Posted on 12/27/2006 4:51:54 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
House Democrats in the first weeks of the new Congress plan to establish a dedicated fund to promote renewable energy and conservation, using money from oil companies. That's only one legislative hit the oil industry is expected to take next year as a Congress run by Democrats is likely to show little sympathy to the cash-rich, high-profile business.
Whether the issue is rolling tax breaks - some approved by Congress only 18 months ago - pushing for more use of ethanol and other biofuels instead of gasoline, or investigations into shortfalls in royalty payments to the government, oil industry lobbyists will spend most of their time playing defense.
Details of a renewable fuels fund have yet to be worked out. Nonetheless, it's one of the initiatives the House will take up during its first 100 hours in session in January, according to aides to Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi. At least some of the money - revenue gained by rolling back some tax breaks - will go to a program to support research into making ethanol from sources other than corn.
"What we'll do is roll back the subsidies to Big Oil and use the resources to invest in a reserve for research in alternative energy," Pelosi, a California Democrat, recently told reporters.
But the oil issue likely to be first out of the legislative block in January concerns the ability of the federal government to recover royalties many lawmakers believe have been unfairly avoided by oil and gas companies drilling in deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico.
The Interior Department has been trying to get more than 50 companies to rework 1998-99 drilling leases that allow the companies to avoid paying billions of dollars in royalties because of a government mistake in writing the leases. Recently five companies agreed to a compromise to pay royalties on future production under the leases, but not from oil and gas already taken from the federal waters.
Most of the other companies argue that the leases represent a binding contract and have not even talked to Interior officials about them.
The industry intransigence has upset many in Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, who say they want to find a way to force the companies back to negotiations on the flawed leases. One approach is legislation barring companies from bidding on future leases unless they agree to renegotiate the flawed ones.
"There will be a new cop on the beat to force every big oil company that is currently lining its pockets with taxpayer dollars to come back to the negotiating table," Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., declared.
Pelosi calls the royalty avoidance from the 1998-99 leases the biggest oil industry subsidy issue she intends to tackle early. Congressional estimates have put the potential royalty loss at as much as $10 billion over the life of the leases.
Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., the incoming chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, has promised to continue pressing the Interior Department on the matter, which also has been the subject of extensive hearings under GOP leadership.
Recently Waxman and Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., the committee's departing chairman, asked the Justice Department to review Interior's claim that royalties legally cannot be collected from past production under the leases.
House Democrats also are targeting a handful of oil industry tax breaks for repeal. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers say there is unlikely to be an attempt to push more sweeping measures such a new tax on the oil industry's windfall profits.
Members of both parties have said they also want to make another stab at passing a federal law against oil company price gouging, an issue that will gain momentum should oil and gasoline prices again soar amid huge industry profits.
At the top of the hit list is a tax break that was aimed at promoting U.S. manufacturing but has provided a windfall for the oil industry as well. The provision reduces the corporate tax rate on profits from products made in the United States.
As for oil companies rolling in profits with $60-a-barrel crude, it is "a break they didn't earn, deserve or need," says Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash. McDermott tried to eliminate the tax break in May but was unsuccessful. He estimates that oil companies are saving as much as $700 million in taxes a year because of it.
Democrats also are targeting other benefits for refinery investments and for expenditures for certain types of oil and gas exploration. Those measures, passed by Congress last year as part of a broad energy bill, are estimated to cost the government about $1.3 billion over 10 years.
Executives of the largest oil companies have said they don't need those tax breaks and do not oppose their repeal. Congress earlier this year already eliminated the tax incentive on exploration for the five largest companies.
Oil lobbyists, however, are preparing to fight another proposal that would raise taxes on their inventories, a change that could cost oil companies billions of dollars. The inventory tax provisions cover the entire industry and some lawmakers want to repeal them only for the biggest companies.
"That would significantly raise the cost of holding inventory" and cause companies to reduce the amount of oil they keep in storage, said Red Cavaney, president of the American Petroleum Institute, the industry trade group. If that happens "prices will go through the roof" if there is even a modest disruption, he predicted.
The White House is not opposed to rolling back some of the tax breaks that Congress approved last year. President Bush has said the industry doesn't need the subsidies given today's oil prices and industry profits.
But the administration is opposed to tinkering with some of the other tax rollbacks under consideration including the one on inventory taxes. The Interior Department also has said it wants to work with Congress to find ways to deal with the royalty issue, but is worried the proposal to bar companies from future leases could throw the federal offshore leasing program into lengthy litigation.
"Our fear is our (leasing) program would shut down. That would have a multibillion-dollar impact on federal revenues," Assistant Interior Secretary Stephen Allred recently told reporters.
Oil industry lobbyists also expect a Democratic push to further expand production of ethanol as a gasoline additive and don't see that as a threat to their business. A more contentious issue will be attempts to require large oil companies to make available fuel that is 85 percent ethanol, so-called E-85, at some of their retail outlets.
It all amounts to "Damn Capitalists"!
This is red meat for the dumb-ass sheeple who blindly pull the lever for Democrats at the voting booth. Thinking people know that oil companies will simply shrug and pass the costs onto working folks, because Democrats & their supporters are the real filthy rich and can afford any increases in fuel costs.
The costs will go to the consumers and the Dems will play
a head fake by blaming the Republicans/Bush & Big Oil.
I give up on stupid Voters.
The only "enemies" the idiot Democrats see are Republicans
and businesses (which built the country). They are oblivious
to real external (and internal) threats like Islam and the
Mexican invasion. They are total fools.
There is no such thing as "renewable" energy or energy "conservation". Energy can not be renewed, only used. Energy can not be conserved, only utilized or not utilized.
"Big Tobacco" trial lawyers shakedown redux...
I trust Conoco-Phillips more than I trust Pelosi-Reid.
Promoting renewable energy sources can mean just about anything. This is a slush fund. Funds will be granted to organizations that donate to Democratic politicians and of course lucrative contracts will be awarded to relatives of democrats.
This is graft, and once the program starts it will never be ended.
When the "PRICES" go sky high the Dims are finished. Tell me that's not a good thing! Unless of course we get the same "30" F'n %" turnout NATIONALLY as we had had in this/06 election year.
(yeah that's right, 30% and that is why the dims aint REALLY echoing no BS about mandate).
Happy Holidays.
And "renewable" energy is such a scam, it's nothing but a total giveaway through gov't subsidies to the envirowackos that support the Dims. If renewable energy was feasible, they'd be on the market already.
Maybe Congress will earmark money for research on horse-drawn buggies and chariots. That's how stupid Democrazies sound.
I'm pretty sure the government makes more money from the sale of a gallon of gasoline than the oil companies profit on it. Not to mention the ton of jobs the oil company created to bring the gas to the pump. All of which the government gets a piece of their wages too. Organized crime wish they had it so good.
Earth to Pelosi: big mistake.
Pelosi, Pelosi, Pelosi... doesn't that woman understand that "Big Oil" is already paying "BIG" taxes?
So who is going to pay for more oil exploration instead of the touchy feely liberal crapola? Drilling in ANWR anyone?
I hope everyone is getting ready for higher gas prices.
And since the leftists blamed the higher gas prices last summer on Bush and his "oil buddies", I suggest we return the favor when prices go up again.
Many people are surprised to learn that the Kennedys have been major players in the oil business and continue to receive sizable checks for crude being pumped from their numerous properties.
The Kennedy's have shrouded their oil ownership from the public; the Kennedy's own two oil companies that have drilled for oil in 4 American states.
Financial disclosure records show to each extended Kennedy family members receives between $50-100,000 a year from properties that were purchased for their mineral rights (oil). In total, family revenue from crude oil and natural gas is more than $1 million a year.
Ted led a battle in the Senate (and won) to pass legislation which cut back on "excessive profits" for oil companies. But he made a nice little loophole for his own oil companies.
He made sure the legislation distinguished between "small struggling oil producers" (his companies) and large oil companies.
Let's not forget.
Sourcing for the above: All sourcing can be found in the book Do As I Say, Not As I Do.
That's what the Democrazies believe. Damn all private economic activity or industry, business.
They want control over you and me and everything we do to say. They're Marxist tyrants.
Conservatives will target 'Big Stupid'
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.