Pelosi tells House Dems: Do what you have to do
House Republicans want, more than anything in the world, to approve the oil companies’ request for more coastal drilling. Desperate consumers aren’t sure it’ll help, but they’re willing to try anything, and look askance at those who aren’t willing to give more drilling a shot. House Dems, who feel pretty confident about their chances at re-election this year, don’t want to support a bad bill, but don’t want risk their majority on this.
Enter Speaker Pelosi, who’s taking a very smart approach, and delivering a compelling message to her caucus members who are afraid of public sentiment on drilling: Do what you have to do.
[W]hat looks like intraparty tension on the surface is part of an intentional strategy in which Pelosi takes the heat on energy policy, while behind the scenes she’s encouraging vulnerable Democrats to express their independence if it helps them politically, according to Democratic aides on and off Capitol Hill.
Pelosi’s gambit rests on one big assumption: that Democrats will own Washington after the election and will be able to craft a sweeping energy policy that is heavy on conservation and fuel alternatives while allowing for some new oil drilling. Democrats see no need to make major concessions on energy policy with a party poised to lose seats in both chambers in just three months — even if recess-averse Republicans continue to pound away on the issue.
“The reality is we will have a new president in three months, and what Bush and the Republicans are trying to do amounts to a land grab for the oil companies,” said one senior House Democratic aide involved with party strategy. “I don’t think we have to give in at all pre-election — we have many more options postelection.”
Look, there’s not a whole lot Congress can do in the immediate term anyway. Even Republicans, when they’re not in front of the cameras, know that increased coastal drilling is just a shallow ploy to mislead voters. Whether they hold a vote or not is of minimal practical consequence.
So instead of negotiating with Bush, and necessarily having a worse bill, why shouldn’t Congress see what the election brings? As Kevin asked the other day, “Any bill passed while George Bush is president will inevitably be a horrible kludge, so why not wait? What’s the downside?”
There really isn’t one. Presumably, Republicans want Dems to be afraid of their meaningless House sit-in, but Pelosi & Co., wisely, don’t seem to care.
And sure enough, vulnerable Dems are taking Pelosi’s advice and showing some independence.
Democratic House aides say the energy agenda has been carefully gamed out in strategy sessions, and Pelosi always intended to take heat on gas prices while tacitly encouraging more vulnerable Democrats to publicly disagree with her and show their independence.
Freshman Democrats like Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania and Don Cazayoux of Louisiana have taken her up on the offer.
Altmire has said a drilling vote “will happen,” while Cazayoux, hoping to hang on to his seat in a conservative Baton Rouge-area district, on Friday sent a letter to Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) demanding a vote on more domestic oil exploration. […]
To some extent, House Republicans seem to be playing right along with the strategy, taking Pelosi’s name in vain dozens of times during their rebel House sessions over the past few days and making her the villain who won’t allow oil drilling votes.
“It’s grossly unfair to the Democrats who want a vote,” said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). “[Pelosi] needs to cut that out.”
Actually, she needs to do exactly what she’s been doing.
jimBOB
says:GOP, this is what irrelevance tastes like. In the years to come you will get a great big bellyful of it.
Cheers.
Racer X
says:Dems should also play it this way: Tell the voters that if we leave that oil in the ground, it’s like money in the bank. Someday we’ll be able to get it out without killing the environment, and turn it into useful products. But for now it’s right where it belongs, and it’s “gathering interest”. Pulling it out now would be foolish, even if we could do it (which we can’t).
SteveT
says:Democrats can win this P.R. battle without giving away the store to the oil companies.
First, all new leases must have a sunset provision. If the oil companies don’t begin drilling within three years, the lease becomes void. Let’s see the Republicans, who have been arguing that new leases would bring more oil to the market in as little time as a few months, argue against that.
Second, all oil from new leases must be refined in the U.S. and sold in the U.S.
Third, a Sarbanes/Oxley-type provision would hold oil company C.E.O.s personally responsible for any oil spills or leaks. The provision would require the C.E.O.s to re-imburse the government for any cleanup costs that taxpayers end up paying. Since the Republicans are arguing that new technology has made offshore drilling “perfectly safe”, they shouldn’t have a problem with this either.
But of course this is all wishful thinking. Pelosi is just setting us up so she can make another complete capitulation to Bush and the Republicans. Once again, she will give them everything they want, and more.
I really wonder what the Republicans have on Pelosi — compromising video of her with a goat? Or maybe just recordings of her accepting bribes.
TomB
says:I hope that when a coastal drilling bill is written, that a hard time-limit will be built in. For example, insists that oil companies must be delivering oil, in form of gasoline or heating fuel, to the American consumer from these new wells, in 10 years or give up the lease or pay high late penalties like copntractors would pay when they don’t get a job finished on time. Other deadlines could be imposed along the way such as having oil rigs in place within five years. And since the rationale for these wells is to lower consumer prices, I would set price benchmarks, when prices rise above the benchmarks, oil companies pay fines.
I would set the time limits by asking the Republicans who support drilling when they think oil from these wells will actually get to market and how much, specifically they think it will affect the market price.
Of course the oil companies and Republicans would scream at having any deadlines at all (we’d have another argument on timelines!) but the debate would shift and drilling would be exposed for what it is – a land grab.
hark
says:What makes anyone think the oil companies will actually exploit these protected areas? They’re not drilling on millions of acres they have access to now. Why not? Why haven’t the Democrats hauled them into hearings and asked them? They routinely subject these oil CEOs to humiliating, purely public relations grillings. Why not ask them point blank why they’re holding back? Why not resurrect the “use it or lose it” provision that got defeated, and also received no media attention? I don’t understand why the Democrats aren’t fighting on grounds which the public can appreciate. Right now, Americans don’t understand that there’s plenty of oil to be had with existing leases. They don’t know this because the media won’t tell them, and the Democrats aren’t screaming about it. Why aren’t the Democrats screaming about it?
The Democrats keep pushing the argument that it will take years to produce results. But so will developing alternative energy. So does everything worthwhile take years and years of hard work and sacrifice. That’s not a good argument. The correct response is that the oil companies are to blame for sitting on billions of barrels under existing leases and not drilling for them.
I just don’t know why the Democrats won’t make an issue of this. Are they trying to lose this debate?
Jon B.
says:There’s an excellent post over at 538.com arguing that Obama should fully embrace the “Gang of Ten” compromise bill. It’s worth a read.
bill
says:This does not read like it was written by a journalist [ who should be imparshall ] but by some one with an agenda. Anyone who thinks that putting more oil on the market will not lower the price just does not understand economics. The elected people in Washington are there to do the will of the people of the US, and the people of the US want lower fuel cost.
Also congress last year chastised the government of Iraq for thating of Aug of 2007 when that was work that was needed, now part of our congress is doing the same thing at the detriment of the American tax payer.
Marty
says:My comment regarding drilling for oil is this: A. Why did the Congress give “themselves” a money break on fuel costs, but not the working guy who it ‘really effects; considering they are lucky if they can be bothered to work more than 3 days a month B: why is it OK for the Chinese to be drilling 50 miles off the coast of Fla for oil, but not us; C: the Dems would rather ‘purposely hurt’ this country to be able to ‘run it’ D: You can’t fix STUPID!
MsJoanne
says:Jeez, better trolls please! (At least ones who can make some sort of sense!)
Drilling will not bring forth any results for years. This will not result in lower prices. Drilling here in the US will put oil on the world market. Domestic drilling will not result in oil being sold here at home. This will do nothing but put more $ into the oil companies pockets.
Offshore drilling can’t even take place for 14 years (last count I read) BECAUSE THERE ARE NO DRILLING RIGS AVAILABLE FOR THAT LENGTH OF TME. They are fully leased for 14 years (again, last count I saw).
Refineries do not have enough capacity for that much added production even should it make it to the refineries.
Good god, where do these idiots come from?
MsJoanne
says:Steve Benen…here is your Chinese is drilling thing come to life.
A lie thrice told becomes a truth.
Show me where the Chinese are drilling off of Cuba.
Can you say Right Wing Talking Points? Or rather, more Right Wing LIES.
Our country is doomed when so many are so fucking stupid.
SteveS
says:Why not go as far as possible in the direction of solving the entire US energy problem right now. If the oil companies are so demanding of new off shore leases, why not allow it with sunset provisions, while, at the same time diminishingh their profitability? Tie into the agreement funding and tax credits for fuel efficiency and developement of alternatives. If these were substantial enough, it would put wind and solar generation on an even field with natural gas, nuclear, and coal burning plants. In this market, coupled with the rapid developement of plug in hybrid gas-electric cars, demand for oil would drop emmensely. In the end the leases may never be developed and would expire.
Naturally, to supply oil to China and other growing nations, these offshore sites will be developed and will be put into operation. At that point however, there is a competition of technologies to be offered to these nations. Either way, the growing global concern would seem to be against oil. This is the time to make the compromise.
From this point the issue of energy would be somewhat muted. That may be a good thing considering the sources of the money that this issue is bringing to the contest.
Rick
says:Marty, the chinese ARE NOT DRILLING 50 MILES OFF THE COAST OF FLORDIA! Read a fucking newspaper and turn off rush.
Bill, this is a blog, NOT A NEWSPAPER! It will take 10 years to get any of that oil to the market. Buy a fucking newspaper and turn off rush.
sorry about the caps, but BETTER TROLLS PLEASE!
SteveT
says:bill said:
This does not read like it was written by a journalist [ who should be imparshall ] but by some one with an agenda. Anyone who thinks that putting more oil on the market will not lower the price just does not understand economics.
bill Your comment reads like it was written by someone for whom English is a second language. If that’s the case, welcome to the United States, where everyone has the right to publish their opinion no matter how uninformed it is.
If English isn’t your second language, you should seriously consider taking a community college course in English Composition.
As for the substance of your comment — the entire point of the drilling debate, which has been ignored for the most part by the corporate-controlled media, is that oil from new leases WILL NOT appear on the market for ten years. There is not a single drilling rig available for the next five years.
neilt
says:wait, aren’t we supposed to hate Pelosi? I’m getting confused with the narrative here.
🙂
(Just kidding, this is the kind of stuff that makes politics so endlessly fascinating for me. This is also the kind of post that has turned CB into required reading for me. I know I’m starting to sound like a broken record – but I cannot get over just how awesome this blog is. I feel like a born-again, having renounced the crassness of Salon, I now remember what got me interested in left-wing politics in the first place)
MsJoanne
says:SteveT, let’s add to that:
The oil companies already have 68 MILLION acres on current leases. Right now. Right at this very moment!
Why are they not drilling on those? Why are they not drilling on the 68 MILLION acres they already have leases on? Quick, someone ask Rush Limbaugh since he knows all.
This is a land grab (meaning they want cheap leases on OUR land…that which is owned by US, The People.
out west
says:Whether the U.S. allows offshore drilling for oil in its territorial waters or not is essentially a moot point. The fact of the matter is that demand for oil is rising much faster with the emergence of the Chinese and Indian economies. If the overall demand for oil does not currently outstrip the supply it will soon and will continue to do so.
Even with tapping offshore oil fields and using that oil only for itself, the United States will only be putting off the inevitable. The inevitable is that the oil will run out, leaving the country looking for other supplies. Now is the time to convert our energy economy. Even if you don’t like T. Boone Pickens, he is at least trying to develop an alternative to oil energy. It’s time for the American public to get behind the development of solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources.
Mark
says:If I remember correctly, the government was afraid of drilling 10 years ago because it would take 10 years to get the oil to the market. Well, look where we are 10 years later. Maybe we should start drilling so we don’t end up in the same position in another 8-10 years.
Yes, alternative energy will take time as well, but we should start seriously funding it so that this doesn’t become a huge issue in the future again.
Oh, and one more thing. Last time there was a gas crisis, (you know, the 10 gallon limit, lines several miles long, spike in prices) and the Democrats were in power in ’74, what did they do to help the average comsumer? NOTHING. I’m not saying the Republicans are much better because I don’t see a huge push to fix the problem. But have we ever considered the fact that the reason is not because of any one particular party or individual, but rather a lack of bipartisan support and a focus on special interest over national interest?
Gerry
says:Why has the media focused on this dumb question of to drilll or not to drill when the whole issue of the price of oil and gas is related to the catastrophic failure of the Bush Administration. The rising cost of living, the price we are paying at the pump, and the sagging economy, and loss of jobs are certainly connected to the enormous cost we are paying for the war in Iraq, war in Afghanistan, the war on terror, saber-rattling with Iran, their backward mentality on climate change, pollution, and the list goes on and on.
It is a great disservice to the nation to narrowly frame the issue of energy policy around the question of drilling for more oil or not. It completely misses the point of how we got on this track and arrived at this ridiculous question and debate. Let’s get to the heart of the problem and discuss real solutions to the mess we are in.
Megalomania
says:Pounding on Pelosi is the mantra on hate radio and across the Cable spectrum is red hot. I am not going into the detail of what Hannity, Levin, Savage, Limbaugh, Mathews, Morning Joe, Blitzer, Dobbs, anybody on Fox, even Dick Morris, even though he Dick Morris says he is married, for me he looks totally queer as a three dollar bill. For me, I am beginning think the Real Maverick in this Presidential race is Hillary Clinton. And every body is starting to perk up because the days are closing to the Convention were the fur will fly and Hillary support will make the moves. Even the experts are wondering what Hillary is going to do, for me this means Hillary is in control.
Or other’s say that the Democrats now are the cause of the problem of progress. For me all the democrats have been battling behind the scenes with Republicans for decades all the while appearing in front of camera as though much is agreeable but not really much has been accomplished in terms of energy independence. This ganging of the Republicans has and interesting appeal that may very well backfire, this very ambitious attitude for drilling in the outer shell has to have something in the background to trap Democrats rather than to serve the American electorate. Off shore drilling could very be a Republican bust up. There is more controversy about off shore tax havens too which could be coupled to a huge, huge off shore calamity that drive a whole new Republican banking and tax scandal around election time.
Here, is a marvelous time to show America the “Contract with America” the Republicans so proudly supported all ganged up the steps of the capital all lacking of a strategy for the oil problems that glared at America but now here today the Republicans are hell bent to save their seats and avoid all that reference. Precisely, The Contract with America is the problems that brought America to we are at now. During the Republican control it was total lack of leadership. Easy proof. A mantra from here to election would drive it home.
If ever there was a time the Democrats had the opportunity to illustrate how Republicans do not operate with bipartisan fundamentals in a socially stressed moment for the electorate, it is now. Pelosi with the Democrats now begin to feel the measure of imbalance in and the real support the Republican’s have with Mainstream Media.
True, a few corruption stories are thrown out to the public such as with Fox news the other day condemning Republicans for the earmarks. The honesty in the telecast was too, too much for me to take, making me wondering. Then realizing with good reason that report was followed up with a monster of Iraq war stuff that seemed impossible to believe, but followed a truism from the Republican corruption that make the Iraq war appear to be palatable.
Even though that Iraq war background has millions in under reported refugee displacement, tens of thousands of mercenary solders with no rules in war operations, trillions of dollars disappeared in pentagon and field operations, laundered money via Bush and Company through his business partnership with the Bin Laden family of which Osama Bin Laden master mind of 911 is still parading guiding and receiving money from American oil purchases. Verified by McCain himself in many town home meetings.
Another cool thing. If one goggles to find that ARAMCO composed of American oil Companies but really Arabian owned produces about 8.4 million barrels of oil a day. Oil roughly going for a hundred and twenty dollars a barrel translates to somewhere around a billion dollars a day in cool cash flow. Some of our American oil companies are greased by the Arabs with contracts with as much or more than thirty percent interest in these profits. Neat buckaroo’s to play around with, don’t you think? And as Gerald Posner said in his book “Secrets of the Kingdom” American politicians have been falling over each other to get a peace of the action. Here collateral damage is both republican and Democratic. But after watching Joe Lieberman one wonders who is a real Democrat and who is a real Republican. Here America is going to witness many Democrats flushed out as Republicans working counter productive in the Democratic Convention.
This has to be one of the toughest time for anybody to be in politics becuase for me this new time is moving quickly to more than just resignations, Americans want jail time and unopardoned convictions…
Tom Cleaver
says:Marty (#8), I really want to take a moment to thank you for your excellent work in proving so thoroughly why “wingnut” is a synonym for “moron.”
Diogenes
says:This is a chance for Pelosi to show that she has some clue. However, she will have to make a revised drilling bill the very first priority in 2009. If she doesn’t this will just be one (of many) examples of Pelosi lacking the spine to stand up to a bunch of fools and shills. The second, of course, will be appointing a commission to investigate all the crap that Bush did in office that was illegal. In 2009 he won’t have executive privilege to hide behind or stall with. Of course, that second point is purely fantasy, and there’s no hope of it coming to pass. I’d find it easier to believe in her if I hadn’t been kicked in the teeth so many times before.
Tom Cleaver
says:Bill (#7): I realize that illiteracy is a requirement for being able to pass the IQ test low enough to qualify for membership in the right wing, but really….
Imparshall????
Go back to Little Green Snotballs or FreiRepublik, little boy, where the fact you’re a fucking moron won’t be so blindingly obvious.
Lance
says:MsJoanne said: “This is a land grab (meaning they want cheap leases on OUR land…that which is owned by US, The People.”
They also want to hide more of their outrageous profits by spending them on leases for drilling rights they can’t use for years. Buying those leases would reduce their taxable corporate profits and help reduce the outrage the American people feel about them.
neilt said: “wait, aren’t we supposed to hate Pelosi? I’m getting confused with the narrative here.”
Oh, we still hate her. She should be holding impeachment hearing on Dick Cheney right now, and that’s only one of her failings.
Chad
says:Pelosi and the 9% congress decided it would be better to hold off addressing the country’s energy crisis because she know’s the bill would have passed, drilling would have started, and prices would have gone down at the pump. Way to work for the people Nancy, running a bi-partisan congress my ass.
You people obviously have no faith in American ingenuity. ‘Oh, it’ll take ten years, it won’t affect prices, it’s big oils fault.’ What a bunch of whiners. How about saying ‘We’re Americans and we can solve any problem that faces us.” I say let’s drill our own oil, let’s build refineries to keep up, let’s expand our nuclear energy, let’s develop VIABLE solar and wind energy. We can do it all, it isn’t about the defeatocrats or Republican, it’s about the American people and our economy and our way of life.
Last I checked, I haven’t seen windmill shops and solar shops on every corner like I have gas stations. At best, all that stuff will take 10-20 years to become VIABLE.
jrpyrennees
says:It’s very enlightening to peruse the opposition and the kool-aid consumers that talk to themselves.
To give Pelosi credit for being very clever in marketing a cogent Dem strategy without any substance to back the claim is a remarkable stretch of rationalization. Quite the contrary, her strategic marketing skills as demonstrated in the disappointing sales of the first book written by the first woman to be Speaker (!!wow!!) speaks volumes. She only needed to put the Dem money bundlers on a commit to buy list and Voila! a NYT bestseller. The books could go to a landfill but it’d be a big seller. What a sad and lost opportunity to build momentum for the Dems with an apparent blockbuster sales hit. What seems to to be the strategy as articulated here is that vulnerable Dems are encouraged to give excuses or outright lie to their constituents knowing full well such support for drilling would never develop in a Dem Congress. This is a very risky strategy for Pelosi that could easily backfire. This is an insulting two-fer for constituents – First, you lie to them (be honest, an excuse is really a lie) and then you insult their intelligence by expecting them to believe the lie. This is not the clever winning strategy as represented here.
BTW, JimBOB, you might try making a coherent argument. Insults alone make you seem small, petty and give you zero intellectual cred to make a logical argument for your cause.
RacerX, regarding your premise that “Someday we’ll be able to get it out without killing the environment” I’ll refer to you to the excuse/lie two-fer above. You have no intention of ever touching that oil. Ever. I mean really, come on and be intellectually honest. You don’t like oil. OK, fine. But get a load of this- The fact is that we can recover oil now without “killing the environment”. One sample of evidence very clear and recent. There are approximately 3000 oil and gas producing platforms in the Gulf of Mexico in our coastal waters. 2700 of them are off the coast of Louisiana alone. Katrina ripped through these platforms with more energy and power than 1000 Hiroshima atomic bombs. Platforms and pipelines were destroyed, twisted, bent and scattered across hundreds of miles. The safety equipment on these wellheads did what they were designed to do, shut off & protect the environment not “kill it”. Every wrecked rig had to be recovered. Here’s a kicker for you – the marine environment off the coast of Louisiana is richer and more diverse than any other coastline in the lower 48. These thousands of rigs provide incredibly rich vertical ecosystems from the surface all the way to the sea floor hosting an infinite variety of life-forms at every level benefiting the environmental health of the entire Gulf of Mexico. The benefits are so substantial that when the rigs have completed their commercial life they are not removed so as not to destroy life. Back in the day thinking was once a rig had finished it’s production life the Owners were legally obligated to restore the site to it’s pre-rig conditions much like open pit mines. It has become apparent that the rig post-production life is vitally important to promoting the health of sea life. To remove the rigs would cause massive habitat obliteration. Just think what these ecosystems could do for the sea life populations off the rest of the Gulf Coast not to mention the East and West Coasts.
Now – wait for it – hold on for the punchline – Not only are we NOT KILLING THE ENVIRONMENT – WE ARE PROMOTING IT!!!!!!!!!
Now, before you fire off your response in ignorance – Do some online research, the information is there. If you have any doubts watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKXF3staQ6Y&feature=related
None of the sea life in this video would exist if not for that rig.
So, after you have the guts to discover the enormous benefits to the sea life food chain these artificial reefs provide, right now, today – and consider that after the virtual nuclear bomb like devastation these rigs took – without any significant oil being spilled to “kill the environment”- Exactly how long do you plan on waiting until “Someday we’ll be able to get it out without killing the environment”. Try to be intellectually honest with the facts and yourself.
SteveT – Where to begin with you. re: your PR Battle – the Dems should be honest about what they believe, no excuses, no lies, no insulting the intelligence of the voters. I don’t think that’s what you are proposing for your PR battle. Quite the opposite. If the Dems were honest about what they – and presumably you – believe, basically that oil is bad, we should stop using oil, there will be causalities to the Dems. So the Dems should offer up a PR battle of excuses and lies instead of honesty. Next, (this may be a shock to you) there are leases that can begin production within months. In the early 90’s under Clinton and the Dems, Chevron discovered on a lease off the coast of Alabama an enormous formation that contains millions maybe billions of barrels of recoverable oil. The lease was for exploration with the option to drill and recover. The Congress stepped in, the option to drill was pulled and the exploration well capped. It’s still there.
There are wellheads off the coast of California that are capped similarly. 60-90 days production could begin. Just two examples. Next, personally responsible for spills. yeah, sure. It’s amazing how dishonest you can be with yourself and others. Oil Companies pay for spills already. You would have to throw the Constitution and the legal construct of corporations in this country out and go pure socialist. Making CEO’s personally responsible would be found unconstitutional and therefore unenforceable. Move on. Next, safe drilling – see above. Next, time limits – Let’s start with your own life ok? And be honest with yourself. Of all the projects done in your life what percentage did you finish in the time you thought it would take? Ok, now for your next project, I’m going to set the time limit on when you should complete the project. Feel comfy now? The fact is, in this world time is money. For businesses, time burns money. Corporations borrow or rent funds from banks on projects. They need to complete the project to start the cash flow. Until they they start generating cash flow from operations they pay rent on all the money they borrow. The longer it takes the more they bleed cash with no replacement. That’s the driver for putting leases online. Land Grab? This is an auction to the highest bidder. You don’t like them getting the leases? fine. Compete for the lease with an alternative plan to put out windmills – Which won’t generate as much energy or value – not the most valuable use for the lease.
Hark – The leases the Dems are complaining about not being used? They’re barely more valuable than the paperwork it took to draw up. There isn’t viable recoverable oil on those leases. Just because you have a oil lease on land doesn’t guarantee there is recoverable oil. The oil companies aren’t going to punch a multi-million dollar dry hole in the ground to prove they can’t economically recover oil – when they know from their ground radar and sonar surveys it’s not worth it. You have to understand, these leases do not come with a guarantee of oil. You buy a lease that preliminarily looks promising from superficial surveys and then you send in your intensive ground radar and sonar surveys before you drill. Just one hole in the ground to see if the surveys have found oil can easily cost $20 million. And that’s on land. Drilling offshore can cost 100 to 200 times more. And there have been dry holes drilled offshore at a cost of $2-4 billion with the best data available. That’s a total loss. Would you potentially risk losing that kind your own money putting up windmills in the Gulf of Mexico where they all be wiped out in a single hurricane season?
The simple fact is we use oil in virtually every aspect of our life, (I won’t list here but it’s waaaay more than just gas for your car). We have more energy reserves in this country than Saudi Arabia. We have companies that are expert at recovering oil safely and efficiently.
All of you, what is your real reason for obstructing the recovery of these resources? Be honest with yourself & try to present your case rationally……
chrenson
says:Chad: So, “the bill would have passed, drilling would have started, and prices would have gone down at the pump.” Ummmm, prices HAVE gone down at the pump, just as they always do at the end of the summer.
It’s not surprising you believe the corporatist bullshit that drilling will start immediately [after all, the oil executives say so!!!], oil will flow and gas will be down to $1.50 within a year. You’re the same sort of mouth-breather that actually believed we’d be greeted as liberators and the war in Iraq would be over in a matter of weeks and cost a few billion dollars. And if you’re so ready to believe anything McCain tells you, why didn’t you believe that offshore drilling is only a psychological solution, as he stated months ago? I know why. Because you drive a guzzler and it hurts to fill it up.
And jrpyrennees: Why don’t you click back over to the neo-con bullshit blogs from which you so copiously cut-n-paste and preach to your deluded, soulless, greedy, shit-for-brains choir? But before you do, why don’t YOU answer your own question: “All of you, what is your real reason for obstructing the recovery of these resources?” Just what IS our real reason? I’m sure you’ve got an answer. And I’ll just bet it’s a doozy!
chrenson
says:jrpyrennees: “All of you, what is your real reason for obstructing the recovery of these resources?”
And just to get you started, here’s a few of my real reasons:
1] Exxon/Mobil is posting record profits while gas is at record highs. Conveniently, two oil men have been in charge of the country for the last 7.5 years. Now Exxon/Mobil wants drilling access to environmentally sensitive offshore areas and ANWR. Therefore, I cannot believe anything that Big Oil says. They would not push for it if they were not motivated by big-ass profits.
2] Even if you don’t “believe” in Global Warming you have to agree that petro-fuels are extremely bad for us [think of Beijing]. And, as cheerfully stated by your hero George W Bush, America is the biggest polluter of them all. Why on earth would we NOT want to start weening ourselves off them now?
3] $4.00 gasoline is already driving more people to make better choices about what they drive and how they drive. It’s encouraging more use of public transportation and more fuel-efficient behavior. I see no reason why we should want the price to drop again.
4] I have a child. I’m thinking about her future.
5] Best of all, it seems to really piss you off.
Lance
says:jrpyrennees: “All of you, what is your real reason for obstructing the recovery of these resources?”
I’m not trying to rush the Rapture??????
Chad, you too are being delusional. How many times do you have to be told that we don’t have the drilling equipment to get to any of those Outer Continential Shelf oil “right now” or even ten years from now?
Or how about this?
We don’t have the refinery capacity to increase our gasoline production.
Conservation makes real savings for the American people TODAY. Go inflate your tires you moron. Then drive home and don’t go out again for a month.
Gary Gross
says:Pelosi’s Do what you have to do plan won’t work. Saying that you’re for something doesn’t mean a thing to truckers or farmers whose gas bills keep going up. THEY’RE DEMANDING RESULTS!!! As I said here, talk is cheap. Rest assured that people getting hurt by high gas prices don’t care about talk.
Democrats that voted for adjourning without voting on the American Energy Act won’t get a free pass on that. Democrats that won’t sign the discharge petition requiring an up or down vote on the AEA will be exposed as talkers, not doers.
That won’t play well with people suffering the way they are.
andy42302
says:jrpyrennees, your points have credibility but it doesn’t dismiss the rhetoric and outright fear mongering that’s being presented by Republicans to con American voters into thinking that new drilling will somehow relieve their problems at the pump. Just a few days ago, John McCain told a group of bikers that “We’re not going to pay $4 dollars a gallon for gas because we are going to drill offshore and we are going to drill now. We are doing to drill here and we are going to drill now”. This is something that surely you and I can both agree is utter nonsense. Wasn’t it just a month ago that President Bush said he had no magic wand? Now, presto/light bulb idea that opening drilling will make it all go away. ost everyone acknowledges the need for nuclear, bio diesel, coal gas, natural gas, etc. along with a need to drill. The problem is however that Republicans have refused to work out anything on the oil crises UNLESS drilling is included. They’ve basically said “look, Big Oil is our largest contributor and they want to drill any damn place they want and any time they want. We owe that to them because, uh, well, they own us”.
This “drill now” is an absolute scam and will do nothing to relieve the price of gas at the pumps. It absolutely defies any common sense in breaking our addiction to oil. People
are angry, scared and broke. What an opportune time for Republicans to do what they do best; con or scare voters into thinking they’re doing something for them when in fact, they are only helping their campaign contributors.
What amazes me is that the Democrats can’t even get enough spine to expose the Republicans for what they have done and have somehow excepted blame for the disaster we’re in. Let’s take a look at what happened when the R’s were in Power from 2004-2006. They repeatedly voted against cracking down on price gouging, defeating Democrats efforts. They promoted tax breaks for the oil companies. They refused to encourage better fuel efficiency in the automotive industry. (HR3893, Vote #518, 10/7/05; HR3893, Vote #517, 10/7/05; HR3402, Vote #500, 9/28/05; HR6, Vote #118, 4/20/05)
Wonder why? Perhaps the $8.6 million in campaign contributions from oil and gas companies with 84% of it going to Republicans could be a clue.
We’ve all heard the talking points explaining why drilling will do nothing. Even President Bush and John McCain have conceded that it will do nothing (other than a psychological sugar pill). Still, Republicans refuse to work out anything UNLESS drilling is included. Reward the oil company first and then we’ll talk. It’s just like almost every piece of legislation American voters have seen the last 7 years. It will make a fortune for a Republican campaign contributor at the expense, or at best do absolutely nothing for the American people.
It’s also interesting that John McCain has received $1.1 million from big oil since he flip flopped on his drilling stand.