Democrats Oppose Drilling for Oil Off U.S. Coasts

Human Events ^ | May 1, 2008 | Staff

[From The Deer Stand]

It’s great to get these Democratic points out in the open via Free Republic but each of us needs to hammer away at our senators and congressman and demand that we drill our own oil in ANWR and offshore, build refineries without requiring 400 permits, and use nuclear power like the French do. I have written several letters to my representatives about this subject. Every Freeper needs to do the same. Read this commentary from May 2006: http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/05/its-official-cuba-hires-china-to-drill.html

[calex59]

hat we have to do, what our nation has to do, is make a decision to be energy independent.

I wonder if Pelosi knows how stupid this sounds when she says just before this statement that she opposes more drilling in the USA. What a bunch of lying, weaseling scumbags democrats are.

[detective]

Democrats prevent the drilling for new supply in the US. They have prevented drilling in ANWAR and in the Gulf of Mexico.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200605/ai_n17175024

[detective]

“Correct me if I’m wrong, but even if the amount sold doesn’t increase doesn’t the government stand to make more and more money as the price of oil, gasoline, et. al. increases?”

The Federal excise tax on gasoline is not a percentage . It is 18.4 cents per gallon.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/federalgasexciserate-20080501.pdf

[Bernard Marx]

I’d bet there is a *lot* of oil off the coast of California.

I recall landing in Santa Barbara one late afternoon and as we made our approach over the S.B. Channel the low sun highlighted a huge oil slick from natural seepage.

At the Mandalay Beach Resort Hotel near the Channel Islands at Oxnard, there are washing stations on the beach so people can remove oil and tar from their bare feet. Ever hear of Pismo Beach where the famous Pismo clams are found? "Pismo" is the Chumash Indian name for the little pellets of oil tar that wash ashore all along California's Central Coast. I've found them as far north as Hearst Castle.

California's rich elitists control most of that prime beach real estate. The Hollywood crowd runs Montecito, the ultra-wealthy enclave just south of Santa Barbara. Super-rich elitists from all over are drawn to Santa Barbara for its beauty and elitist-friendly ambiance. It considers itself the birthplace of the militant Green movement (UC Santa Barbara is a hotbed of Green-Marxist activity, and a professor there helped write the Global Warming mythology-propaganda for the IPCC).

These people are rich, powerful, Left-Socialist and absolutely dedicated to the notion that there will never be any further oil drilling in the S.B. Channel. They campaign on "green" issues but they're mostly worried that the ocean views from their multi-million dollar estates will be spoiled by the sight of drilling platforms.

[Doohickey]

SEN. MARIA CANTWELL (D.-WASH.): I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to

LOL!

[Red_Devil 232]

The RED DOT is the GREEN area is where we want to drill

[CPT Clay]

At what price per barrel do the Dems lift moritoriums, dril ANWR, etc?

I believe on every piece of ligilation an amendment to dril AnWR if the average price of gasoline goes above $4.00 per gallon.

[thackney]

There are a lot more taxes collected from oil companies than only the gas excise tax at the pump. It is taxed all along the process and again with any money left over for profit. Governments make more money off the oil industry than the companies keep as profits.

ExxonMobil 2007
Revenue $404.6 Billion
Profit $40.6 Billion (10.0%)
Taxes $102.5 Billion (25.3%)

Sales-Based taxes $31.728B
Other taxes and duties $40.953B
Income taxes $29.864B

2007 Financial & Operating Review
http://www.exxonmobil.com/corporate/files/news_pub_fo_2007.pdf
Page 16

- - - - - - - - -

ConocoPhillips 2007
Revenue $194.5 Billion
Profit $11.9 Billion (6.1%)
Taxes $30.4 Billion (15.6%)

Taxes other than income taxes $18.990B
Income taxes $11.891B

2007 Annual Report
http://www.conocophillips.com/NR/rdonlyres/3838234F-F20C-4BCE-AE8D-78DE29D67455/0/07RevisedARfinal.pdf
Page 60

- - - - - - - - -

Chevron 2007
Revenue $220.9 Billion
Profit $18.7 Billion (8.5%)
Taxes $35.7 Billion (16.2%)

Taxes other than income taxes $22.266B
Income taxes $13.479B

2007 Annual Report Supplement
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/13/130102/reports/CVX_ARsupp07.pdf
Page 3

- - - - - - - - -

Marathon 2007

Revenue $62.8 Billion
Profit $4.0 Billion (6.3%)
Taxes $8.5 Billion (13.5%)

[chimera]

Your post has captured the essence of the conflict between the political realm and physical/engineering reality when the two worlds collide. Political timelines are on the order of months, maybe a year or two. Development and deployment of new technologies can take on the order of decades. No politician thinks in those terms when they have to run for office every two or four years. Few understand or will recognize the phase lag inherent in making decisions and having widespread implementation across a diverse and complex sector of a technological society.

There is also a fundamental conflict in the manner in which technological decisions made by government entities are reached. You see it in the responses by the various political figures in the original post. A smart political leader will enlist the assistance of recognized technical experts and trust their judgment in advising them on how to vote on technical issues. Unfortunately, today you see political leaders pandering and making decisions based more on what they think the public perceives as desirable, and thus will make them popular. The fundamental flaw in trusting technical decisions to popular votes is that, by definition of a democracy, two morons are "smarter" than one genius, so you have the spectacle of two brainless dolts like Pelosi and Cantwell overriding the intelligence of someone on the level of Einstein. Well, eventually Mother Nature pays no mind of how many votes you have. Pelosi and Cantwell can pass all the laws they want to against energy shortages and high prices, but when you burn up your natural gas in utility boilers, or destroy your foodstocks for some government-subsidized boondoggle like ethanol, the laws of nature and economics will trump whatever laws the airheads will pass.

[GourmetDan]

Tis as expected.

Thanks for the added perspective.

[yankeedame]

Thanks for the heads up! I wasn’t sure how that worked. Nice to know the government has reason to want to see lower fuel prices

[GourmetDan]

"I wonder if Pelosi knows how stupid this sounds when she says just before this statement that she opposes more drilling in the USA."

Demos believe that if you have feelings and speak words you have made tremendous progress.

[Otho]

Where is it stated that this interview is several years old? Pombo and Barton aren’t chairmen of anything. And Nancy Pelosi isn’t House MINORITY Leader anymore. Actually, a bill which included allowing drilling in ANWR passed the Senate back in 2005 or 2006 when the Rs held both houses, but RINOs in the House helped defeat it. Most, if not all, of them lost their reelection bids.

[Redleg Duke]

"Sorry, have to disagree. Please leave them with all the sharp objects that can be found."

ROTFLMAO!

[SAJ]

More to the point, she's an outright liar. Refinery utilisation nationwide is running 83-84 %. Reasonably so, too -- refiners are just barely breaking even on motor gasoline (of course, they're making a killing on every gallon of #2 oil).

However, with ute at 84%, we could very easily ramp refining up another 10%. Feinswine, as usual, is lying out her arse.

[denydenydeny]

Would you support lifting the moratorium on offshore drilling on the East and West coasts?

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D.-CALIR): No.

No? Now, I'm not trying to be cheeky, but doesn't that artificially inflate the price if we can't drill because of legislation?

FEINSTEIN: No, not necessarily at all. The fact of the matter is California is at refining capacity. They couldn't refine more if we had it.

Even if we opened....more refineries?

FEINSTEIN: Well, that's not the issue here.

Try to follow the logic. Breathtaking.

[pallis]

Democrats want $6 dollar a gallon gas, so they can keep the environmentalists happy. The best way for Democrats to get what they want is to create supply problems. If people complain too loud about paying $4 dollars per gallon, the powers that be will have us waiting in gas lines until we are happy to pay $6. None of their plan involves increased production.

[detective]

Good info. You are not including state and local taxes, regulatory fees, environmental compliance fees, etc.

[detective]

Good info. You are not including state and local taxes, regulatory fees, environmental compliance fees, etc.