iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama Urges Congress To End Tax Breaks For Oil Companies

Obama Oil Subsidies

03/29/12 04:20 PM ET  AP

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's plea to Congress to end $4 billion in tax subsidies to oil companies was rebuffed Thursday as the Senate turned back a Democratic bill to repeal the tax breaks.

Moments after Obama made his election-year appeal in the White House Rose Garden, the Senate failed to reach the threshold of votes needed to proceed to a measure that would have ended the subsidies. Obama had argued that Americans are getting hit twice – once at the gas pump, and once more by sending billions of dollars in tax subsidies to oil companies.

"I think it's time they got by without more help from taxpayers who are already having a tough enough time paying the bills and filling up their gas tank," the president said. "And I think it's curious that some folks in Congress, who are the first to belittle investments in new sources of energy, are the ones that are fighting the hardest to maintain these giveaways for the oil companies."

The Senate vote was 51-47, short of the 60 votes necessary. Two Republicans voted to proceed to the legislation – Maine Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe. But four Democrats rejected the effort – Sens. Jim Webb of Virginia, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Mark Begich of Alaska.

Prior to the vote, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell challenged Obama and Democratic leaders.

"Is this the best we have to offer folks who are staring at $4 a gallon gasoline? A bill that even Democrats admit won't do anything to lower the price of gas?" the Kentucky lawmaker asked.

Obama said oil companies are pulling in record profits and shouldn't get taxpayer help when that money could be used on alternative energy. Obama, up for re-election, has sought to align himself with people frustrated by high gas prices.

Many congressional Republicans said cutting the tax breaks would lead to higher fuel prices, raising costs on oil companies and affecting their spending on exploration. Obama couldn't end the subsidies when Democrats controlled Congress earlier in his term.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama would continue pressing for repeal of the subsidies.

"That was an unfortunate vote," he said of Thursday's Senate action. Obama "won't stop calling for this, it makes zero sense to have the American taxpayer subsidize oil and gas companies who are enjoying record profits."

Obama spoke before a crowd in the Rose Garden that included representatives from energy, business and environmental groups, as well as people who wrote on social media sites about how rising gas costs affected their finances.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's plea to Congress to end $4 billion in tax subsidies to oil companies was rebuffed Thursday as the Senate turned back a Democratic bill to repeal the tax bre...
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's plea to Congress to end $4 billion in tax subsidies to oil companies was rebuffed Thursday as the Senate turned back a Democratic bill to repeal the tax bre...
Filed by Luke Johnson  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 126
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Samareth
Defender of polite debate
04:58 PM on 04/17/2012
I think this makes sense in theory since there has yet to be any evidence that oil companies pass the savings onto consumers. I think in the short term there is however a possibility of a punitive price increase as the companies hit back for decreasing their profits. My version of a common sense approach would be a new version of the subsidy program that links the amount the company can receive with the resulting price the company charges. "Rewarding" a company for low prices might bring the price down.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
azted123
01:15 PM on 04/17/2012
This is way past time for this action. It would never happen if Republicans had their way.
11:59 AM on 04/17/2012
So he can give more bonuses to companies like Solendra and the CSA, right?
09:07 PM on 04/17/2012
EXACTLY!!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ksjprod
Never met a wise man, if so, it's a woman
02:25 AM on 03/31/2012
No Mitch, it won't do anything to lower the price of gas. And yes, the oil companies would likely raise the price at the pump to compensate for the lost tax break/hand out. BUT, it will let consumers know what the REAL cost per gallon of gas is. We're paying way more than $4/gallon as it is, only we pay it through tax give aways. I say end the tax give aways and let the people see what their gallon of gas actually is costing them. Or do the oil companies not want us to know?
-swift
Can you put your country before your party?
01:23 PM on 03/30/2012
The Democrats worked incredibly hard to prevent Mary Landrieu from losing a primary challenge to someone not beholden to big oil.

Sadly, I would say that the Republican Party is so horrible right now that you have no choice but to vote for a Democrat in 2012. But after that, look into perhaps the Green/Rainbow party.
photo
Strings55
A scoundrel still loved by Jesus
07:23 AM on 03/30/2012
When one of the most liberal congressmen to ever come out of Texas, Martin Frost, tells us that Mr. Obama is not being honest about oil subsidies, you know you're in trouble.

The media ought ask Mr. Obama about that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6dPFYmr4Cw
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
modelaford
Vote All of Congress OUT!
06:08 AM on 03/30/2012
Well we now know that the people who voted to continue to give the big oil companies their big subsidies, are puppets for the big oil companies.

These people who voted to protect the oil companies should be voted out.

They are supporting the oil companies that made billions and billions of dollars of profits and who are making billions off of the rest of us with their high gas prices.

Congress, you made your choice. You chose the big oil companies who do not need government subsidies and tax breaks, while you continue to do nothing to help the 99%.

Shame on congress. Obama is right. At least he is on the side of the people and not the big oil companies.
photo
Strings55
A scoundrel still loved by Jesus
07:25 AM on 03/30/2012
The government rakes in 7 times as much money per gallon than oil companies.

Say again?

Maybe you should take a look at the most liberal congressman in Texas, ever, and find out the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6dPFYmr4Cw

Shall we kill those jobs too?
photo
Thomas Marsden
Death By Partisanism
05:52 PM on 03/29/2012
So is it a tax break or a subsidy? You keep using those words interchangeably, there is a difference...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tundra599
05:48 PM on 03/29/2012
Interesting read of the bill here from the Senate website:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112e3p8nD:e17368:

These "subsidies" are really normal actions given to manufacturer's and is related to exploration of oil, to drilling new wells, etc.
Just nice to see what is actually being looked at eliminating. It's not just the gov't handing over $4 billion to the oil companies. It's a result of the oil companies doing something.
socialtalker
this micro-bio is a great idea!
10:50 PM on 03/30/2012
they dont need it, oil companies have made a trillion dollar profits in the last 10 years.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tundra599
10:58 PM on 03/30/2012
Regardless, Obama seems to tout this move as a way to ease prices at the pump. I'm confused as to how that would do that. But taking away existing incentives for exploration and development can easily lead to oil companies not wanting to invest in those areas, and thus a loss of jobs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aerobat
Truth through humor ... and sarcasm
05:23 PM on 03/29/2012
These oil subsidies sound a lot like corporate socialism ... corporations are people after all.

Or is it bribery? A lot of those subsidies go right back to politicians.

Or is it Blackmail? You know the oil companies will punish us if we stop the subsidies.

It's all very confusing but the most confusing part is giving subsidies to companies (aka: people) making obscene profits and keeping those profits offshore to avoid US taxes. And then we reward them for that?
photo
Strings55
A scoundrel still loved by Jesus
07:26 AM on 03/30/2012
The government takes in 7 times as much money per gallon than oil companies.

What was it you were saying about obscene?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aerobat
Truth through humor ... and sarcasm
12:16 PM on 03/30/2012
The government builds the roads and other infrastructure we use the oil on. The government also runs the military machine that protects the oil companies assets and overthrows regimes that get in the way of the oil companies.

I'm not for the latter but I'm pretty happy with the bang for my Tax buck. And our tax dollars do so much more. Is it inefficient ... of course. But ours is the best for it's size.

"The trick is in what one emphasizes. We either make ourselves miserable, or we make ourselves happy. The amount of work is the same. © Carlos Castaneda"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Midnight Cry
Tax Reform Now!
05:14 PM on 03/29/2012
Who received $884,000 from oil companies for his 2008 campaign? Take a guess...???
socialtalker
this micro-bio is a great idea!
10:50 PM on 03/30/2012
that could be any of them save bernie sanders.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
leedan
Sometimes you just have to shake your head at the
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
leedan
Sometimes you just have to shake your head at the
03:19 PM on 03/29/2012
Sen. Lisa Murkowski [R, AK] $71,600
Sen. David Vitter [R, LA] $58,950
Sen. Robert Portman [R, OH] $33,300
Sen. Charles Grassley [R, IA] $31,500
Sen. Roy Blunt [R, MO] $30,900
Sen. Richard Burr [R, NC] $27,500
Sen. Jim DeMint [R, SC] $24,500
Sen. John Thune [R, SD] $23,800
Sen. John Isakson [R, GA] $22,000
Sen. Michael Crapo [R, ID] $20,500

Rep. Eric Cantor [R, VA-7] $23,500
Rep. Dan Boren [D, OK-2] $21,250
Rep. Joe Barton [R, TX-6] $20,500
Rep. John Boehner [R, OH-8] $20,250
Rep. Cynthia Lummis [R, WY-0] $20,000
Rep. Doc Hastings [R, WA-4] $19,650
Rep. Al Green [D, TX-9] $16,400
Rep. Kevin Brady [R, TX-8] $15,500
Rep. Michael McCaul [R, TX-10] $15,500
Rep. Kevin McCarthy [R, CA-22] $15,500 ( oil and gas producers where the money goes)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
azted123
01:28 PM on 04/17/2012
Hmm 17 Republicans 3 Democrats. The scales are a bit out of kilter there.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nettwench
Dedicated Truther!
02:59 PM on 03/29/2012
How can these guys who HATE welfare and public handouts SO MUCH justify GIVING AWAY 4 BILLION in taxpayer dollars to oil companies who are going to gouge us no matter how much oil they drill in the US?

They'll still be shipping it off to China and India, and we will still be stuck with high gas prices. Their business is doing BETTER THAN EVER.

You'll give an oil company 4 Billion, but begrudge free lunches for schoolchildren - what's wrong with this picture??

How can middle-class republicans support this give-away of their own tax dollars. Shouldn't they be yelling that it should go to pay off the deficit or something? All these policies do is benefit the already-rich, and businesses that are doing well. What does that do for ordinary Americans???
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:13 PM on 03/29/2012
The gov doesn't give them anything. Oil companies pay $86 million per day in royalties to the gov. - why don't they use some of that to pay down the debt instead of spending it? The tax break Obama is talking about is just the manufacturer's tax deduction that all manufacturers receive.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Midnight Cry
Tax Reform Now!
05:05 PM on 03/29/2012
he lies...
02:51 PM on 03/29/2012
It is politically convenient for President Obama to call tax provisions subsidies. The President wants to take away a companies ability to expense the cost of drilling a well in the first year. Say it costs 1 million to drill a well. Companies can take that cost as a expense in the first year because there is no salvage value of that hole that was drilled. Boy, that is a huge hand-out isn't it. There also is a tax provision that is called a depletion allowance for a "depleting asset." This is a tax code acknowledgment that mined assets deplete when produced. This has been in place since the 20's. If you are going to take out this provision, then it needs to be done for all mined assets, not just oil and gas. By the way, "drill baby drill" has been so successful, that we have collapsed the natural gas futures market by producing so much natural gas. The technologies that were applied to natural gas fields are working in oil basins as well. If you take away the incentive to drill for oil, then you are going to have to expect higher gasoline prices and higher dependence on oil from our enemies.
04:48 PM on 03/29/2012
Natural gas prices collapsed, but power companies decided to raise delivery cost several times over to make up for the collapse.