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

Skip to comments.

House Democrats pass bill to raise taxes on gas(Socialists and Globalists want even more money)
cfp ^ | 10/3/10 | brian ward

Posted on 10/04/2010 2:23:42 PM PDT by bestintxas

H.R. 3534, a bill to give our land away to the U.N., passed by a narrow margin. On July 30, 2010, 207 Democrats and two Republicans voted in favor of the bill, and 39 Democrats and 154 Republicans voted against it.

Among many things, this bill exemplifies that bipartisan support in Congress only exists with the Republicans. The other news is that it raises fuel taxes an estimated 5 cents per gallon on gasoline and diesel.

“Section 802 (b) Amount- The amount of the fee shall be, for each barrel or barrel equivalent produced from land that is subject to a lease from which oil or natural gas is produced in a calendar year, $2 per barrel of oil and 20 cents per million BTU of natural gas in 2010 dollars.”

Most Americans are unaware of the amount of taxes included in each gallon of gasoline. According to the American Petroleum Institute, as of July 2010, the national average fuel tax was 47.7 cents per gallon (cpg).

Given that the average vehicle in the United States holds 16 gallons of gasoline, this equates to $7.63 in federal, state, and local taxes paid each and every time you fill up your tank.

If you live in New York, California, Connecticut, or Hawaii, you will pay an average of $10.16 per tank in taxes. This is, of course, what they keep voting for, so they deserve a higher gasoline tax than the rest of us.

(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: energy; gas; hr3534; oil; taxes
Anyone out there that calls himself a Consevative who doesn't beleive the 2 Republicans who voted on this need to be fired next month? See vote Tally

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2010-513&sort=party

1 posted on 10/04/2010 2:23:46 PM PDT by bestintxas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bestintxas

What? My self-contained bio-organic methane emission development and processing plant is going to cost me money?

If I don’t lift the sheets, will they even know?


2 posted on 10/04/2010 2:26:20 PM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Islam is a violent and tyrannical political ideology and has nothing to do with "religion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bestintxas

I kind of skimmed it as I loathe reading guv’ment speak. It appears that this new tax only applies to Federal lands.


3 posted on 10/04/2010 2:34:12 PM PDT by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bestintxas
The lame duck session will be unprecedented power grab
4 posted on 10/04/2010 2:52:11 PM PDT by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bestintxas

As the Science Czar said, he wants to de-develop the US. These people are pure evil, in a religious sense.


5 posted on 10/04/2010 2:53:11 PM PDT by Clock King (Ellisworth Toohey was right: My head's gonna explode.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

WHO were the two Republicans who voted for this???
6 posted on 10/04/2010 3:35:51 PM PDT by haircutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

WHO were the two Republicans who voted for this???
7 posted on 10/04/2010 3:36:06 PM PDT by haircutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: haircutter
oops double post...sorry
8 posted on 10/04/2010 3:37:09 PM PDT by haircutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bestintxas

Look, Conservatives need to get smarter, and less blind about fuel taxes.

Without them, generally, your car would be sitting in your driveway having no place to go, or at least not very far (there is no Utopian Libertarian revolution that is going to change - in my lifetime- how MOST roads in this country are built and maintained).

So, as a “user fee” (a charge to everyone who uses the roads, collected in the sale of the fuels used to travel the roads) they do provide the dominant element of financing for our roads. They, in essence “subsidize” motor vehicle transportation. That might be a dirty word to Conservatives, but that is in essence what they do.

Where Conservatives SHOULD complain about fuel taxes is:

1. That they should ONLY subsidize/fund the forms of transportation from which they are collected.

2. That they should be sufficient to that purpose but not greater than needed for that purpose.

3. That road projects should enjoy the greatest public scrutiny concerning true general public need, so that road projects are not mere work projects to artificially boost employment, and so that the true priority projects are not fighting for funds with political “earmarks” and special interest projects.

Accept by knowing the general state-by-state fuel tax-revenue, road funding data and what its going for, I do not know that any state fuel tax is “too” high or, in fact, “too” low, for the purposes for which the tax is supposedly collected.

While I appreciate and join the concerns about politicians that rant over transportation fuel “profits”, as they, usually, taking a bigger slice of the transportation fuel bill in fuel taxes, than what is retained by oil companies as profits;

the REAL ECONOMIC question must be - “do we collect in transportation fuel taxes what WE NEED for motor vehicle transportation infrastructure supported by such taxes, or not” (considering the three provisions I noted above).

If we do, then “fuel taxes” are either sufficient or possibly too high. If we don’t, their not.

Meanwhile, politicians need to quit being dishonest about the true cost of supplying oil-fuel products and the true, low, return on revenue that retail oil-product profits amount to. The politicians mount their populist rants due to public perception over fuel prices. But, the truth is that if fuel prices, particularly in the U.S., had kept pace with most of the rest of the economy - inflated as much over the decades - retail gasoline in the U.S. would, legitimately, be selling for more than it does today. If it just kept pace with college tuition, it would sell for $12.93 a gallon (so who is “price gouging” whom??)


9 posted on 10/04/2010 3:43:45 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: haircutter

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2010-513&sort=party


10 posted on 10/04/2010 6:03:59 PM PDT by bestintxas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: crusty old prospector

“It appears that this new tax only applies to Federal lands.”

But the amount of production we get from those lands is huge.

Think Alaska, all of offshore, and the huge tracts out west.

Also, most of the prospective oil exists on federal lands too.


11 posted on 10/04/2010 6:08:21 PM PDT by bestintxas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bestintxas

thank you

Carole
haircutter


12 posted on 10/04/2010 6:34:36 PM PDT by haircutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

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