clip where Pelosi promised to lower gas prices if the Democrats got the majority in Congress.

Or this would be a great national campaign ad by the Republican Party itself. Just show the price at the time she made the promise and the price now. Voice over could say if you think she kept her promise vote Democrat. If not, vote Republican.


15 posted on 06/30/2008 1:13:11 PM PDT by Truth is a Weapon (Truth, it hurts soooo good!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

True drilling wouldn’t help in the short term, but couldn’t it help down the road? Say 5-10 years from now?


16 posted on 06/30/2008 1:15:24 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Kozak; misterrob
WHERE does it say they blame Democrats? Just because they are to a large part to blame, doesn't mean the average dummy makes the connection.

Very astute observation. Most of the sheeple think congress is the same as BUSH. As misterrob pointed out above:the quality of education in this country sucks

FMCDH(BITS)

17 posted on 06/30/2008 1:15:45 PM PDT by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Truth is a Weapon

And the one where Maxine water threatens to “Soc... uh, uh... mm, uh... basically have the government take over,” (she was looking for “nationalize”) our oil.


18 posted on 06/30/2008 1:17:08 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
Americans should be blaming each other for sending the same do nothing bunch that has been legislating for the last 35 years!

But that would mean accepting personal responsibility and "Americans", by in large, much prefer "blaming others"!

19 posted on 06/30/2008 1:17:35 PM PDT by ImpBill ("America, where are you now?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: djsherin; RightWhale
Drilling now will help in the short term.

One of the things driving up the cost of crude oil is the weak dollar. One of the things making the dollar weak is our huge trade deficit. 1/3 of that huge trade deficit is oil imports.

Start producing 1 million extra barrels of domestic crude oil and that would reduce oil imports by about 10% and would start reducing the trade deficit. With a reduced trade deficit the dollar will strengthen. With a stronger dollar the world wide price of crude oil will begin to fall.

20 posted on 06/30/2008 1:19:37 PM PDT by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Then the President should emphasize where the blame lies by revoking the Executive Order that banned offshore drilling. Then he can sit back and tell Congress, “We’re waiting.”


21 posted on 06/30/2008 1:19:43 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

***81 percent want to allow more drilling in the United States and offshore and 90 percent support increasing alternative energy development.***

This would indicate that a majority of Americans want both but because the Rats are the Party Of No, a majority of Americans will have to continue and pay high gas prices.

The Democrats are unpatriotic because they don’t believe in doing what a majority of Americans desire.


22 posted on 06/30/2008 1:21:36 PM PDT by tobyhill (The media lies so much the truth is the exception)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: djsherin
"True drilling wouldn’t help in the short term, but couldn’t it help down the road? Say 5-10 years from now?"

Have you been drinking the Dem Kool-Aid? Now way it takes 5-10 years. 2-5 maybe.

23 posted on 06/30/2008 1:21:50 PM PDT by cookcounty (Obama reach across the aisle? He's so far to the left, he'll need a roadmap to FIND the aisle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: avacado

I’m just saying it will take a little time to get to start drilling and build new refineries which will take some time. Maybe not 5-10 years, but I chose those numbers just to show that by then we’ll certainly have a high level of production and prices will have definitely fallen.


24 posted on 06/30/2008 1:26:34 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

Drilling must be done, but it won’t increase domestic production more than 1-3 million bpd. 12 million bpd is needed. Something else is needed, and that something appears to be more factory-like. Coal to liquid or shale to oil is industrial processing more than classical oil refining. Not cheap, but way cheaper anymore than drilling in that range of production.


25 posted on 06/30/2008 1:27:40 PM PDT by RightWhale (I will veto each and every beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
Have you been drinking the Dem Kool-Aid? Now way it takes 5-10 years. 2-5 maybe.

From two separate sources I've heard the figure 1-3 years, the 1 year for places where the infrastructure is already in place. Sounds right to me.

I've always thought the figure of 10 years was a load of baloney. The leftists throw that figure around to discourage people who want to DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW.

26 posted on 06/30/2008 1:28:44 PM PDT by Glenmerle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
The issue really is the commitment to higher supplies. Once the market knows that there are projects underway and longer term supplies are available then the speculators won't dare continue bidding up prices.
27 posted on 06/30/2008 1:28:45 PM PDT by misterrob (Obama-Does America Need Another Jimmy Carter?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty

No, I just chose 5-10 years because by then we would definitely be on the right path and doing well for ourselves. I realize it may only take a year or 2 to start getting the oil out, but I wanted to be more conservative in my estimate and 5-10 years really is not that far down the road.


28 posted on 06/30/2008 1:29:00 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: misterrob
the quality of education in this country sucks"

It would be hard to argue with you especially after
reading this: "and 83 percent want to encourage
conservation through tax incentives or alternative
transportation"

Being quite proud of my 8th grade education, let me attempt to translate that for you.

What they are really trying to say is we will raise taxes on those with the means and give the money to those in need. Does that sound kind of familiar? I knew you would recognize the strategy. The alternative forms of transportation can be divided into two classes. Delux automobiles and jet airplanes for those with the means which includes all those in charge, while the other is for everyone else and is strictly limited to walking.

29 posted on 06/30/2008 1:29:41 PM PDT by An Old Man ("The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they suppress." Douglas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

I see what you are saying. I agree it will take time for such production to come online.


30 posted on 06/30/2008 1:29:52 PM PDT by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Correct to place blame on Congress. But, incorrect to propose drilling as a solution. No cheap way out exists now. Congress has failed for 35 years to direct Dept of Energy to produce alternative fuels. Coal to liquid plants producing 12 million bpd or the equivalent in shale oil plants could have been constructed with the funding provided for 35 years to DoE, and will have to be done now at huge expense or the situation will only deteriorate

A lot of that expense would be deferred if they could skirt all the EPA regs and frivolous lawsuits by the greenies.

Nobody ever seems to mention PUMPING oil, just drilling.

Yes I know that drilling ends in pumping, but I know that a myriad of producing wells were shut down in the last century.

And they could be up and running a lot faster than new wells.

One expert said the only a small percentage of the oil has been pumped our of the Signal Hill area in Southern California and there is a lot left just ready to pump out with a little tweaking of the equipment and the formation.

Interesting that shale oil (is that the same as coal-to-liquid?) is considered an alternative fuel.

I thought that the only "alternative fuels" were the ones like ethynol (which takes more energy to produce than is derived from it) windmills, solar etc.

31 posted on 06/30/2008 1:30:05 PM PDT by Syncro (Tagline: optional, printed after your name on post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: avacado

We could also help the dollar by tossing the federal reserve or at least telling it not to print so much damn money and to stop keeping interest rates artificially low.


32 posted on 06/30/2008 1:30:53 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: avacado

The dollar, according to OPEC, has been weak since 1970. Major investment in coal to oil or shale to oil will solve the problem, but this will be be expensive. No alternative exists aside from letting the economy return to what it was in 1900, which would probably involve population falling to that level as well.


33 posted on 06/30/2008 1:32:04 PM PDT by RightWhale (I will veto each and every beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

I meant to include oil shales and coal-to-oil as well. I thought you meant that we just couldn’t get enough oil onto the market no matter what we did. I should’ve been more specific. I absolutely agree we need to get to the oil shales and take advantage of the ENORMOUS amount of coal we have.


34 posted on 06/30/2008 1:34:11 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Syncro

California is on a green kick. Strange, all those resources begging to be developed and a hugh budget deficit and they won’t make the link.


35 posted on 06/30/2008 1:35:16 PM PDT by RightWhale (I will veto each and every beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: An Old Man; misterrob
I'll even advance your theory to the ‘carbon credit’ scam. Those who are the elitist will horde and keep the precious resources off limits to the little people while they fly around in their private jets and are the only ones able to afford ‘carbon credits.’

Al Gore and Arnold Schwarzenegger come to mind. Schwarzenegger flies in his private jet back and forth to Sacramento because he doesn't want to live there but justifies it by buying so-called carbon credits. All the while lecturing the little people that they need to conserve energy.

Who can afford ‘carbon credits’ on top of high energy prices? Not me!

36 posted on 06/30/2008 1:36:12 PM PDT by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Pathetic, self admiring, scam artists interested in only one thing themselves and thier political career.
Despicable, disgusting human garbage that Americans voted into office to represent America. I’M SICK TO MY STOMACH!


37 posted on 06/30/2008 1:36:36 PM PDT by ronnie raygun (IF YOU ARE NOT CONSERVATIVE BY 35 YOU HAVE NO BRAIN. W CHURCHILL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax; BOBTHENAILER

Hey Pelosi and Reid, where is that cheaper gasoline you lied to us/er promised us during the 2006 elections?

The democrat congress hasn’t done a damn thing to start the lowering of the prices of gasoline.


38 posted on 06/30/2008 1:38:09 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (EA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

He’s not heavy. He’s my Congress!


39 posted on 06/30/2008 1:39:13 PM PDT by Hans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Syncro
"One expert said the only a small percentage of the oil has been pumped our of the Signal Hill area in Southern California and there is a lot left just ready to pump out with a little tweaking of the equipment and the formation. "

I hope you tweak that equipment real good! If you pump all the oil from that structure, the entire City of Long Beach is going to need a levee built around it.

40 posted on 06/30/2008 1:39:32 PM PDT by An Old Man ("The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they suppress." Douglas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

I personally like the idea of building coal to liquid plants and shale to oil plants everywhere. I like the appearance of factories with more steel pipes than the eye can follow going everywhere. The pipes can be painted in a variety of colorful systems, I wouldn’t want to see any neon, and be looking good. Not to mention that these are hugh engineering projects and I have a degree to manage that kind of thing.


41 posted on 06/30/2008 1:40:54 PM PDT by RightWhale (I will veto each and every beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Correct.

I saw Schwarzenegger on TV the other nite, and he referred to the Republicans as “they...etc”

Marry a Kennedy, you are a Kennedy.

42 posted on 06/30/2008 1:42:43 PM PDT by Syncro (Tagline: optional, printed after your name on post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

Are you an engineer? I’m currently a mechanical engineering student (as well as ROTC). Anyway, I wouldn’t mind a bit of nuclear power either.


43 posted on 06/30/2008 1:43:21 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: All
The counter to the "it will take 10 years to see benefits" argument, besides telling the truth, is this: That same 10 years will go by whether we drill or not, if we drill, in 10 years we have more oil and prices start to go down and at the same time we have been working on alternative fuels, which may bring prices even more. However, if we don't drill then prices will never go down and we will have to give up our cars(which of course is what Dems want, but the people don't).

30 years ago the Dems(and make sure you mention them by name)said the same thing, that it would take 10 years to see more oil, well that 10 years and 2 other decades have gone by and we still don't have the oil because we didn't dril. Even an incredibly stupid Democrat can understand this, if their face turns gray or mottled then you know you have gotten to them, just leave them alone and they will figure it out!

44 posted on 06/30/2008 1:44:29 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
Have you been drinking the Dem Kool-Aid? Now way it takes 5-10 years. 2-5 maybe.

It might be even less time than that. One thing that I question, can the existing pipe line, Trans Alaskan Pipeline, handle the increase oil flow. The pipe line is about 80 to100 miles from ANWR field. I might be able to be connected to each field. Also there is another oil field, Sourdough, between Prudhoe Bay and ANWR. How is oil moved from this field? I assume by ship. If so, a small pipeline from ANWR and Sourdoegh could connect to shipping lanes. Damn, there are so many questions and we need some intelligent beings to really tell us what is happening.

45 posted on 06/30/2008 1:44:42 PM PDT by Logical me (Oh, well!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: An Old Man
I guess so

Large areas of Texas have sunk almost out of site from pumping the last drop of oil they could get out of thousands of wells.

46 posted on 06/30/2008 1:44:49 PM PDT by Syncro (Tagline: optional, printed after your name on post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

Yes, I have an MS in Engineering Management. Get that degree in addition to your engineering degree, many doors open.


47 posted on 06/30/2008 1:45:41 PM PDT by RightWhale (I will veto each and every beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

That’s because they have completely reversed themselves (or fooled us the first time around). Come to think of it, what HAS the democratic Congress accomplished that it set out to do?


48 posted on 06/30/2008 1:45:44 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Logical me
One thing that I question, can the existing pipe line, Trans Alaskan Pipeline, handle the increase oil flow.

Yes

It is flowing at about 30% capacity now.

Enough oil could be put in the pipeline to supply us for about 30 years (I read that the other day while researching this subject) and break the huge dependence of getting oil from terrorist countries.

49 posted on 06/30/2008 1:48:15 PM PDT by Syncro (Tagline: optional, printed after your name on post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

“Come to think of it, what HAS the democratic Congress accomplished that it set out to do?”

That is the question that many of their rat voters and supporters are asking them behind closed doors.

If you want to have fun with a vocal rat ask he/she/it:

1. Can you name and document one accomplishment that Obama has really done since he became such a vocal Senator?

2. What has your democrat controlled and led congress done to make you happy?


50 posted on 06/30/2008 1:53:39 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (EA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson