Honest officer this guy just pulls up in this here bus .Points a gun at this other fellow , starts laughing and saying its all you faultWASHINGTON (AP) — Republican presidential candidate John McCain is launching a new television ad that blames Democratic rival Barack Obama for rising gasoline prices.
The ad, airing on national cable and in 11 battleground states, argues that the cost of fuel is rising because of opposition to oil drilling in the United States.
"Some" are indeed opposed to lifting the moratorium on new drilling in the waters of the Outer Continental Shelf, and they include Obama.
What's not true, however, is that current opposition to lifting the moratorium has anything to do with today's gas prices. They aren't high because any one individual is against ending the ban. As we have pointed out previously, the Energy Information Administration estimates that if the go-ahead were given right now for such drilling, it would be 2030 before there would be enough oil flowing to have a "significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices." Is there "no end in sight" because of opposition to ending the moratorium? No more so than because of opposition to hastening the development of alternative sources of energy and new kinds of cars.
McCain even acknowledged as much in late June when, after saying that drilling would have a positive effect on prices in the short term, he backtracked and said he believed it would have a beneficial "psychological impact."
That seems to have slipped his mind.– by Viveca NovakUpdate, July 23:
The McCain campaign's Brian Rogers contacted us to complain that we had failed to note that the campaign had released a long list of "ad facts" in support of its new spot. "
But most of McCain's "ad facts" don't actually address whether opening new drilling areas "can reduce prices today."
We find just three statements on that point:
CNN special correspondent Frank Sesno is quoted saying, "Expectations of more production can send prices down."
Harvard economist Martin Feldstein, former chief economic adviser to President Ronald Reagan, is quoted saying that "[a]ny policy that causes the expected future oil price to fall can cause the current price to fall, or to rise less than it would otherwise do."
The Fox Business Network's Eric Bolling is quoted as writing in TheStreet.com: "It would take anywhere from one to six years to produce a barrel from the Outer Continental Shelf. That's right, we could realize oil in as little as a year and as far into the future as six years for those really remote reservoirs."
We found that these fell far short of justifying the McCain ad's claim that voters have Obama to thank for rising gasoline prices.
You can aways depend on FoxNetwok
But since the campaign seems to rest its case on the notion that lifting a federal ban on offshore drilling would have an immediate and perceptible effect on gasoline prices, we will address them here. Sesno and Feldstein are of course correct:
An expectation of an increase in supply in the future can have an effect on prices today. But not necessarily. It depends on how big an increase, and how soon.
News Flash
McCain Cancels LA Oil Rig Visit Due to OIL SPILLBy Jacquie(David) John McCain was supposed to hold a press event on a LA oil rig today in support of offshore drilling. The event was called off because of a oil spill in the gulf, basically undercutting McCain's argument of how safe offshore drilling is .
Bolling's statement that some oil could begin flowing within a year is at odds with the assessment of the Energy Information Administration that it will be 2030 before we'll be pulling any appreciable oil out of the OCS from new drilling.
Twenty-two years in the future is an awfully distant horizon when it comes to affecting prices today. And another portion of the same EIA analysis we've already quoted says that even then, we won't see much of a bump down in costs: "Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant."
The Feldstein quote, by the way, is from an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal that never mentions drilling, offshore or elsewhere. And the economist also notes that an expectation of lowered demand would have the same impact on today's prices as an equivalent increase in supply:
Feldstein, July 1: For example, increases in government subsidies to develop technology that will make future cars more efficient, or tighter standards that gradually improve the gas mileage of the stock of cars, would lower the future demand for oil and therefore the price of oil today.As we've noted before, Obama is proposing to spend $150 billion over 10 years on energy research. And Obama – and not McCain – proposes tightening corporate average fuel economy standards.
McCain's new ad accuses Obama of keeping gas prices high, all by himself. That's absurd, and McCain knows it – he has said repeatedly that our current problems were "30 years in the making."
The notion that Obama is singlehandedly, or to any significant degree, or more than most other senators, to blame for the high cost of gas is absurd in too many ways to count here. Okay, we'll give you a couple: Obama has been in the Senate only since 2005. McCain himself said earlier this month that the problem has been decades in the making.
McCain, July 7: Our dangerous dependence on foreign oil has been 30 years in the making, and was caused by the failure of politicians in Washington to think long-term about the future of the country.
The announcer in the ad says, "Gas prices — $4, $5, no end in sight, because some in Washington are still saying no to drilling in America. No to independence from foreign oil. Who can you thank for rising prices at the pump?"
ExxonMobil made $40 billion last year
Working families are feeling the squeeze—record high gas prices, record home foreclosure rates and skyrocketing health care costs.
But President Bush and John McCain both have Big Oil’s interests at heart.
Despite record profi ts and executive pay in the oil industry, neither Bush nor McCain is willing to cut back on Big Oil’s windfall profits and tax breaks.
McCain already has proposed giving $3.8 billion more in tax breaks to Big Oil and has voted to protect their profi ts.
Tell John McCain it’s time to Turn Around America by putting working families’ needs over Big Oil’s greed.
BIG OIL HAS DONE WELL UNDER THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION
Working Families Are Hit Hard With Extreme Gas Prices
Average Price of Gas Has Hit $4 a Gallon, Up from $1.47 the Week Bush Took Office. The average price of a gallon of regular gasoline reached $4 in May. This is up from only $1.47 per gallon the week President Bush took office in January 2001. (Energy Information Administration, Petroleum Navigator).
Nearly 80 Percent of What We Pay Goes to Big Oil. The executive director of the Gasoline and Automotive Service Dealers of America, Michael J. Fox, explained that “79.9 percent of the money a consumer spends on a gallon of gas goes to ‘Big Oil,’ the term used to describe companies like ExxonMobil, Shell and Sunoco.” (Connecticut Post Online, 5/7/08)
BIG OIL IS MAKING RECORD PROFITS UNDER THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION
ExxonMob Reported the Highest Profi ts for a U.S. Company Ever, Making $40 Billion in 2007. ExxonMobil Corp. broke the record for profits made in a year by a U.S. company, reporting $40 billion in profits in 2007. (Associated Press, 4/10/08)
OIL INDUSTRY EXECS TAKING HOME MILLIONS (Associated Press, 4/10/08)
ExxonMobil gave chairman and CEO Rex Tillerson a raise to $21.7 million.
Occidental Petroleum Corp. paid chief executive Ray Irani $34.2 million in 2007. Anadarko Petroleum Corp. Chairman and CEO James Hackett received $26.7 million.
ConocoPhillips gave Jim Mulva a $15.1 million package in 2007.
The Top Five Oil Companies Have Made $525 Billion in Profits Under the Bush Administration. The five largest oil companies have made $525.3 billion in profits under the Bush administration and $123.3 billion in 2007 alone. (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 financial reports for ExxonMobil, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, ConocoPhillips and ChevronTexaco)
Bush Administration Has Repeatedly Slashed Funding for Renewable Energy and Protected Big Oil’s Profits. Daniel Weis and Nick Kong, in an article for the Center for American Progress, outlined Bush’s policies throughout his tenure as president. Despite repeated calls for more investment in energy independence and renewable energy,
Bush has slashed funding for these programs while protecting Big Oil’s tax breaks. (Center for Responsive Politics, accessed 5/31/08)
BECAUSE McCAIN WILL CONTINUE BUSH’S GIVEAWAYS TO BIG OIL
McCain’s Tax Plan Gives $3.8 Billion in Tax Cuts to the Top Five Oil Companies. McCain’s current plan would deliver $3.8 billion in tax cuts to the five largest American oil companies. (“The McCain Plan to Cut Oil Company Taxes by Nearly $4 Billion,” Center for American Progress Action Fund, 3/27/08)
McCAIN VOTES TO PROTECT BIG OIL’S PROFITS McCain Skipped a Vote to Repeal Tax Breaks for Oil Companies. In 2007,
McCain was the only senator to miss a vote on the energy bill repealing tax subsidies for oil companies. (H.R. 6, Vote 425, 12/13/07)
McCain Voted Against Curtailing Oil Companies’ Windfall Profits to Give a Tax Rebate to Working Families. In 2005, McCain voted against imposing a temporary windfall profits tax on oil companies and using the proceeds to provide nonrefundable tax credits to working families. (S.Amdt. 2635, Vote 341, 11/17/05; S.Amdt. 2587, Vote 331, 11/17/05)
McCain Voted to Protect Tax Breaks for Big Oil. Earlier, McCain opposed eliminating tax breaks for oil and natural gas companies related to depletion and drilling costs. (S.Amdt. 2782/H.R. 776, Vote 159,
http://www.aflcio.org/issues/politics/mccain_gasprices.cfm
No comments:
Post a Comment