Make HuffPost Your HomePage
Get Email Alerts
Three Cents A Gallon
Last night the Democrats caved in on the "drill baby drill" mantra of the GOP and voted to allow the oil companies to drill off shore... sort of.
What the Democrats actually did was apply some very clever strategy back against the Pro-Oil Company Republicans, turned the tables on them, and got more for the United States than anyone could have imagined.
First, a question, did you ever notice that the Republicans never tell you how much savings 'We the People' can expect from drilling off shore? They are screaming, "America needs relief" ... well, we all agree on that one. They scream, "We can get billions of barrels of oil off our shore"... well, that is true but they leave out an extraordinarily important fact - We the People will only save 3 cents a gallon, that's right, just 3 cents.
Startling but it's true... every single estimate shows that American will save 3 cents a gallon in 10 years and up to 7 cents a gallon in 20 years. Do you remember when Glenn Beck mocked those that said, "You won't see any savings for 10 years"? He spit back his retort by screeching, "I want to drill now because I plan on being here in 10 years", but he never did tell you what the savings would be. Bush, McCain, Palin, Limbaugh, none of them ever tell you.
3 cents a gallon.
The news media has been equally to blame for not telling the American public these facts. The national polls just ask Americans if they are in favor or not in favor of drilling off shore, without telling them that Exxon-Mobil will make billions of dollars in profit and 'We the People' will save 3 cents a gallon.
Last night the Democrats gave something to the oil companies, they allowed them to drill off shore... 50 miles or more off shore, and, only if the State agrees. Fifty miles away where an oil-spill would not damage our shorelines and there is little to no oil. The oil companies are not going to drill there.
The legislation also included the following three points, (source CBS News):
1. Provide tax credits for wind and solar energy industries, the development of cellulose ethanol and other bio fuels.2. Require utilities nationwide to generate 15 percent of their electricity from solar, wind or other alternative energy source.
3. Give tax breaks for new energy efficiency programs, including the use of improved building codes and for companies that promote their employees use of bicycles for commuting.
The news media will leave out all the details and just say, we're going to drill baby drill, and since it is a popular idea right now, (again because Americans aren't told what the miniscule savings will be), it takes this off shore drilling argument off the table for the Republicans.
The Democrats are learning to play the game, just like the Republicans. Instead of playing the game to benefit the oil industry, however, the Democrats are playing the game to benefit 'We the People', the Environment and to funding renewable energy resources. Very well played.
Loading comments…
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
Didn't mention the 9000 leases that are currently being held and not being used? The fact that the oil does not go the America but gets sold on a world market is why there will be so little effect on price and so much profit for the oil companies. If it were really about helping America perhaps Governor Palin could Explain why we send all that oil that comes out of her state to Asia.
Yes, selling oil on the World Markets means far more profit, so that is why they do it. If they were actually Patriotic (as they often claim) they would take a smaller profit and only give the oil to "We the People".
The other aspect I left out is the fact that the US uses 24% of the world"s oil but only has approximately 3% of the world"s oil reserves.
Even if we could somehow squeeze out every single drop and keep all the oil for ourselves, we"d still be 21% in the hole¦ at this time, even in the absolute best possible scenario; we are stuck on buying oil from overseas.
Moving in the direction of alternative energy solutions is the single best way to break our dependency on foreign oil.
-Anthony
So they didn't really "cave in", they just pretended to (heh-heh). I like it. What's good for the goose and her gander, is good for the.... shucks
Come to Siesta Key,Fl and spend an afternoon on the beach,then look at the pictures of the coastline after the Exxon Valdez disaster.
Offshore drilling? Thanks but no thanks!
Good point¦ and I wonder how many Neo Con"s would be willing to help scrub the shoreline and give up playing golf at their segregated country clubs on the weekends after a disaster?
Not too many I would imagine.
-Anthony
Maybe if the media would inform the blissfully ignorant American public that drilling will take ten years to produce a three cent per gallon savings, there could be a rational discussion about spending money on more promising technologies and the environmental impact of continued dependence on oil.
Maybe if the American public could get its collective head out of the warm, dark cocoon of celebrity worship and stop clinging to GOP talking points, and just maybe take an actual interest in what is happening in our country and around the world, there could be a discussion of the actual issues.
Did McCain vote?
The House passed the legislation, it now goes to the Senate.
McCain will most likely not show up to vote on it.
-Anthony
That's what I was thinkin'
mccain is in the senate, and this was a house bill.
Oh boy. I can look forward to saving $.03/gallon in the year 2018.
If prices continue to increase at the rate of the last 8 years, those 3 cents a gallon will make such a big deal on $10 dollar gas...
Would someone please show me in the U.S. Constitution, where the federal government has the authority to regulate our natural resources? Both the Democrats and Republicans are operating outside of the Constitution.
I don"t think either Party is "regulating our natural resources" nor is there any oversight, that"s why oil and gas speculators were able to push the price of a barrel of oil to over $150.
The Constitution states that Congress writes the laws of the land, the law of the land used to say no drilling off shore. Now the law says, drilling off shore is okay if it"s more than 50 miles off shore and the State agrees to it¦. or at least it will if the Senate adopts the legislation.
The EPA was created to protect our natural resources, and it had a great deal to do with the old off shore ban but, it"s been mostly gutted of it"s oversight powers by the GOP over the past 8 years.
-Anthony
wait...... So you'd RATHER that the federal govt just get out of the way and let corporations rape our natural resources????? You'd NEVER be able to breathe, drink water, see a tree, and we'd no longer be even the powerhouse that we are CURRENTLY, much less what we were in the 50s!
They make laws to entice companies to risk capital in the production of natural resources on federal land. States, local municipalities, and landowners make the agreements on their land. The outer continental shelf is federal land.
I can't see what you're complaining about, if oil prices had got much higher it probably would have been worth opening mothballed plants in places like Ohio, Kansas. The price of oil is likely to continue to rise in the longer term as it gets used up. Much better to tax gas sales and give Federal subsidies/tax breaks to people who drive autos that are 50% more efficient than CAFE standards. I don't see McCain or Obama showing much leadership on this issue. Oh I forgot they want to get elected...
Thanks for the comment.
I"m not complaining, I explaining to folks in the Center and on the left, those that were upset last night about the bill, that the Dems didn"t actually cave in.
They used an extraordinarily cleaver strategy against the GOP to help get us off fossil fuels, fund alternative energy sources, and slap the face of big oil.
-Anthony
Yes, you're right, they only pretended to cave, and it worked. It's not perfect, only a small step, but at least the movement is now toward seeking out alternate energies, which BTW is the only way to reduce the cost of oil. Lower demand, price goes down. So those who don't believe in pollution, global warming and such nonsense, can continue to use up the remaining oil, just don't come crying to me in my solar house when you run out.
So much work to do, so little time...
The GOP is slapping around the DEM's now because the give-always weren"t big enough to big oil. My = rip on the DEM's, I hope as this bill reaches the senate everything that is good about it does not get railroaded by the senate. The Senate has been incredibly weak in the last year and a half. Harry is not one to call names in press conferences after getting bull-dozed by the GOP, the former gold-gloves boxer doesn"t needs to go back to his corner and lick his wounds.
Harry Reid GET TOUGH, or get out of your leadership role. This is all the more important especially if the shift in seats moves closer to 60. The DEM's will only see 2 years that they can get something accomplished before the next mid-term. They better be working for all of America to get their platform accomplished rather than hiding earmarks in the dead of night (AS THE GOP DID).
Bob Barr has stated that earn-marks are only 17billion of a 3trillion dollar budget and he is right it is small potatoes at about 0.5%. But it ends up being who is on and leading conference committees.
If the DEM's blow this and the GOP refuses to work with them in a truly bi-partisan manner than 3rd parties will lead the charge and many of us will be right behind them if not out front to take this country back ...
The problem is not that the Senate hasn't done anything, the problemS are a combination of two issues:
1) the Republicans are filibustering EVERYTHING that matters to everyday Americans.
2) Harry isn't FORCING the filibuster to go forward.
In the first issue, that belongs ENTIRELY to the republicans! In the second issue, I'm SO PI$$ED at Harry for not standing there and saying, "Okay, you want to filibuster this, we can stay here for WEEKS while your staffers get you food, and we'll bring in cots for everyone to sleep on!" If he would do that for just ONE important bill, Americans would realize what's going on, and stop buying the lies of bushco when they say that the Democratic Congress isn't doing anything!
Except that passing this bill is not a priority for the Dems . . . It's a pure political ploy to try and turn the issue around on Republicans. The whole point is to do nothing. There's no incentive for the Republicans to go along and no incentive for Bush to sign built into this bill.
Just so I'm clear: is that a savings of three cents per gallon below the current price, or a savings of three cents per gallon below the projected price in ten years? A 3 cent savings today would shave less than 1% off my gas bill. But in ten years, when we're looking at $10 (or more if we re-elect big oil to the White House) for a gallon of gas, would anyone even notice a 3 cent savings? Drill now, shave 30 cents off your $100 gas bill later. Sounds like a plan.
3 cents is the amount (based on current oil prices) that drilling off the US coast would directly subtract from the price, per gallon, of refined oil (also known as gasoline). It doesn't take into account speculation (since it CAN'T!) and it doesn't figure what the price will be, it's just an average assumption based on how a set amount of increased production in the past has reduced the overall price.
It's a savings of three cents per gallon below the projected price in ten years, something the GOP never, ever mentions.
And yet the republicans (who have been trying to get drilling as part of a "comprehensive" bill!!!) were voting against this, showing their true stripes!
Yup, that's how you know we did the right thing, nearly everyone in the GOP voted against the bill.
-Anthony
You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in or