Republicans Block Extra Taxes On Oil Companies

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Republicans Block Extra Taxes On Oil Companies stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

H. JOSEF HEBERT | June 10, 2008 09:19 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., center, flanked by Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., left, and Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., right, gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, June 10, 2008, on the failed Senate vote on a windfall tax for oil companies. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

WASHINGTON — Saved by Senate Republicans, big oil companies dodged an attempt Tuesday to slap them with a windfall profits tax and take away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response to the record gasoline prices that have the nation fuming.

GOP senators shoved aside the Democratic proposal, arguing that punishing Big Oil won't do a thing to lower the $4-a-gallon-price of gasoline that is sending economic waves across the country. High prices at the pump are threatening everything from summer vacations to Meals on Wheels deliveries to the elderly.

The Democratic energy package would have imposed a 25 percent tax on any "unreasonable" profits of the five largest U.S. oil companies, which together made $36 billion during the first three months of the year. It also would have given the government more power to address oil market speculation, opened the way for antitrust actions against countries belonging to the OPEC oil cartel, and made energy price gouging a federal crime.

"Americans are furious about what's going on," declared Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D. He said they want Congress to do something about oil company profits and the "orgy of speculation" on oil markets.

But Republican leaders said the Democrats' plan would do harm rather than good _ and they kept the legislation from being brought up for debate and amendments.

On world markets, oil prices retreated a bit Tuesday but remained above $131 a barrel. Gasoline prices edged even higher to a nationwide record average of $4.04 a gallon.

At the Capitol, Democratic leaders needed 60 votes and they got only 51 senators' support, including seven Republicans who bucked their party leaders. Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, a state tied closely to the oil industry, was the only Democrat opposing the bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid voted in favor of the measure, but for procedural reasons changed his vote to "no" so that he could bring it up again.

"We are hurting as a country. We're hurting individually as Americans ... and the other side says, `Do nothing. Don't even debate the issue,'" complained Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.

Story continues below
advertisement

"Average citizens are scratching their heads and saying, what's wrong with Washington," said Schumer.

GOP opponents argued that little was to be gained by imposing new taxes on the five U.S. oil giants: Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp., Shell Oil Co., BP America Inc. and ConocoPhillips Co.

While these companies may be huge, they don't set world oil prices and raising their taxes would discourage domestic oil production, the Republicans said of the Democrats' plan.

"In the middle of what some are calling the biggest energy shock in a generation ... they proposed as a solution, of all things, a windfall profits tax," Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky chided the Democrats. He called their proposal "a gimmick" that would not lower gasoline prices and only hold back domestic oil production.

"The American people are clamoring for relief at the pump," agreed Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., but "they will get exactly what they don't want" under the Democrats' plan _ higher prices and an increase in oil imports.

The bill's supporters argued that their proposal was different from the windfall profits taxes of the early 1980s that thwarted domestic production and led to a rise in imports. The oil companies could avoid the tax by using their "windfall" to push alternative energy programs or refinery expansions, they said.

Shortly after the oil tax vote, Republicans blocked a second proposal that would extend tax breaks that have either expired or are scheduled to end this year for wind, solar and other alternative energy development, and for the promotion of energy efficiency and conservation. Again Democrats couldn't get the 60 votes to overcome a GOP filibuster.

Neither Republican presidential candidate John McCain nor his Democratic rival, Barack Obama, were in Washington to cast votes on the energy issue on Tuesday.

Obama, in a statement, said Republicans had "turned a blind eye to the plight of America's working families" by refusing to take up the energy legislation. Obama has supported additional taxes on the oil companies. McCain is opposed to such taxes and has proposed across-the-aboard tax reductions for industry as a way to help the economy.

Election-year politics hung over the debate. Democrats know their energy package has no chance of becoming law. Even it were to overcome a Senate GOP filibuster _ a longshot at best _ and the House acted, President Bush has made clear he would veto it.

But there was nothing to lose by taking on Big Oil when people are paying $60 to $100 to fill up their gas tanks.

The oil companies have been frequent targets of Congress. Twice this year, top executives of the largest U.S. oil producers have been brought before congressional committees to explain their huge profits. And each time the executives urged lawmakers to resist punitive tax measures, blaming high costs on global supply and demand.

In addition to the proposed windfall profits tax, the Democrats' bill also would have rescinded tax breaks that are expected to save the oil companies $17 billion over the next 10 years. The money would have been used to provide tax incentives for producers of wind, solar and other alternative energy sources as well as for energy conservation.

In an attempt to dampen oil market speculation, the legislation would require traders to put up more collateral in the energy futures markets and would provide authority to regulate U.S.-based trading in foreign markets. And it would make oil and gas price gouging a federal crime, with stiff penalties of up to $5 million during a presidentially declared energy emergency.

After Tuesday's defeat, Democrats did not rule out pushing the issue again.

"This was politics at its worst," complained Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. "This was a refusal to debate the biggest problem confronting the American people. ... That takes nerve."

WASHINGTON — Saved by Senate Republicans, big oil companies dodged an attempt Tuesday to slap them with a windfall profits tax and take away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response to the ...
WASHINGTON — Saved by Senate Republicans, big oil companies dodged an attempt Tuesday to slap them with a windfall profits tax and take away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response to the ...
Filed by Katharine Zaleski  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
2273
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next › Last » (36 pages total)

There is and always has been a lot of hyperbole regarding the oil companies. The 1973 oil crisis was punishment by OPEC for going off the gold standard in 1971 and the resulting increased costs to those OPEC nations for highly influated US goods. The Arab oil embargo in 1973 was also waged against the US and Europe by the OPEC nations as a punishment for support of Israel in the Yom Kippur War. It changed nothing about our Israeli policy, but created much suffering. The consequence to the oil industry was the increase in price from $4 to $12 per barrel. The public had alternate days to buy gas based on license plate numbers, old oil was priced differently than newly discovered, the 55 mph speed limit was enacted.

A second oil crisis occurred in 1979. This was more of a panic than a real crisis, because production had declined only about 4 percent. One of the consequences was the windfall profits tax. An important consequence that is not discussed typically was that congress made it very clear that the oil industry could profit from crude oil price swings only when there was a real, physical shortage. The oil companies complained that they had been retaining excess refinery capacity since WWII as a duty to the nation and a hedge for times of war or embargos. Congress did not yield and enacted the windfall profits tax.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:13 PM on 06/10/2008

Is it true that Obama didn't show up to vote. He must be doing more important work (ie: Romey's kids) getting Obama elected. Shame on him!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:13 PM on 06/10/2008
photo

Thanks again Republicans! Great job. Thanks again, and again, and again. Everything you've touched is in a tailspin; why screw up your perfect record?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:09 PM on 06/10/2008
- Chubbster I'm a Fan of Chubbster 34 fans permalink

Now that we have all finished knee-jerking and otherwise reacting to our personal fantasies about reality, let me point out that reactively taxing the oil companies profits, which are all poured back into the ground exploring for resources to satisfy the accelerating demands, will ONLY result in LESS oil and gas AND higher prices. Punitively taxing the oil companies, who DO NOT set the world price of oil, despite common ignorant belief to the contrary, makes about as much sense as taxing the farmers who finally are making a decent living. Bread too expensive? Tax the farmers. Just brilliant. Definitely a "New Idea." If Democratic politicians can stop for a moment and realize the obvious rather than pander dishonestly to the pump-shocked voter we will all be better off. Obama sold the idea of genuine change but still we are seeing the same dreary and uninformed politicians in Congress attempting to panderously extract payback. It is depressing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:08 PM on 06/10/2008

proof the Republicans are in the pocket of big oil.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:08 PM on 06/10/2008
- renoir I'm a Fan of renoir 18 fans permalink

This is terrible news on one hand, but good news for the upcoming election. Even republicans will take note (probably especially the republicans, since they're all about pocketbook) of the greed and there will be a backlash. Once we have a filibuster-proof majority we'll FINALLY be able to get some things done.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:06 PM on 06/10/2008

A GOP voter I just met over lunch told me that we have F-16s flying over Saudi Arabia and that US military pressure will move Aramco to pump 2 million barrels more a day, which will inevitable lead to an oil price around $75 a gallon.

The guy was dead serious. I guess we can all start dreaming about buying that Hummer. I mean, everything is taken care of, right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:03 PM on 06/10/2008
- neocon666 I'm a Fan of neocon666 72 fans permalink

Let's all hold our breath...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:05 PM on 06/10/2008

If you think it is bad in the US, you should see the UK--currently it costs 11 dollars a gallon and in bigger cities like London and Birmingham it is more like 15 dollars. If things keep going they way they are, the common citizen will not be able to afford to drive.
http://www.theidaexpress.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:06 PM on 06/10/2008
- sanywhere I'm a Fan of sanywhere 2 fans permalink
photo

they had a mention to europe today on msnbc. they had british gas prices at around 6-8. still bad but not as much as you have here.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:09 PM on 06/10/2008

Sorry... I meant to say the guy said "$75/barrel". He hopes that prices will come down significantly.

I can feel your pain, by the way. My parents live in Europe. They are retired and hardly go out to the next town which is three miles away.

We shall see where this will level off. I think it has to go to somewhere around $8-10/gallon in the US before there is enough pain for this country to start conserving on a serious scale. By that time gas will be more like $15-20/gallon in Europe, of course.

I don't see either party introduce a significant gas tax increase over here. It's a game of chicken, whoever blinks first, loses. We won't have any changes until the next president is in office. Maybe we will see some effects by next summer. Or two or three years after that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:20 PM on 06/10/2008
- Bluedanube I'm a Fan of Bluedanube 38 fans permalink

Western Europe, however, has a more comprehensive transportation network, providing more options than in the U.S.. Just another example of the U.S. falling behind.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:30 PM on 06/10/2008

Cripes! How many martinis had he suqued down before you arrived? LOL

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:11 PM on 06/10/2008
- 1oldlady I'm a Fan of 1oldlady 10 fans permalink
photo

With regards to the 60 votes needed in the senate....­other wise called filibustering, below is the link
and if your up to reading the rules of the senate, read on!

http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RL30360.pdf

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/margaret_talev/story/18218.html

Both are good reads, but the mcclatchy dc read is really, really good in laymen terms.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:03 PM on 06/10/2008
- HansB I'm a Fan of HansB 17 fans permalink

Thank you. As usual, McClatchy does its job - reporting.

Still, I wonder when the Dems will call the Repubs' bluff. Not getting a cloture vote passed doesn't mean you can't pass the bill anyway and dare the Repubs to get off their sofas and actually do the filibustering they always threaten while the US public watches.

Until they do, filibuster, schmilibuster.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:23 PM on 06/10/2008

McClatchy is the last HONEST, hardworking journalistic outfit remaining in this country.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:46 PM on 06/10/2008
- izAriver I'm a Fan of izAriver 27 fans permalink

repugnicans. That's why I call them that. Real repugnicans and those democrats posing as such are the enemies among us. They call for wars against others but it is they that should be destroyed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:02 PM on 06/10/2008
- izAriver I'm a Fan of izAriver 27 fans permalink

I wish I could say I never gave them any thought but I have. I want them out.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:06 PM on 06/10/2008
- PSTEN I'm a Fan of PSTEN 10 fans permalink
photo

why should be tax them, we already gave them $94B in subsidies. Our goverment is broken!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:00 PM on 06/10/2008

More like $118 BILLION...­but, hey, who's counting?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:01 PM on 06/10/2008
- kidshare I'm a Fan of kidshare 2 fans permalink

I wouldn't cut the subsidies, just force them to account for every dime and make it public.

Interesting Obama, McCain and Clinton all were not present for this vote.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:12 PM on 06/10/2008
- sanywhere I'm a Fan of sanywhere 2 fans permalink
photo

i think that is where we could go after them. it is easier to "sell" that idea to officials than the ev il word "regul ation".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:02 PM on 06/10/2008
photo

"Regulation" should be just about the most positively connotated word in the American lexicon about now.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:06 PM on 06/10/2008

"Senator McCain is proposing $300 billion more in tax breaks and loopholes for big corporations and the wealthiest Americans, and he hasn’t explained how he’d pay for them"

Any fool can see...WE ARE GOING TO PAY FOR IT! The ones who have to get up and go to work and eek out a living.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:04 PM on 06/10/2008
- ming099 I'm a Fan of ming099 7 fans permalink
photo

..........­......NOVE­MBER IS COMING....­.....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 06/10/2008
- rajoro I'm a Fan of rajoro 8 fans permalink

THROW THE BUMS OUT!!!!!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 06/10/2008

The gales of November..­....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 06/10/2008

...may be preceeded by the Surprise of October...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:55 PM on 06/10/2008

Nice.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:03 PM on 06/10/2008
- hey0there I'm a Fan of hey0there 4 fans permalink

it'll have to be one hell of a big suprise to stop this wave. Not that they won't try.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:55 PM on 06/10/2008
- ramper I'm a Fan of ramper 15 fans permalink
photo

Only Scrooge McDuck made better returns.
What concerns me is China has linked up with Cuba to slant drill about 50-60 miles off the coast of Florida. India is also working to lease rigs in those waters. We are not even allowed to look for oil off those shores. Slant drilling would allow oil to be extracted right under our noses. This will become a big issue down the road. What is the solution? I don't know, but there has to be some rational solutions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:49 PM on 06/10/2008
- k6007 I'm a Fan of k6007 236 fans permalink
photo

There must be some rational solutions.­.....

Well, it certainly isn't drilling for more oil.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 06/10/2008
- sanywhere I'm a Fan of sanywhere 2 fans permalink
photo

agreed, as scary as the transition may become.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:55 PM on 06/10/2008
- sanywhere I'm a Fan of sanywhere 2 fans permalink
photo

i guess the question become "do we want to keep searching for more oil or find a different solution. i am up for a different solution living in florida. i don't want oil rigs off the coast, and r aping the environment.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:52 PM on 06/10/2008
photo

While Democrats ruled the California gubernatorial and legislative offices we we forced to have rigs built off of Santa Barbara. I wonder why Florida never had to to submit?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:55 PM on 06/10/2008
- Chubbster I'm a Fan of Chubbster 34 fans permalink

Well, buy a bicycle and get used to it NIMBY.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:02 PM on 06/10/2008
- Savanarola I'm a Fan of Savanarola 5 fans permalink

According to the CIA, there is more oil in the lower 48 states that has been extracted since 1890.
BIG OIL is waiting got European prices per liter to go after the reserves.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:01 PM on 06/10/2008

The USGS and DOI disagree..­..and I'd believe geologists before I'd believe the CIA.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:33 PM on 06/10/2008

You bet there's a better solution. ALTERNATIVES.

Let them have the stinkin' dino juice. I say beat 'em with technology. It worked for us in the past, and it will again...if ONLY we'll stop listening to Neanderthal idjits and just DO IT! Dammit. Grrrr

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:07 PM on 06/10/2008
- Shaddup I'm a Fan of Shaddup 14 fans permalink
photo

You're talking about evolving new technology, the simply the words "evolution" and "new" have always been beyond the rbubs.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:23 PM on 06/10/2008

The solution is investment in a green economy

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:12 PM on 06/10/2008
- Rianna I'm a Fan of Rianna 13 fans permalink

I hope the Democrats have the good sense to bring this up, again and again, when they campaign this fall. People should realize that these republicans are only for the rich, and for the energy companies.
Something is not right, when these gas companies make gigantic profits that go into the billions, and
the poor man is getting squeezed at the pumps.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:47 PM on 06/10/2008
- kidshare I'm a Fan of kidshare 2 fans permalink

The only reason it was brought up in the first place was because November is approaching. Same with Kucinich's little game.

If windfall tax were really high on the list of priorities it would blow past filibuster just like the farm pork bill.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:20 PM on 06/10/2008
photo

If they do they will be painting themselves into a corner. If you frig around with the economic system by putting extra taxes the oil companies for "windfall profits" guess what, you will encourage extra taxes on windfall profits on other things. Oil companies and speculators develop oil and take risks for the opportunity of making those "windfall profits". The flip side of the coin is that they lose huge amounts of money when they make bad or wrong decisions. Would you propose that governments give losers a tax credit when they lose money? Of course not.

The proposal to put extra taxes on the oil companies is a bad idea. If you do that the oil companies will say, "screw you" if you are going to levy surprise taxes every time we happen to make good or lucky decisions we are not going to develop oil resources for your ecconomy. Its as simple as that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:00 PM on 06/10/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next › Last » (36 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect