Pelosi’s Folly & Pin the Tail on the Donkey Part 4
Three more items from Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s top ten list (sorry, Dave) are as idiotic as others presented in previous posts. In item 3 (below) the Democratic Speaker of the House indicates she favors ‘repealing tax subsidies’ but you can bet she will oppose repealing any taxes. But that is a story for another time. Echoing the Democratic party’s disdain for profitable enterprise she believes the oil companies should be taxed into oblivion as energy policy. She states that ‘Exxon-Mobil is making $1,500 a second’ and implies that is the limit for increasing their tax liability. She fails to mention the staggering tax bill of Exxon Mobil, other oil companies and the tax burden to the American citizens she claims to protect. So here is one excerpt from the Tax Foundation to help you see the other side.
February 2, 2007
ExxonMobil’s Record Profits — And Record Taxes
Today, ExxonMobil reported the largest corporate profits in U.S. History. From Yahoo Finance:
So Nancy, you know what you can do with your ‘repeal the tax subsidies’ idea.
Top Ten Questions for the House GOP on Energy
In item number four (above) the wonderful Speaker of the House offers a stunningly stupid question. She suggests favoring independence from foreign oil yet is to short sighted to understand that the US needs to produce crude in America for that to happen. At the same time she wants to force American oil interests to drill on land for which they currently hold leases. It is fine to want to collect royalties that may be owed to the American tax payer from oil companies holding the leases but forcing companies to drill regardless of the probability for success makes no sense. While payoffs from domestic production may not have an immediate effect on prices at the pump, Ms Pelosi, failing to do so will find us in the same boat on imported oil decades in the future.
This blog opposes oil production in ANWR but primarily due to the fact that there are other locations with more promise that should be tapped first. It would be nice if all concerned could develop effective strategies for what to do when things go wrong…. and they will, they always do. Drill domestically where we can. Have contingencies in place for correcting errors effectively. Increase refining capacity to a level that approaches balance between supply and demand. Add this to the other measures like alternative energy sources and conservation, etc., but remember that only non-petroleum sources will not effect prices at the pump immediately either. Nothing will solve the energy problems immediately. And fawning over ethanol which currently requires more energy to produce than it provides as well as other pie in the sky solutions is irresponsible as well.
Part of what Pelosi says about the long wait for results from drilling ANWR is true. But what she fails to mention is why. Much of what would slow results from drilling in ANWR is government, politics, beauracracy and potential legal action associated with the drilling. Check it out yourself by Pelosi’s own reference both from the Energy Dept and US News.
Analysis of Crude Oil Production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Arctic Drilling Wouldn’t Cool High Oil Prices
Of the ten years it would take to begin oil production in ANWR according to Pelosi (and these sources) she fails to mention a two to three year wait to obtain the oil leases and a one to two year wait to develop a plan and get BLM approval. That would be half of the wait to which Pelosi alludes. The point is, this is merely political theatrics by Pelosi, nothing more, nothing less.
And item five (above) by Pelosi does not even merit a response. The leap between item five’s first and second sentence not to mention her failing to connect the dots is as stupid as the three word question with which she finishes that item.
To be continued……
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
Nan on drilling: No longer the hoax I knew (Michelle Malkin)
