November 10, 2005
Well Oiled Machine
The Republican party does not hide the fact that their only true allegiance is to the oil industry, pharmaceutical companies and “The Far Right.” They stick together to champion their causes. They are unified in their attack on the seperation of Church and State. They are unified in their struggle to increase the disparity between the haves and the have-nots.
Most importantly, they are unified in their struggle to save the poor and disenfranchised oil executives from the horrors of being just wealthy. The oil CEO’s deserve better than being just wealthy, they need to be super-wealthy.
A few weeks ago:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - House Republicans recently pushed through legislation that would give more federal subsidies to the oil industry instead of trying to help consumers cope with sharply higher energy prices, the top Democrat on the House Commerce Committee said Saturday.
"We see the U.S. government as "liberators", quoted one of the oil executives.
On Oct. 7, the House of Representatives narrowly passed a bill that would give federal insurance to oil refiners whose expansion projects are delayed by lawsuits or regulatory snags. It also put the Energy Department in charge of permits for new refinery projects as a way to speed up approvals.
The bill was approved, 212-210, after Republican leaders held a five-minute vote open for more than 40 minutes to persuade some party members to change their votes.
Democrats opposed the bill, saying the industry had plenty of its own money to pay for new refineries and did not deserve a government hand-out.
Can you believe Alaska still wants the $4.5 billion owed from the 89 Exxon Valdez accident?
Dingell said Democrats were concerned that high crude oil, natural gas, gasoline, and heating oil prices have a ripple effect throughout the U.S. economy.
"To meet our energy needs, we do not need to weaken protections for clean air and clean water, or spend your tax dollars to help out the oil companies," he said.
We now know that the corporate welfare that was handed out to the oil companies was money well spent.
It's gotta be one of the most rewarding feelings you can possibley experience. Seeing all of those oil executives with their little faces, knowing that they were so close to being just wealthy.
Their effort pays off:
The profits of the oil and gas companies in the Standard & Poor's 500 index rose about 62 percent in the third quarter to about $25.9 billion, excluding special items, compared to a year ago, according to earnings tracker First Call. Exxon Mobil reported the largest profit in U.S. corporate history during the quarter.
That jump in profits followed year-over-year growth of 42 percent for the industry in the second quarter, according to First Call, and full-year profit growth forecast to be up 49 percent. And the profits are not expected to disappear any time soon. Analysts surveyed by First Call expect industry earnings to be up another 13 percent in 2006.
Oil industry stocks have retreated about 11 percent from the highs reached in September when oil and gas prices were near record highs. But even with that retreat in stock and oil prices, the Amex oil index still shows a nearly 40 percent rise for oil stocks over the last 12 months.
A White House official was heard saying, "We must stay the course."
Less than three months ago, the president signed into law a Republican-written energy bill giving $14.5 billion in tax breaks and incentives to the energy industry.
Give till it hurts.
Oil and gas companies overwhelmingly favored Republicans over Democrats in their campaign giving, the study found. Just over 73 percent of the industry's campaign contributions have gone to Republican candidates and organizations.
The Democrats didn't care about these people. Those cold hearted bastards looked at these CEO's and all they saw was wealth. The Republicans were able to get past their initial prejudices and see these poor wretches for what they were, people who needed our governments help.
You want to know the hell the "Just wealthy" go through to be "just wealthy?"
The industry exerts its influence in other, less obvious ways, including membership on the National Petroleum Council, a commission formed to advise the energy secretary. Koch Industries, the largest privately-held oil company in the United States, has financed a network of conservative nonprofit organizations designed to influence policy debate in this country.
You thinks it's easy to walk around with The President of The United States and members of Congress in your pocket? Try it sometime.
U.S.-based oil and gas companies have nearly 900 subsidiaries located in tax haven countries, such as the Cayman Islands and Bermuda.
You try keeping track of all of those hidden asset, it's hell.
The world's largest oil company and third largest company of any kind, ExxonMobil, was the industry's leader in lobbying expenditures, spending $55 million to plead its case with officials in Washington over the past six years.
The worst part of being "just wealthy" that makes this cause so worth-while for the Republicans is the tragic fact that those poor oil executives, have to suffer the ultimate degradation. They have to sleep with one of the most gutter-level, unsavory, sleazy and immoral whores on the planet, the United States government.
Go GOP.
Posted by Andre M. Hernandez at November 10, 2005 09:48 AMgreed and power, power and greed. talk about a welfare state, how can anyone be blind to the hypocricy?
Posted by: vex at November 10, 2005 01:30 PMThe dems are making a mistake pushing for a “windfall profit tax” on big oil. This move borders on marxist socialism. The dems should instead be focusing on ending the huge tax breaks and incentives given away to these greed mongers. In a free market capitalism big oil should be free to run their companies, within the law, as they see fit. However Republican leaders in Washington should NOT be playing reverse Robin Hood with our tax dollars.
Posted by: JayJay Snowman at November 10, 2005 02:02 PMHonestly, what the democrats really need to do is take the far left spin away from their rhetoric. It doesn’t help to counteract the spin of the far right. Most Americans understand the current economic problems in the US, and I think most people believe that the democratic party can currently do a better job managing the economy as well as current social issues far better than the republicans can. The problem is, the rhetoric of the democratic party leads one to believe that the democratic party is against the idea of becoming wealthy. The problem is not some fiendish republican idea of oppressing the poor, it’s simply the oil executives capitalizing on a business opportunity, and the republican party not setting any boundaries. I think that if the democratic party can unify in a more centrist manner of thinking, they will win many more supporters, even in some of the supposedly “red” states.
Posted by: Mariano at November 10, 2005 02:18 PMIt is unfortunate that President Bush refuses to put a windfall tax on oil companies.Of course we know that this alone would not reduce gasoline or heating oil prices prices; however he should review President Nixon’s program in 1973 after the arab oil embargo gave the oilc ompanies an excuse to double gas prices. President Nixon took 3 steps to reduce prices.He institued windfall taxon oil companies; rationed gas to reduce consumption allowing people to buy gas on alternate days depending on even and odd numbers on licence plates and no purchases on Sundays, and establishe the 55 mile per hour speed limit on federal highways. This stabilized prices and later even reduced prices somewhat. It was not a complete success becuse the oil compnies tried to sabotage the program by reducing their production. Evidently Mr. Nixon was not in the oil business like our current president and his cronies. Incidently I consider myself a liberal democrat, but I am glad that President Nixon felt that Americans were more important than oil companies.
Jack L Wisser
Posted by: Jack L Wisser at November 10, 2005 02:37 PMClearly the conservative side has all but written off the future of this country, let alone planet and are “padding their pockets” if you will in hopes that they might be spared any future hardship. What hardship? Can’t they see they’ve become their own worst nightmare? Massive wealth equals massive debt and as long as one distance themselves from such a calamity, so much the better.
Posted by: Gerald Perez at November 10, 2005 03:13 PMI don’t mean to be so blunt, but most of you just don’t understand how business works. You look at one year’s results and draw the wrong conclusions.
Stay away from stock investments. If you believe what you say, you certainly will be unable to understand the market.
Did you want to give the oil firms money when oil was below $20. Back in 2000, gas in my area was under $1 a gallon. Should we have pushed the price up?
It is not only liberals. Bill O’Reily is hot on the trail of the oil firms.
Do you remember what happened last time we put on a windfall profit tax?
But let’s go beyond business for a minute. What should the price of a gallon of gas be? If you push the price down, people drive more and they buy bigger cars. The higher cost of gas had an immediate effect. Demand dropped. Sales of SUVs dropped. Car dealers couldn’t keep hybrids on the lot.
I wrote before that I would like gas to cost $5 a gallon. It is not going that way, however. The station on the corner near my house is now selling gas for $2.25, down from more than $3 a couple of weeks ago. I only wish those guys could keep the price up.
Posted by: john at November 10, 2005 08:33 PMSorry to sign “John” instead of “Jack” One is the nickname for the other and I wasn’t paying attention.
Posted by: jack at November 10, 2005 09:41 PMDid you want to give the oil firms money when oil was below $20.Short answer: no.
I do not believe that the federal government should be giving our tax dollars to any private company or industry. In a free market society an industy should have to stand on it’s own, without corporate welfare.
Posted by: JayJay at November 11, 2005 12:04 AMThe powerful leaders of a nation calls a group of businessmen to DEMAND why those CEO are actually doing their jobs and making money for their companies? “Gentlemen, how dare you actually serve your shareholders rather than what a bunch of posturing Congressmen declare is the greater good?”
Damn evil capitalists- good things we have big-hearted politicians to save us from them.
Misha Tseytlin:
Unfortunately, these guys are only making a profit due to the current crises. Once things stabilize, they will go back to losing money while keeping their gigantic pay scale.
No wonder they are all GOP Contributors.
Posted by: Aldous at November 11, 2005 03:28 AMAldous- as long as they are not violating the law it is not my business or yours if they are making or losing money (unless one of us is a shareholder in those companies, which I can assume we are not). Congress has no business calling these guys in front of the committee, since there was no serious allegations that any of them broke the law. Using the congressional hearings to bully private individuals is shameful and should be denounced (just as I did here-http://www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/002151.html- in a slightly different context).
Posted by: Misha Tseytlin at November 11, 2005 09:08 AMMisha:
“Damn evil capitalists- good things we have big-hearted politicians to save us from them.”
Though I know you’ll never agree Misha, most people in this country don’t like the idea of letting Big Oil control us with predatory pricing. Because there is a point where capitalism can indeed become evil — and its very helpful to have politicians who wish to save the country not only from price gouging, but from allowing business to gain so much power that they no longer have any competition.
Theodore Roosevelt was a sufficiently big-hearted politician to know this, which is why he enacted so many necessary Anti Trust laws. Specifically, he broke The Standard Oil Company into more than 30 smaller companies that eventually had to compete with one another.
It’s just too bad that Roosevelt never got the chance to really regulate the economy with what he called “The Square Deal”. Had he been reelected, this was going to include things like limiting court injunctions against labor unions during strikes (very big at that time), national incorporation law (rather than letting corporations hold state charters which could vary from state to state), a national employee liability law (to protect workers who suffered industrial accidents), campaign finance laws, and a federal income and inheritance tax which would have directly targeted the wealthy.
Man, they just don’t make Republican’s like they used to…
Anyway, it is more than obvious that we need another president like TR. who understands that allowing giant oil cartels to call all the shots is a very bad thing for America.
Adrienne- You are right that I wont agree in principle, but i will take for the purpose of this argument that some of the goals of anti-trust law are worthy. The problem is that, as far as I know, the oil companies were violating NO anti-trust laws. Read my response post: “as long as they are not violating the law it is not my business or yours if they are making or losing money.” Anti-trust violations would be cause for legal action, ect. These companies are being called in front of congress for breaking no law. Its shameful grandstanding.
I remember when Newt tried to pass a bill removing special interests and lobbyist from capital hill altogether. The Democrats went ape sh*t.
He also tried to remove the “bill-rider” provision from law, this also was voted down by both republicans and democrates.
So please do not complain about the lobbyist on capital hill, because democrates love them being there as much as the republicans.
Posted by: MacIrish at November 16, 2005 10:07 AM
