iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Raymond J. Learsy

GET UPDATES FROM Raymond J. Learsy
 

NOPEC ('No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act'): A Presidential Issue and a Test of Political Integrity

Posted: 09/10/2012 5:06 am

The weekend past, the most auto traveled of the year, gasoline hit a record Labor Day high. It is well past time for all our branches of government, in the name of the nations bludgeoned consumers, to stop playing doormat to the oil interests, most especially the machinations of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).

The United States is the world's largest consumer of oil, and instead of using its massive purchasing power to forge a level playing in the oil market it has consistently permitted OPEC, and oil interests piggybacking on OPEC's manipulations (to ever higher oil/gasoline prices), to make us dance to their tune, hiding under the preposterous umbrella of 'sovereign immunity,' permitting OPEC's collusive practices countenanced by an out of touch U.S. judicial branch of government, as though sovereign economic aggression was analogous to not giving parking tickets to cars with diplomatic plates. This has now gone on for years with a near fivefold increase in the price of oil since the turn of the century with nary a push back from our government or its agencies.

Yet some years ago, in 2007, there was a genuine effort to change the equation in a fundamental way when Congress voted overwhelmingly, in defiance of the oil lobby and their allied interests for the NOPEC bill, so named because it would allow the international oil cartel, OPEC, and its national oil companies operating outside the law, hiding behind our sovereign immunity shield, to be sued and held accountable for what are clearly anti-competetive attempts to limit the world's supply of petroleum and the consequent impact on oil prices.

In defiance of oil interests Congress voted overwhelmingly for the Bill (70 votes to 23 in the Senate and 345 to 72 in the House). This was an act of refreshing and courageous leadership by our Congress only to be abandoned after President George W. Bush, that great stalwart of oil interests and friend of Saudi Arabia, made it clear that he would veto the bill should it land on his desk.

Anti-OPEC legislation has a long history and varied forms of a NOPEC bill have been introduced some 16 times since 1999, only to be vehemently resisted by the oil industry, its allied oil interests like the American Petroleum Institute and their legion of "K" Street Lobbyists, fully cognizant that the higher OPEC can push oil prices the greater the profits for domestic oil companies. Then, of course, the diplomatic pressure by potentially impacted national interests as the assertion of the UAE's oil minister Mohamed bin Dhaen al-Hamli not so subtle threat, "If the U.S. wants to sue (OPEC) member countries it's extremely dangerous."

In 2000, the proposed bill took form as the "Oil Price Reduction Act and International Energy Fair Pricing Act" seeking to force the president to reevaluate or even suspend economic and security ties to those states engaged in "oil price fixing to the detriment of the U.S. economy."

The legal loophole has not only permitted collusion among OPEC member states to impact the price and availability of oil, but equally insidious has permitted their national oil companies, the instruments of OPEC manipulation, to control important swaths of America's refinery capacity such as PDVSA, Venezuela's national oil company's ownership of CITGO with its significant refineries at Corpus Christie TX., Lamont, ILL., and Lake Charles, LA. supplying 13,500 domestic gasoline stations, thereby having direct impact on U.S. gasoline prices and availability. This while on May 31 of this year a valve turning ceremony took place at Port Arthur, LA. signaling the completion of the Motiva Enterprises Refinery, owned 50 percent by Saudi Aramco and 50 percent by Shell, of their 600,000b/d refinery expansion, making it the largest refinery in the U.S.

Opportunistically situated at Port Arthur with its access to the world's shipping lanes, it is strategically placed to export petroleum-based commodities such as gasoline, diesel, heating oil, etc. to world markets taking pricing pressure off America's growing production of oil and keeping oil prices up, which is Saudi Aramco's primary strategic business, and Shell's not far behind. Ironically perhaps, perhaps better said purposefully with malice aforethought, the plants 600,000 b/d capacity is almost the equivalent of America's new oil frontier, North Dakota, with its daily oil production of 600,000 barrels/day.

In the face of OPEC and oil interests riding roughshod over the nations economic interests, this administration showed its true colors in the eye-opening court case, litigated during the past year:

United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (No. 06-3569) Spectrum Stores Inc.....et al Plaintiffs-Appellants v. CITGO Petroleum Corporation; Petroleos De Venezuela S.A. ....et.al.

With the plaintiffs charging that the Venezuelan State Oil Company is "liable under the Sherman Act for its participation in a global price-fixing conspiracy with the OPEC member nations and other private oil companies."

Given the issue of "Sovereign Immunity" the court asked the Obama administration to file a brief commenting on the merits of the complaint. Incredibly, the administration filed an amicus brief upholding the defendants argument that the plaintiffs had no standing because of the principle of 'Sovereign Immunity' and joined by the Department of State, Treasury, Energy and Justice Departments.

This was a sea change from not only the president's position, but also his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton when both were serving in the Senate. Then Senator Clinton was co-sponsor of the "S.879 (110th): No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels (NOPEC) Act of 2007" sponsored by Senator Herbert Kohl (D-Wis.) on March 17, 2007 -- "a bill to amend the Sherman Act to make oil-producing and exporting cartels illegal." As cited above the Bill was introduced in April of that year but was not enacted.

President, then Senator Obama voted "Yes" for the NOPEC Act of 2007, on making oil-producing and exporting cartels illegal. Voting "Yes" would have amended the Sherman Act, making it a violation for any state:

  • To limit oil production/distribution of oil/natural gas

  • To set or maintain the price of oil/natural gas

  • To otherwise take any action in restraint of trade for oil/natural gas

  • When such collective action has a direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable effect on the market supply, price, or distribution of oil and natural gas in the U.S.

On February 29 of this year Sen. Herb Kohl, Chairman of the Senates Judiciary Committee, introduced once again the "No Oil Producing & Export Cartels (NOPEC) Act." Senator Kohl's clarion call is lucid and should finally be heeded:

"Now is the time, with the people we represent seeing soaring energy prices eat into their family budgets, to finally pass this legislation into law and give our nation a long needed tool to counteract this pernicious and anti-consumer conspiracy."

Clearly the Bill has gone nowhere because it did not have the administration's support. And therein lies the crux of the issue.

Is the Obama administration as pathetically submissive to OPEC and oil industry pressures as the Bush administration? How would they deal with this issue if they were given "four more years." And not to be left out, how would a Romney administration handle this hot potato? These are important questions that need be asked now, before the election, so Americans will have an understanding on whose side the next elected President is on, the oil barons or the battered American consumer.

Listen to Raymond Learsy on WHDD an NPR station: http://podcasts.am1020whdd.com/~am1020wh/shows/play.php?id=19631

 
 
 

Follow Raymond J. Learsy on Twitter: www.twitter.com/raymondLearsy

FOLLOW POLITICS
The weekend past, the most auto traveled of the year, gasoline hit a record Labor Day high. It is well past time for all our branches of government, in the name of the nations bludgeoned consumers, to...
The weekend past, the most auto traveled of the year, gasoline hit a record Labor Day high. It is well past time for all our branches of government, in the name of the nations bludgeoned consumers, to...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 30
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
neillevine
want to go into waterwheel business
03:37 PM on 09/12/2012
Eve hear of Appeasement? Iran makes threats and Obama declares Peace In Our Time.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
oldStory
Southern hippy man dreaming on
08:26 AM on 09/11/2012
Considering that the nation's energy policy has been for years dictated with the brains and logic of a wratchet strapped to the agenda of big oil; here we are driving 90 miles per hour with the parking brake on. What's good for the oil industry is what is good for America. Europe, for decades, has paid more than double the price for fuel, forcing frugality on drivers and vehicles, and used the taxes to support the autobahns and high speed rail. Big oil and the big three auto companies blocked taxes that might slowdown the profits Yet look how quickly the new mileage standard was met when an extra gear or two was added to new cars and trucks after the industry whined for years about impossible emission, safety, and mileage standards. I filled up yesterday. The pump was set to run about half the normal speed. I wondered how much revenue could have been raised for the worn-out interstate half a mile away if prices had been taxed ten years ago to this $3.60 I was paying today.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
realitytrumpsbull
Two 'alves of coconut!
01:49 AM on 09/11/2012
I'm for energy independence. I think it represents the foundation for future economic independence, and enabling our guys n gals to make effective, if unpleasant deciderers in our not-so-distant future if some foreign petroleum trading partner decides to have one of those socio-political episodes they seem to like so much. This country was founded on independence, but over time, we've gone into hyperslack in more ways than one, and it shows. Old Man America is slow, whiny, weak, can't even go and get his own beer from the fridge, anymore. Rut-roh...price of beer just went up.
01:08 AM on 09/11/2012
perfect timing for this article no!. once a trader always a trader. one thing i will not understand : the stubornes of some so called scholar ( my apology to the real and discreet one) to shift the blame from wall street trader to Opec. the future traders are driven by profit ( praised be ,Bhudda, Allah and so on) they influence and impose oil prices in our country and their dealings are kind of opaque ( excuse the pun) and it has been going on for decades and to shift the blame the author seem to exonerate his former buddies and blame the oil producing countries who have been for years used as scapegoat for the prices of oil that is slick (( ?)
ps :The Huffington post readers are different and i think a bit more informed that the tabloids reader where this article belongs. .
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Toogee
2G or not 2G?
11:04 PM on 09/10/2012
Until our fellow US citizens decide (regardless of it being their 'God AND unconstitutionally given right' to over consume) to STOP the crazy compulsion of over consuming that has become a mainstay in our national psyche, ANY president we could have will be in bed with OPEC!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
afairview
cheap energy, the best stimulus
09:43 PM on 09/10/2012
Here is a theory, could it be true?
The article describes new refineries being opened, that alone should bring down the price of oil, demand has been declining since 2007 but still gas prices jeep rising, and it is about to happen again.
The fed is suspected to do another stimulus or QE3 which is a nice way of saying he is about to pump more liquidity or money into the economy, as soon as that happens you will see gas prices rise again, it is a way for oil companies to suck up the stimulus, they will blame it on rumors of war or war itself. Oil speculators in wall street will have a field day and their biggest client, the military, will go into gas guzzling mode again. The American consumer will pay the tab and we'll be back where we started in no time.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:27 PM on 09/10/2012
"The United States is the world's largest consumer of oil, and instead of using its massive purchasing power to forge a level playing [field]....."
Raymond, i love that!
I have never seen addiction described as something that has a characteristic of "massive purchasing power" that can be used to get better prices as if it is something that can be mandated by congress or some governmental entity.
We are actually, in reality, competing for the oil that is on the market with the other addicts, and have agreed- thru allegedly well supplied markets- to pay what we are paying.
bon appetit !
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TexasBahr
act as you would like to be treated
06:21 PM on 09/10/2012
Why cant the government force domestic oil producers to sell X% of their oil to domestic refineries for a fixed government price and those refineries would have to sell x% to gas stations at a low fixed price so that we can stabilize oil and gas prices in the U.S.. That would be the cost of doing business in the U.S..
In other words, we should have the power to artificially set gasoline prices for domestic use. Gas companies are making record profits year after year and its time for them to 'give back' to the American economy.Lets take care of our own before we sell to the world market.
06:15 PM on 09/10/2012
Why cant the government force domestic oil producers to sell X% of their oil to domestic refineries for a fixed government price and those refineries would have to sell x% to gas stations at a low fixed price so that we can stabilize oil and gas prices in the U.S.. That would be the cost of doing business in the U.S..
In other words, we should have the power to artificially set gasoline prices for domestic use. Gas companies are making record profits year after year and its time for them to 'give back' to the American economy.Lets take care of our own before we sell to the world market.
05:45 PM on 09/10/2012
Documentary: ALL AMERICAN OIL, in Pre-Production

A Non-Profit Documentary ( for national broadcast distribution) being produced under the 501c3 covering of the IFP (www.ifp.org). Our budget is just under $200K; your donations are tax deductible.

We will be focusing our lens on the hardworking, middle American's who live, work and play in the clean and charming oil town of Van,Texas. We have been contractually granted unfettered access to all township properties and personnel, and not one citizen we have contacted has declined access to property or to be interviewed. - Katie Couric's producers contacted the town requesting to film a piece there; they flatly declined that request. --- This project they believe has merit and benefit for all American's.

We have commitments from The Brookings Institute and the Institute for Energy Research.

PREMISE / OUTLINE
1. We have enough oil (Proven Reserves) to supply our nations needs for the next 200 years
2. Oil producers are competent at extracting oil safely when held to a high standard (as evidenced in the town of Van, Texas)
3. We need the cost of petroleum products to come down; sky rocketing prices are crushing middle-America
4. We need a flush of high paying, enduring career jobs.
5. We are buying approximately 65% of our nations crude oil from other countries.
6. The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to promote energy independence. Why have they failed us?

VISIT: www.AllAmericanOilProject.com

Rick Denny
Seer Asylum Studio
Garden Valley, TX
10:11 PM on 09/10/2012
When the fossil fuel industry agrees to pay all the costs of their petroleum products including the externalities that they currently socialize onto the environment and the worlds populace, We'll listen.

Until then, shove it.

The fossil fuel industry are the biggest Socialists in the history of the planet.

There is nothing “Conservative” about keeping farmers in this country from growing industrial hemp.

http://relegalize.info/hemp/08-organic-biofuel.shtml
12:53 AM on 09/11/2012
Oil touches every aspect of (your) modern life without exception. Whatever the crop, farmers need it as much as any other citizen in our nation. The topic at hand is OPEC (ie.: buying oil from other countries), it is not at all about farming, or marijuana.

Our premise is predicated upon the fact that we have enough Oil under our own soil to meet the needs of our nation for the next 200 years (www.instituteforenergyresearch.org), and yet we are presently buying 65% of what we need and use from other nations.

Additionally, America needs a flush of high-paying jobs. If we were to open up drilling, create jobs, and bring down the price of oil, you and everyone you care about would benefit.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
aligatorhardt
Cut on the bias
09:38 PM on 09/16/2012
Let's institute a domestic use clause, requiring all oil and gas domestically produced to remain for domestic sales only. Since we are suffering the pollution from drilling, we should get the advantage of the oil and gas instead of buying from other countries. No references exist for the claim that we have 200 years of oil reserves. Sounds like a lame attempt to convince people to remain addicted to the use of petroleum when the real cure is to shift to other transportation options.
02:17 AM on 09/17/2012
Our approach is purely journalistic; the design and our personal intention is no less than to expose the facts as they come to light. Regarding North America having enough oil (proven reserves) to meet our nations needs for the next 200 years, I am quoting the Institute for Energy Research (www.ier.org).

Myself, I think and strongly feel that it's way past due time that we see cleaner, safer, more efficient technologies come to market. That said, I am very much confronted by the harsh realities of our present moment in history: Our nation needs a flush of high-paying, enduring jobs, right now. We are consuming millions of barrels of oil per day, and we're buying over 50% from other countries. Few would argue that we should not be dependent on OPEC to meet our nations needs.

Presently, petroleum products are not only fueling (nearly) every means of transportation, but consider the prevalence of plastics in your life, the lubricants that keep moving parts running smoothly, and so on. RIGHT NOW, if oil stopped flowing - life as "you" know it ceases to be.

We are in the process of making an educational film designed to bring awareness to the American public regarding important, relevant issue and related facts that must be disclosed. This is a non-profit venture; I am working 7 days a week, on my own dime.

So, what are you doing to help your country?

ALL AMERICAN OIL - join us in Facebook.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jerome Graber
I'm off to fight on the side of the gods.
04:20 PM on 09/10/2012
In principle I agree. OPEC is a cartel that should be trust-busted. That seems really clear, strictly on the facts.

I wonder about the complications though. Can we afford to cut them off? And how would we go about enforcing such a ruling against sovereign nations?

It seems to me that maybe a better approach would be to flood the market with alternatives to OPEC oil. Ramp up domestic production as much as possible. Tap Canadian oil to the greatest extent possible. Open up our markets to sugar cane ethanol. Support technology to convert coal to oil.

If we reduce their market share, we reduce their power too.
08:35 PM on 09/10/2012
"Open up our markets to sugar cane ethanol."

Reason why no mention of industrial Hemp?

I can see by the content of your post that you most likely consider yourself a conservative.
What does that mean to you anyway? Conservative?

I can also see that you really are a low information as to knowing about the protected markets in energy and the socialization of externalities onto the populace in the fossil fuel industry.

It's expensive. look it up.

And you so called conservatives never manage to call out the biggest Socialists in world history or even ask that they pay the costs of their externalities. Not to mention their 100year and counting tax subsidies and special carve outs for such nonsense as "depletion allowances".

Hence,this is why the industry can continue it's monopoly in this country even though the big players have zero loyalty to America or the people.

These unAmerican multinational corporations are able to avoid paying even close to fair royalties for our resources because of their lobbying, and then get to sell OUR resources back to us at WORLD MARKET prices! Does this sound Conservative? Not even close.

I think you possibly support this current arraignment possibly without even knowing it.

Any rational patriotic American rightly can't see anything "conservative" about the people who continue to protect this deeply entrenched racket.

Conservative? More like unpatriotic punks selling our country down the river.

There is nothing “Conservative” about keeping farmers in this country from growing industrial hemp.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jerome Graber
I'm off to fight on the side of the gods.
06:51 PM on 09/11/2012
First off, if hemp can be used as a cost effective bio-fuel, I have no problem with that. Why in the world would I? I admit I have never heard of it until your post, but if it works, then by all means allow its production.

Secondly, we can have a discussion about "externalities" if you wish, but that is kinda a separate issue from whether we can trust-bust OPEC. Any externalities would apply equally, I think, to oil regardless of the source.

As for all this blather about "subsidies" and royalties, oil extraction companies are treated EXACTLY the same as every other mineral extraction company acting in the country. If the laws need tweaked, okay, I suppose. I'm not sure what big problem you're proposing to solve though.
03:49 PM on 09/10/2012
The only truly battered consumers are businesses that must drive and transport and the poor. Everyone else has the option to choose a vehicle that won't bankrupt them when fuel prices rise. I have no pity for those who need $120 to fill their Escalade or equally inefficient SUV. Huge pickup trucks that have never seen a days work dot the landscape as do an array of other large, low geared, bad fuel economy vehicles that are symbols rather than necessities. If we're battered, we've asked for the beating. I have 2 four cylinder vehicles, 1 car and 1 truck. I have to be informed by co-workers about the rising gas prices because otherwise, I'd hardly notice. I've bludgeon proofed my budget and there's no reason most Americans can't do the same. You can fit 4 kids in a fuel efficient car which will also hold a dog or two when the need arises. They hold a lot of groceries, too and will satisfy almost any situation that are used as an excuse not to drive a sensible vehicle. They won't work for some consumers, I'm sure, but they would work for most.
02:39 PM on 09/10/2012
The challenge is a functional one. Because Oil is a vital commodity as we have not developed alternative energies your functional policy choices to combat OPEC in the american market are.

a) Invade the middle east and take control of the oil fields.

b) nationalize US OIl interests banning the export of US developed petroleum products and double US oil production to meet US demand. (Our oil does tend to be deeper and dirtier and therefore more expensive however.)

petroleum is for far more than cars and we simply can't do without it. Nor have we positioned ourselves to economically survive any significant disruption.

Opec nations don't have to sell to america the rest of the world is just as dependent on oil. Cut production drastically, stop selling to the US and they could make their same profit from the rest of the world while extending their supply availability.

This holds true until we have a viable alternative energy source to power our economy.

Personally I'ld say try a corporation that has made an oil production deal with an OPEC member state(As these deals are with governments) and is therefore party to an agreement to negatively impact the US economy with a foreign hostile power under the treason sections of the US constituion if you want a judicial legal hammer.
10:00 PM on 09/10/2012
"petroleum is for far more than cars and we simply can't do without it."

Complete nonsense.

ANYTHING made from hydrocarbon fossil fuels,
could be made from organic carbohydrates!

Hemp seed oil can be used to produce ORGANIC non-toxic diesel fuel, lamp lighting, household detergents, stain removers, printing inks, paints, varnishes, lubricants, resins, and oils. Because hemp seeds account for up to half the weight of a mature hemp plant, hemp seed is a viable source for these products. In industrial 'chemicals', hempseed oil is similar to linseed oil. Superior quality paints and varnishes were made from hemp seed oil until 1937.

There is nothing “Conservative” about keeping farmers in this country from growing industrial hemp.
http://relegalize.info/hemp/08-organic-biofuel.shtml
03:25 AM on 09/11/2012
maybe you haven't noticed we are dependent on food that is grown by very few on vast tracts of land fertilized with fertilizers containing extracted nitrogen harvested by machines dependent on liquid energy for motive power. We move massive quantities of water using energy derived from fossil fuels. plastic is the least of our worries.  Biofuels currently lack the energy content to land area displaced to be viable.  Battery technology isn't there etc.... Could we move off them, yes.  But we haven't invested the decade to two decades of defense level spending to do so.
photo
LateDave
Where I - dreaming - lay amazed
02:14 PM on 09/10/2012
Mr. Learsy:

Yours is a very populist argument. Obama is likely to favor gasoline/diesel pricing not being manipulated by plutocrats, but may not need to say so - his supporters *understand* (wink wink, nudge nudge), and his silence denies his opponents a weapon.

However! The Sherman and Clayton Acts and other price-fixing laws are on the books now. In theory, all of the actions a new law would forbid may already be forbidden. Enforcing existing laws should appeal to those of a conservative bent. This is Teddy Roosevelt trust-buster stuff, and might be favored by our present weird Congress if Obama were to speak out against it, for example.

My own view is that the first world (non-US) strategy of taxing transportation fuel to encourage fuel economy, pay for infrastructure and replacement energy source development, etc., is generally sound. While not inherently populist - indeed, it can stress low-income people - it can be manipulated like the Strategic Oil Reserve to counter OPEC. It might lower deficits, albeit on the backs of personal vehicle users and consumers impacted by fuel cost pass-through. Barring subsidies, people with low and inelastic income - a great many marginally-employed people in our lethargic recovery - are once again thrust into the chemo-or-radiation, food-or-rent quandary. Clinton-level income tax restoration is needed anyway to enhance recovery without additional deficit; if this increases labor needs, it raises wages for those most impacted by higher fuel taxes.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
anonymous67
12:31 PM on 09/10/2012
Obama is a Democrat in name only. He, like Republicans and many Democrats in Congress, primarily serve the interests of the elite who have bought our elections and government. Our government is corrupt.

Look no further than Obama handing the levers of government power over the Wall Street architects of deregulation and financial collapse. Look no further than his administration's failure to extend a hand to struggling Americans even as trillions are still lavished onto Wall Street.

Look at Obama's immediate capitulation on a single-payer healthcare system even though Americans pay 4-5 times more per capita than all developed nation -- and millions go without.

Look no further than the failure of his administration to pursue and prosecute any of the egregious and systematic crimes of Wall Street.

Yes -- without doubt -- he is the lesser of evils. However, as citizens of a solid "red state", I will not condone a country ruled by self-serving elitist. For others in my situation, I encourage you to elevate the power of non-elitist party and vote for Jill Stein, Green Party, for President.
pavementends42
Micro-bio is a study, not a blurb.
02:17 PM on 09/10/2012
The President's office cannot legislate. Point your finger of blame where it belongs: the House Republicans that have blocked legislation that would've specifically addressed these concerns... had Congress not patently rejected the notion that we need to protect jobs and bolster the economy in a time of economic depression.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
afairview
cheap energy, the best stimulus
09:22 PM on 09/10/2012
Very True, it is of no coincidence that the same party that has obstructed the president's agenda is the one funded by the Koch oil barons, the tea party. They have done everything in their power sometimes unknowingly to protect the oil scam that is being perpetrated on the American people.