Hillary Clinton: 'I am convinced energy traders are driving up the cost of oil and gas right now'

[bigtree]

Hillary Clinton delivered the following remarks at a "Get Out the Vote" event in Wake Forest, NC:


"Someone running for office, particularly running for the presidency, has to be able to deal with both the immediate, the urgent, the long-term and necessary.

"What I have tried to do in this campaign is to keep us focused on how we have to plan for the future, be prepared to deal with the economy, with energy, education, health care, our standing and position in the world, but also to deal with the date-to-day, because I have seen very personally the challenges that our families are facing now.

"These prices that are going up from gases, gas prices, to grocery prices, are really taking a big chunk out of people's disposable income. I think that it's imperative that we try to obtain some immediate relief. And what I have proposed would do just that.

"Now, it's important to me that we come up with solutions, and in a campaign, sometimes that's hard, because of the back and forth in the campaign. But it is important, too, for you to see clearly what it is I propose and what I would do. There is no contradiction between trying to provide immediate relief and having a long-term vision and a plan for what we must do to lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and to be moving towards more home-grown fuels.

"So here is what I propose: I want the oil companies to pay the federal gas tax this summer. Now, some people say, well, that wouldn't save the average consumer all that much money. Well, we figure we'd save about $70 for the average consumer. It would save a whole lot more for truck drivers, for farmers, for people who commute long distances to work, who rely upon transporting the goods they sell for their business. And it would probably save truckers $2 billion in fuel costs, just for the summer. And that's $2 billion that wouldn't go into the cost of the food that you go to the grocery store to buy.

"I also believe that we should make it clear that there is something not right about the way these prices are going up, and I would ask the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to conduct an investigation to try to get to the bottom of this.

"And here's why I believe this, and why I am urging the President and the Congress to really take this seriously. There was testimony by an oil company executive just a few weeks ago in Congress. When he was pressed, he admitted that probably if it were just market forces, the price of oil would be less than $100 a barrel. Well, we know its $120 a barrel. Another investigation in the Senate found that there's about a $20 premium on the cost of oil, because of market manipulation by energy traders.

"Now, we remember energy traders. Back during Enron, energy traders deliberately drove up the price of electricity on the West Coast. I am convinced energy traders are driving up the cost of oil and gas right now in the global marketplace. And we need to close what is unfortunately called the Enron loophole, and start regulating energy traders again so that they cannot be basically taking advantage of the rest of us.

"I also believe we should quit buying oil on the market to put in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The President of the United States runs the strategic petroleum reserve. The point of it is to have a huge reserve of oil in case of some terrible disaster. It is 97% full. We can very well stop paying for it at these high prices which drives the price up for everybody else, and I would even release some of it to send a message to the oil companies and the oil producing countries that we're going to be serious going forward.

"I think if you are a leader, you have got to look at both the headlines and the trendlines. You’ll have in me a president who gets up every single day and worries about what is going on here in Wake Forest. I believe completely that there isn’t a problem we can’t solve in America if we start acting like Americans, and that requires us to have a president who is going to summon us to action again.


http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=7486








SOUTH BEND, IND. -- In the face of growing criticism from economists and some in her party, Hillary Clinton said she will not give up in her pursuit to temporarily eliminate the federal gas tax for the summer.

“I am unabashed! I am unapologetic! I am going to fight for the middle class and I am going to take on the oil companies and everybody else who’s had it their way for way too long!” Clinton told a dismal crowd at an outdoor rally here.

“My opponent says, you know, ‘that’s a gimmick’ he doesn’t want to take on the oil companies to make them pay the gas tax, he’d rather you do it, but he attacks me because he doesn’t have any plan for immediate relief,” Clinton said.

[meow mix]

1. everytime she goes off on this the prices jump higher, she needs to stop.

:mad:

[Muttocracy]

6. her threat to obliterate Iran was surely helpful too. nt

[ecstatic]

60. exactly! Why isn't the media talking about her affect on prices lately?!

Especially in Georgia! This is OUTRAGEOUS!

[mcctatas]

2. Can't put anything past hillary...

:crazy:

[stevietheman]

3. So reduced production, inadequate refining, and weak dollar have nothing...

to do with it? I think Hillary should start talking to economists again.

[boppers]

7. Economists have a known statistical bias.

She thinks with her gut, screw logic and reason.

[bigtree]

10. the oil companies have more than enough money to build refineries.

Production is being manipulated to keep prices high.

Bush came out with the refinery excuse last week. It was the first thing out of his mouth.

[SwampG8r]

38. sure they have the money

and the greens wont let them build one
we need to look at domestic drilling as we make the transition to new technologies

[bigtree]

50. that's just code for relaxing regs that ensure safety, environmental protection and accountability

and, it's just code for opening up ANWR to drilling . . .



No presidential admonishment of Congress is complete, it seems, without a call for opening up the Alaskan wilds for oil and natural gas exploration. Again, context would be nice.

The pristine Arctic environment would be radically altered, but how much oil and gas prices would actually change is very much in doubt. The Energy Information Administration estimated in 2005 that it would take about 10 years of drilling before oil would flow from ANWR. That oil would reduce prices by less than a penny a gallon by 2025, using constant 2003 dollars.

"Somehow if you mention ANWR, it means you don't care about the environment," the President says. "Well, I'm hoping now people, when they say ANWR, means you don't care about the gasoline prices that people are paying."


http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=685833&category=OPINION&newsdate=5/4/2008

[SwampG8r]

86. where did i say anything about alaska?

i said increase domestic production and if you see a code word there its in your mind not mine
you cannot stand and cry about an issue and then shoot every offered solution down
i live in florida and i will soon be able to stand on US soil and see a huge cuban oil complex in the staits of florida
every drop of flotsam that comes off that complex will float up the gulf stream contaminating our waters as it goes by
meanwhile we drill not a single hole
if we build the refineries and drill the wells then we can hope OUR regulatory agencies will be more concerned with our welfare than the cuban agencies are

[bigtree]

87. that's still language used to undermine environmental and safety concerns in the name of expediency

I believe there can be responsible drilling offshore in that region. Many folks there support that. But, we should continue to be cautions that economic opportunities don't trump responsible drilling.

ANWR is the logical extension of the argument about domestic production. Offshore drilling is only a little less controversial.

[Marie26]

14. WP: Energy Traders Avoid Scrutiny

Energy Traders Avoid Scrutiny
As Commodities Market Grows, Oversight Is Slight

By David Cho
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, October 21, 2007; Page A01

One year ago, a 32-year-old trader at a giant hedge fund named Amaranth held huge sway over the price the country paid for natural gas. Trading on unregulated commodity exchanges, he made risky bets that led to the fund's collapse -- and, according to a congressional investigation, higher gas bills for homeowners.

But as another winter approaches, lawmakers and federal regulators have yet to set up a system to prevent another big fund from cornering a vital commodity market. Called by some insiders the Wild West of Wall Street, commodity trading is a world where many goods that are key to national security or public consumption, such as oil, pork bellies or uranium, are traded with almost no oversight.

Part of the problem is that the regulator, the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission, has had a hard time keeping up with the sector it oversees. Commodity trading has exploded in complexity and popularity, growing six-fold in trading volume since 2000 -- the year that a handful of giant energy companies, including Enron, successfully lobbied to get Congress to exempt energy markets from government regulation.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/20/AR2007102001203.html

[rodeodance]

68. congress is still controlled by the REPUGS--as a whole.

........Part of the problem is that the regulator, the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission, has had a hard time keeping up with the sector it oversees. Commodity trading has exploded in complexity and popularity, growing six-fold in trading volume since 2000 -- the year that a handful of giant energy companies, including Enron, successfully lobbied to get Congress to exempt energy markets from government regulation.

[Marie26]

23. dupe

[Zynx]

53. Oil prices would be a great deal lower if not for the speculation.

Also, the weak dollar is largely driven by speculation.

[lastliberalintexas]

57. You may as well stop

I'm not a supporter of either candidate, but I've finally admitted that most of these people don't really want to discuss things. They just want to bash anything they can about the other candidate, even if it means denigrating a good idea. :shrug:


I've seen articles suggesting that upwards of 40% of the price is based on speculation, which as you say is excaserbated by the weak dollar. If only we could nationalize...

[stevietheman]

77. Well, if nobody but McCain supports Clinton's idea, how good is it? n/t

n/t

[stevietheman]

76. A lot of the speculation is based on level of production and the potential for supply disruptions...

such as strife in war-torn Iraq.

I don't see how speculation is a problem now when the same speculation wasn't a problem when gas was one dollar a gallon.

[wileedog]

4. ""So here is what I propose: I want the oil companies to pay the federal gas tax this summer."

Because certainly, the oil companies won't raise prices to compensate, will they?

Beyond retarded.

[bigtree]

8. Nothing we can do about their record profits. Nothing we can do to get immediate relief at the pump.

And oil speculators aren't robbing us blind.

Right?

Nothing we can do, just keep feeding them our tax dollars, feathering their bed.

Surrender.

[sfam]

5. I'm convinced that little green men from Mars are infecting my cheese-steaks....

I don't have any evidence for that of course. Does she, or is this another "logical thinking is bad, I know the answer that matters" speech like she makes on the gas tax holiday?

[Duke Newcombe]

9. Welcome to the party, Princess Obvious.

At this rate, Senator, you'll be ready for the presidency by around 2024...


Duke

[bigtree]

11. The Obama campaign has been virtually silent on the issue of price gouging

Someone has to say these things out loud. It certainly isn't coming from Obama. All they've managed to do this week is criticize Clinton's plan.

Where's Obama's plan to confront and hold accountable the thieves and opportunists in the oil industry?

[Marie26]

15. Exactly

At least Clinton is talking about the price gouging & abuses. I haven't ever heard Obama really address the reasons for the rising prices or what should be done to stop it.

[tabasco]

30. You are willfully ignorant of Obama's plans.

Either that or a liar.

Obama calls for windfall tax on oil profits as gas prices soar

Obama proposes oil companies be taxed on windfall profits from oil sold at or above 80 dollars a barrel, and the revenue be used to help relieve the burden of rising prices on working people, according to his campaign.

He also wants more transparency in the way pump prices are fixed, a tax cut for the middle classes that would benefit families by up to 1,000 dollars a year, and a 150-billion-dollar investment over 10 years in clean energy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080425/ts_alt_afp/usvotedemocratsenergy_080425211322

[yourout]

12. but since I need the Exxon corporate donations I will do absolutely nothing.

[bigtree]

16. Obama might say he doesn't take contributions from oil companies, but he took more money in March

. . . but he took more money in March from oil company executives than any other candidate. He might say he'll stand up to the oil companies but he’s the only candidate who voted for the Bush-Cheney energy bill that was written by energy lobbyists and has been called the best energy bill corporations could buy.


Sen. Obama raised more money from oil executives and employees in March than any other candidate.

Sen. Obama accepted more money from oil company executives last month than any other candidate, while he ran an ad saying he didn't take money from oil companies. "Sen. Barack Obama continued accepting donations from oil company executives and employees last month even as he aired ads in which he stated he took no oil company money, his campaign finance reports show. Obama has taken at least $263,000 from oil company executives, family members and employees since entering the presidential race last year, including $46,000 last month. At least $140,000 has come in chunks of between $1,000 and $2,300, the maximum permitted under federal law."


Sen. Obama voted for the Bush/Cheney 2005 energy bill.

Sen. Obama voted for the 2005 Energy Bill, Hillary opposed. H.R. 6, Vote #213, 07/29/05


Bush's 2005 energy bill was written by the energy lobby, who spent millions to ensure passage.

Public Citizen: Energy lobby gained 'exclusive, private access to lawmakers' to advocate for 2005 Energy Bill 'starting with vice-president Dick Cheney's energy task force': "On August 8, 2005, President Bush signed into the law the energy bill; on July 28, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 275 to 156 to approve the energy bill; and on July 29, the U.S. Senate voted 74 to 26 to approve the energy bill. Since 2001, energy corporations have showered federal politicians with $115 million in campaign contributions—with three-quarters of that amount going to Republicans. This cash helped secure energy companies and their lobbyists exclusive, private access to lawmakers, starting with Vice-President Dick Cheney’s Energy Task Force, whose report provided the foundation of the energy bill passed by Congress and signed by President Bush on August 8." Public Citizen, "The Best Energy Bill Corporations Could Buy," citizen.org

Thomas Friedman: 2005 Energy Bill Was 'The Sum of All Lobbies': "This bill is what the energy expert Gal Luft calls 'the sum of all lobbies.'" Thomas Friedman, New York Times, 8/5/05


With 2005 energy bill, energy lobby got what they paid for.

Washington Post: 2005 Energy Bill was 'a piñata of perks for energy industries': The Washington Post said, "…The energy bill, touted as a way to reduce dependence on foreign oil or moderate gasoline prices, has been turned into a piñata of perks for energy industries." Washington Post, 7/30/05

Energy Bill gave $6 billion in subsidies to oil & gas industry: Public Citizen, "The Best Energy Bill Corporations Could Buy," citizen.org


Sen. Obama has acknowledged pernicious influence of lobbyists on energy policy he supported.

Obama: 'You can look at how Dick Cheney did his energy policy…he met with oil and gas companies forty times, and that's how they put together our energy policy': "The one thing I have to remind folks, though, of – we’ve been talking about this through Republican administrations and Democratic administrations for decades. And the reason it doesn’t change – you can take a look at how Dick Cheney did his energy policy. He met with environmental groups one, he met with renewable energy folks once, and then he met with oil and gas companies forty times, and that’s how they put together our energy policy. We’ve got to put the national interest ahead of the special interest, and that’s what I’ll do when I’m President of the United States." Democratic Presidential Debate, 7/23/07

[tabasco]

28. Why are you a liar?

You say Obama took more money from oil company "executives."

PROVE IT.

You know better but you made the conscious decision to lie, just like Hillary.

Clinton Camp Circulates Misleading Memo About Obama Oil Company Donations

Claiming that a candidate has "taken... money from" a certain entity or industry is false and misleading.

The above Clinton campaign memo is trying to incorrectly imply that Obama is accepting money from oil and gas-funded PACs and/or lobbyists.

The problem with this is that when they make the claim that "Sen. Obama has received over $160,000 from the oil and gas companies", they are relying on reports submitted to the Federal Election Commission by their opponents, which contain a variety of details on each of their donors. Federal law requires that these donor reports contain the name of each donor's employer.

As a result, when a candidate makes a claim that their opponent "accepts money from" a certain company they are simply saying that certain employees of that company made a donation to their opponent.In other words, it could be a VP of that company, or a Secretary, or a Janitor.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/28/145339/267

[bigtree]

34. and

In addition, two oil industry executives are bundling money for Obama – drumming up contributions from individuals and turning them over to the campaign. George Kaiser, the chairman of Oklahoma-based Kaiser-Francis Oil Co., ranks 68th on the Forbes list of world billionaires. He's listed on Obama's Web site as raising between $50,000 and $100,000 for the candidate. Robert Cavnar is president and CEO of Milagro Exploration LLC, an oil exploration and production company. He's named as a bundler in the same category as Kaiser.


http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_oil_spill.html

[blm]

13. She KNEW IT in 2002 but stayed SILENT because she wanted Bush to stay in office till she ran in 2008

.

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

17. Congressman Stupak has a bill in the senate called the Pump Act, why aren't

the 3 major candidates pushing for this to go thru? It covers this problem, I just don't get why it is stalled and no one talks about it.

[kevinmc]

18. No SH*T Sherlock ...... n/t

[bigtree]

21. not a word from Obama about this, just the criticism of Clinton's plan

Where's Obama's plan for immediate relief?

[wileedog]

32. He doesn't have a plan for "immediate relief"

Because there isn't one. The President, no matter who they are, can't wave a magic wand and gas prices go down.

That's why this is a total pander. There needs to be a long term plan in place.

Stupidly, Clinton actually has a good one, and has chosen to push this crap instead.

[bigtree]

41. so we wait for 'peak oil' to peak? We wait for the electric car to drive demand down?

Problem is, many Americans are conserving to survive.

And, Clinton has a 'long-term plan' :

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=7375


Hillary's long-term, comprehensive plan to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and move America towards energy independence: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/poweringamericasfuture.pdf

[onenote]

83. where is her legislation?

Its beyond stupid to support a gas tax holiday without directly tying it to a longer term legislative proposal. Otherwise, you just hand the repubs what they want. If this is the way she plans to govern, no thanks.

[Historic NY]

19. When were they convinced? Close the Enron loophole !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.closetheenronloophole.com/

[Ichingcarpenter]

20. Enron picked a Clinton Appointee to run its Washington Office

"The hazards of Enron's efforts to connect with both parties were evident last year, when shortly before the November election, the company picked a Clinton administration Treasury official, Linda Robertson, to run its Washington office."
2001




Kenneth Lay played Golf with Bill Clinton regularly.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1225-02.htm

Enron also cultivated relationships with Democrats, however. Lay played golf in Vail, Colo., with President Bill Clinton, and Enron gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Democratic campaign committees and Democrats in the House and Senate, including Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) and Rep. Martin Frost (Tex.), the ranking minority member on the House Rules Committee.

Sen. Schumer helped with deregulation laws.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1225-02.htm

[bigtree]

22. I don't see Hillary's name in there anywhere.

Nice try.

[RichardRay]

24. I am completely convinced she's right about that...

the long markets in oil futures are super-heated and show no signs of cooling down. I doubt there's a barrel of crude unspoken for or an hour of refining time unreserved for the next year and probably more like 3. That is definitely one place to look for the reasons for the price increases. That's on top of the weak dollar, a seriously warped supply chain and the increased unrest in the Niger delta.

BUT, calling for a 'gas tax holiday' doesn't address any of those problems! It just moves the pain a few weeks into the future. If Senator Clinton wants to address the real problems I'd love to hear what she has to say, I certainly don't have any magic bullets, but stop with the chimera she's trying to peddle to buy votes.

[bigtree]

27. she has a comprehensive plan. it's responsible, activist, and progressive

here's Clinton's plan:


Take Immediate Action to Crack Down on Speculation and Market Manipulation in Oil and Gasoline Markets – Oil and gasoline markets contain loopholes for traders, and the markets are inadequately policed by regulators under current law. As a result, there is considerable concern that current market prices reflect the influence of speculators and other forces beyond supply and demand. In early April, an Exxon Mobil executive testified under oath before a House committee that the price of oil should be $50 to $55 per barrel based on supply and demand fundamentals. Marathon Oil's CEO stated last October that: "$100 oil isn't justified by the physical demand in the market…it has to be speculation on the futures market that is fueling this." Hillary would take action to reduce the influence of speculators, crack down on market manipulation in oil markets, and outlaw price gouging by:

* Closing the Enron Loophole – Hillary supports closing the "Enron loophole," which exempts electronic trading of energy commodities by large traders from U.S. government regulation. The loophole has helped lead to the dramatic growth of trading on unregulated electronic energy exchanges, and has made the U.S. energy markets vulnerable to price manipulation and excessive speculation. Even Alan Greenspan has cited "investors and speculators who took on larger net long positions in crude oil futures" as one cause of oil prices. In June 2006, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations issued: "The Role of Market Speculation in Rising Oil and Gas Prices: A Need to Put the Cop Back on the Beat." This report analyzed the degree to which financial speculation in energy markets had contributed to the dramatic increase in energy prices in recent years. The report concluded that "speculation has contributed to rising U.S. energy prices," and endorsed the estimate of various analysts that the influx of speculative investments into crude oil futures accounted for approximately $20 of the then-prevailing crude oil price of approximately $70 per barrel.

* Protect the consumer market from price gouging for petroleum products – Hillary will make it unlawful for any supplier – wholesaler or retailer – to sell crude oil or gasoline at an unconscionably excessive price. Price gougers would face new fines and criminal penalties of up to $1 million and five years in prison and civil penalties could be assessed from $500,000 up to $5 million. Today, there are no federal laws prohibiting price gouging in the oil and gas industry, leaving some states to prohibit these actions. In 2006, the Federal Trade Commission conducted a study of post-Katrina gas price, and while it did not find widespread gouging, it did find 15 examples of pricing at the refining, wholesale, or retail level that fit a definition of price gouging under legislation that Senator Clinton has backed and is proposing to enact now.

* Call on the Federal Trade Commission to Take Action Against Market Manipulation in Wholesale Oil Prices – The energy bill passed last year included new provisions to provide greater transparency and prevent manipulation in wholesale oil markets, and to empower the Federal Trade Commission to investigate and pursue violations. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has chosen not to use this new authority. To ensure that oil companies and traders are not ripping off consumers, Hillary is calling on the FTC to begin investigations using these new powers. In addition, Hillary is calling on the FTC to propose regulations under the new law within 60 days to prevent market manipulation in oil markets. Recent cases show that market manipulation is a concern in oil markets. In 2007, Marathon Oil paid a $1 million fine to the Commodities Futures Trading Commission to settle charges that a subsidiary had tried to manipulate crude oil prices in 2003. Action by the FTC to investigate the current oil market and to develop and enforce new prohibitions on market manipulation would help to minimize foul play in oil and gasoline markets.

Take more aggressive action to pressure OPEC to increase production – OPEC recently reiterated that it will not even consider increasing crude output until September 2008, even though limited supplies are contributing to record oil prices. Hillary believes we should be taking more aggressive action to address OPEC's control over global production levels and hold OPEC accountable for its decisions. President Bush's efforts to pressure OPEC over the past seven years have been inconsistent and unsuccessful. Hillary supports sending a strong signal to OPEC that the era of complacency has ended. Hillary will:

* Use the WTO to Challenge OPEC's Production Quotas – With nine of the thirteen OPEC member countries also being members of the WTO, Hillary believes we should use the tools available at the WTO to address OPEC's refusal to increase production. WTO rules currently prohibit member countries from imposing export quotas. Yet OPEC member countries are actively and explicitly banding together to restrict oil production and affect global prices. Hillary is calling on the President to engage in immediate negotiations with OPEC members and, if no progress is made, file a formal complaint against OPEC countries at the WTO. Filing a complaint at the WTO will send a clear signal to OPEC countries that the U.S. is committed to an open, transparent global oil market. Such a step will give OPEC members an incentive to increase production as well.

* Allow OPEC Production Decisions to Be Challenged Under U.S. Anti-Trust Law – Currently, OPEC countries cannot be challenged under U.S. anti-trust laws, even when they are engaged in coordinated, commercial activity to control the global oil market. Hillary supports amending the Foreign Sovereignty Immunities Act so that the Justice Department can bring suits against OPEC countries in U.S. courts for price fixing. Changing the rules would help hold OPEC countries accountable for their decisions.

Close the oil and gas loopholes and use those resources to provide direct assistance to working families facing skyrocketing energy bills on top of record gas prices. Hillary believes that in addition to imposing a windfall profits tax on large oil companies, Congress should move immediately to end the approximately $7.5 billion per in tax giveaways and subsidies that we continue to provide to oil and gas companies, despite their record profits. These subsidies are in part a result of the 2005 Energy Bill she voted against. She would use those resources this year to provide assistance to lower-income families who are not only being hit at the gas pump, but with skyrocketing energy and food bills as well. This winter, a record number of families were forced to seek assistance through the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) to heat their homes. This included 61,000 Oregon families. Hillary was the only candidate to call for providing emergency energy assistance to these and other struggling families as part of the economic stimulus package. Now, as many states' moratoriums on utility cutoffs expire this spring, millions of families could face the prospect of having their energy shut-off and having to go without electricity, hot water or the ability to keep their homes cool this summer. Hillary will use a portion of the proceeds from closing the oil and gas loopholes to ensure that these hardworking families, who are already struggling to pay for gas at the pump, do not face the extra hardship of having their energy cut off. She will use the remainder of the proceeds to provide immediate aid to lower-income families that are facing high food prices as a result of the record price of oil.

Stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and release oil from it when that becomes necessary – Hillary is calling on President Bush stop taking oil off the market and putting it into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). The SPR is now 97 percent full, which analysts believe is more than adequate. Continuing to fill it at these high prices exacerbates high oil prices and costs taxpayers money. Hillary also believes that the SPR should be more actively managed to enable releases from the SPR to counter market spikes and reduce volatility.

Proposals to Reduce our Dependence on Foreign Oil Over the Long-Term

The plans to address rising gas prices in the short term build on Hillary's bold, long-term, comprehensive plan to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and move America towards energy independence. (www.hillaryclinton.com/poweringamericasfuture.pdf ). Key elements of that plan include:

* Raising fuel efficiency standards (CAFE) to 55 miles per gallon by 2030;
* A $150 billion investment in researching, developing, and deploying renewable and alternative energy;
* Cutting our foreign oil imports by two-thirds by 2030;
* Providing $1.5 billion per year for public transit, an additional $1 billion for intercity rail, and additional funds for congestion reduction, better traffic management and telecommuting;
* Providing tax credits and research and development funding for plug-in-hybrid vehicles, which can get up to 100 mpg; and
* Conserving fuel in the federal fleet. Hillary will call on all federal government agencies to suspend non-essential travel and other activities that use gasoline or diesel fuel, and encourage employees to carpool, telecommute, and use public transportation to reduce fuel use. And she will direct federal employees to reduce maximum speeds to conserve fuel, with exceptions for law enforcement and other emergency services. Under Hillary's plan, the agencies will to report to the White House once a month on their energy use and the impact of conservation efforts.

[RichardRay]

31. Absolutely great ideas, I support almost all of that...

those are all great ideas to help fix the problem we face. It's just that the 'gas tax holiday' idea doesn't follow from any of it.

It's also not clear to me how we'd enforce a judgement against OPEC that came out of a U.S. antitrust action.

[onenote]

84. Then why hasn't she introduced this plan?

The repubs will do everything in their power to block this plan. The only leverage she would have is to tie her "long term" plan to the McCain/Kyl/Lieberman et al short term plan. But giving the repubs their plan now and hoping for something better later on is bad legislative strategy. Very bad.

[Telly Savalas]

29. It seems pretty plausible that big money investors chasing high returns

aren't finding them in equities and real estate so they look elsewhere. Hence we see a bubble in oil and other commodities.

[RichardRay]

36. Unquestionably true...

the energy futures markets are going up like rockets. Until there's some reason to believe that the demand for crude oil and refined petroleum products will be less in the future then the markets will continue to do just that.

Preventing the criminal behavior of outfits like Enron is a 100% good idea, but preventing U.S. traders from investing in legitimate futures markets (not the kind of abusive manipulation that Enron perpetuated) will result in those same trades being done in markets outside of the U.S., with the resulting continued weakening in the U.S.D. and all of the attendant problems that causes.

[frickaline]

25. ty for the informative post

I may not completely agree with her on this but I enjoy having the opportunity to read what she has to say.

[chill_wind]

26. Painful to watch. She's dug herself in. No where to go but deeper.

SD's must be getting a really good eyeful now with every passing day she keeps digging.

[AZBlue]

33. Just like the rest of her campaign: pure fantasy and lots of empty promises.

Say anything anywhere to anyone to win.

[bigtree]

35. sez you!

[wileedog]

37. No, sez 150 world leading economists

Sorry.

[bigtree]

40. I remember when Bush had 100 or so economists supporting his initial tax cut scheme

Who are these 'economists'?

And why are Obama supporters so willing to accept these number crunchers' judgment that the industry can't be moved to reduce prices by challenging their record profits?

[AZBlue]

42. Not one economist has come out in favor of her plan.

Neither has any other legislator (other than McCain).

Not only is it a bad plan, but it assumes (falsely) that oil companies won't just raise prices to cover their additional costs and that Congress and Bush will pass this legislation (which they won't).

She knows all this but is counting on the fact that the people listening to her empty rhetoric won't take the time to think it through.

[bigtree]

43. so the argument is that the WH, Congress, and the oil companies will resist it

good start

[AZBlue]

44. Yes - that makes it empty talk, lies just to get elected.

I mean, if Barack Obama promised every American citizen $1 million upon his election, that would be really nice too, but just as empty.

[bigtree]

47. he panders just the same with his $1000 tax credit.

don't pretend he hasn't made promises he'll be hard-presssed to keep.

[AZBlue]

52. He'll have a better chance getting that passed during his presidency than she

will given that this is May 4th already and it's a summer gas tax break. He's at least got a chance at it - she's got none and she knows that.

[bigtree]

54. plenty of proposals in this campaign from BOTH candidates which have an uphill climb

. . . to enactment.

That's shouldn't stop them from proposing remedies and pressing for them, especially since both are SITTING senators.

[rodeodance]

72. he was late in coming up with that plan. He has not learned from Hillary that people

need immediate relief.

[wileedog]

45. LOL

Holy smokes, one of her biggest water-carriers Krugman even panned this nonsense.

The industry can't be moved to reduce prices by government legislation, short of flat out price restrictions. Which of course would never ever pass COngress and would certainly be vetoed by Bush even if it did.

Furthermore, her plan to tax windfall profits to pay for this have nothing in them to prevent oil companies from simply raising the prices to compensate. Maybe no this month or next, but certainly down the road.

What you don't get is that it is in the oil company's best interests to keep the price of gas in a 'sweet spot'. where it is not so out of whack that no one wants to drive but still at a point where the majority can afford it. This doesn't HURT that, it HELPS it.

Supply and demand is what it is. It doesn't care if oil companies pay the tax or you do, the price of gas will be what it will be.

[bigtree]

48. nothing we can do to force the oil companies to spend the record profits on things they say we need

. . . to bring prices down.

The 'economists' say it's refineries we need. Bush claims that too, but the industry won't build them. They're satisfied with the way things are. Meanwhile we're still subsidizing them and giving them tax preferences and making room for more profit-taking.

You're attitude is a surrender to Bush and his oil cronies and benefactors.


Nice try, Mr. Bush


Sunday, May 4, 2008

The President is frustrated over gasoline prices that have surpassed $4 a gallon in some places, petroleum production that seems destined to remain stagnant without new refineries or drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, the lack of progress developing alternative fuels, what he regards as not nearly enough nuclear power plants and Congress' opposition to a free-trade deal with Colombia.

"It's a sign that the country is losing its confidence, to a certain extent," Mr. Bush says. "There's a lot of concern around the world, by the way, about America's retreat. They're wondering whether or not America is going to be a leader."

The point being, what, that Congress is to blame?

What about Mr. Bush showing some leadership? He is the President, after all, not some cameo star who appears, by videotape, on "Deal or No Deal."

Mr. Bush might begin by playing it much straighter with the facts. Lamenting the absence of any new oil refineries in the past 30 years, for instance, really ought to require pointing out that the oil companies are in no rush to build them. The CEOs of the top five oil companies told Congress last month that they didn't want to build any more refineries. They're hedging their bets instead that the demand for gasoline is going to decline, in part because of an anticipated increase in the use of ethanol and other alternative fuels.


http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=685833&category=OPINION&newsdate=5/4/2008

[wileedog]

55. You're attitude is a surrender to Bush and his oil cronies and benefactors.

Uh, no, its reality.

My attitude is to have a comprehensive LONG TERM energy plan which eventually ups energy efficiencies while developing new alternatives. Which, by the way, as I have already mentioned your OWN candidate has an excellent version of (as does Obama).

However instead of touting this she is pushing a fairy tale. Something politically expedient to help get a few more votes in a time of need. And her own economist supporters are panning her for it.

The Gas Tax Holiday is nothing more than money laundering, not that it will even get passed any time soon. That she has chosen to stump everywhere on this specious issue instead of pushing her own plan which has short term pain vs. long term gain is extremely telling. As is Obama's decision to stick to his principles.

[lastliberalintexas]

58. Why not both?

Although I don't support a lot of Clinton's legislative agenda, I must say that reducing or eliminating the regressive gas tax is a good idea, especially when used in conjunction with the windfall tax she's proposed. If she'd also call for price caps, I'd maybe even become a supporter.

All you people who keep saying "But it won't get past the republicans" make my head explode. So what if it doesn't? You just want to give them a pass in the meantime, rather than forcing their hand in an election year with an electorate that is pissed off about high gas prices? And you and others don't at least want to try to get those kinds of legislation passed, and at least force the republicans to go on record in favor of Big Oil? Can you imagine the ads that the DNC or our candidate could run this fall if we forced the republicans to filibuster windfall profits and price caps legislation? It could be on par with Johnson's Daisy commercial.

But instead, because the other candidate is the one pushing it, you people have to voice opposition in lockstep like good little whatevers. The oil companies thank you for keeping the powder dry yet again.

[wileedog]

59. So explain to me why gas prices wont increase to the tune of

what oil companies are required to pay to the government as part of this 'windfall tax'?

Explain why encouraging more gas consumption in this environment is a good idea.

Explain to me how within a few months prices wont be exactly where they were before this legislations, because it is proven that is what the maket will bear?

And price caps will never, ever pass. I'm not sure I want them to. I don;t want to give a government so heavily influenced by lobbyists the precedent to set prices for their corporate buddies.

[lastliberalintexas]

62. As I said, I really don't care if they pass at this point

I just want republicans on record filibustering tax relief to the middle class and opposing higher taxes on an industry raking in record profits. The Art of War, my friend. This is why republicans win elections even though there are more Democrats.


Also, Econ 101, once a good windfall tax is implemented, it can basically set a price cap by taking any and all profit above a certain level. At that point the corporation has no incentive to raise prices because they don't receive the benefir of the higher price, the government does. If Clinton only wanted a tax holiday, I would think it a bad idea. But I am happy that both of our candidates support a windfall tax. I just think Obama should be asking for more- but, I think even Clinton should be asking for more. Not even her plan goes far enough for me, but it's the best thing being proposed by either of the 3 right now.

[onenote]

85. but she's not linking the two proposals

Her legislative strategy -- if you can call it that -- is to give the repubs the short term gas tax relief bill that they've introduced now and sometime --- unclear when -- seek to enact some longer term solutions.

But that's bad legislative strategy. If you de-link the two, which is what she's done by not proposing any legislation of her own -- you have zero chance of getting as much as you would get by linking them together.

[futureliveshere]

39. I agree with the market manipulation, but reject the rest of the sabre-rattling

As an ex-trader I do know what I am talking about.

[Warren Stupidity]

46. Tax Holiday remains a big fucking gimmick.

I am glad that Clinton finally noticed that the corporate elites are running washington like their own private tax farm, extracting every cent they can from us peasants, but she is Hillary-come-lately to that show. She and her husband Bill have been part of the problem for the last- what does she claim? - oh yeah 35 years. Now that she sees another opportunity to play some issue, she decides to be a populist.

Oh and the problem is 1) peak oil and 2) the dollar lost 40% of its value. The oil exporters are not idiots. They are aware of the value of the dollar and are not going watch their resources get gamed by devaluation.

Clinton has no plan for 'immediate relief' either. The stupid pandering tax holiday will not provide one cent of relief, as has been pointed out by every single economist who has spoken on the matter. Instead it will divert $0.18/gallon from the highway trust fund to Big Oil. Even if magically a windfall profit tax actually gets enacted, still no relief at the pump. Too much demand, not enough cheap oil. The price has nowhere to go but up.

[rodeodance]

69. Obama saying it is gimmick is a phony gimmick by Obama

[stevietheman]

78. Nope. At worst, it's saying the obvious, and abiding by what most...

economists say is smart.

[Warren Stupidity]

89. wow, its the 'so are you' form of neener neener.

Great argument. You have outdone yourself.

[madrchsod]

49. well duh....that`s common knowledge

when traders can buy on 2.5% margin nothing will stop them from running up the price to cover their asses.
until this country starts using less oil the price of oil will continue to rise...

the elimination of the gas tax will do nothing to resolve the problem. i was on I-90 in northern il today going about 60-65 and being passed by big ass suv going 75-80...a toyota tundra v-8 going 75-80 miles an hour and i bet the driver bitchs about the high price of gasoline

[bigtree]

51. It's all the consumers fault? That's not going to pass the smell test.

[dorktv]

56. Yep, she is not totally wrong. There is some interesting stuff on the interwebz that

explain some of it.

Like how with the consolidations there is no incentive for the industry to keep adaquate supplies on hand.

[yewberry]

61. I absolutely agree with that point

but I disagree with the plan that Clinton is proposing.

Yes, there should absolutely be a windfall tax in place for the oil companies--problem is, it's not in place yet, and it will take some doing to get it there. As it is, those federal taxes are used for our already-starving programs for infrastructure, and those programs simply cannot afford to lose a single dollar.

Even if there is a repeal of the federal tax, there is just no reason that oil companies wouldn't be able to raise their prices--the market has been shown to support a higher price, so there is nothing to stop them from charging it. Another windfall.

We all want to see some relief, but we need to be realistic about how to best implement it.

[bigtree]

63. kick

:kick:

[VotesForWomen]

64. is the Pope German? nt

[barack the house]

65. What is not right about the prices is thratenting oil naitons afects price stability. *sigh*.

[Eurobabe]

66. I believe the shitty dollar is driving up the oil prices

Speculation doesn't help either.

[rodeodance]

73. that is true also. Many factors involved.

[rodeodance]

67. People are realizing Hillary will always fight for them and the call

by Obama that it is a gimmick is its self a gimmick by Obama.




.......
“My opponent says, you know, ‘that’s a gimmick’ he doesn’t want to take on the oil companies to make them pay the gas tax, he’d rather you do it, but he attacks me because he doesn’t have any plan for immediate relief,” Clinton said.

[stevietheman]

79. But we don't want a President acting like she'll fight for us... when the result...

is a big thud, you know, like HillaryCare in 1994.

[rodeodance]

70. REC

[Vinca]

71. I actually agree that energy traders are to blame - so what's

that got to do with the pandering "gas tax holiday?" Nothing. Go back to the Senate and legislate new trading laws on vital commodities.

[mmonk]

74. That's true.

Along with, I might add, socialized capitalism (your tax dollars at work) through subsidies and tax breaks and a "war on terrorism" to give them control of other's oil reserves.

[zulchzulu]

75. Even if that was true, does Hillary want to stop free market trading?

Dig deeper into the ditch you made for yourself, Hillary... dig... dig... dig...

:rofl:

[Armstead]

80. She's right on that -- I just wish The Clintons weren't so late to the issue

The Clintons help to set the deregulated "free market" environment that allowed the markets to become so skewed.

Her coming out as a fighter against it now seems like she's late to the party.

[stevietheman]

81. Hillary may want to outlaw energy trading, but she's wrong.

Speculation in oil markets is based on the overall level of production and the potential for disruptions in the supply, such as war in oil-rich countries.

Energy trading gave us $1.00/gallon gas in previous years, and it gives us the much higher price we see today.

If Hillary were serious about this issue, she would talk about increasing production, stabilizing Iraq, looking at alternative fuels, and enhancing conservation.

[onenote]

82. $70 "average" savings assumes "average" driver gets 20 mg and drives 26,000 miles/year

She's sniffing glue on this.

And, by the way, where is her legislative proposal? Or is she really just supporting the McCain/Kyl/Lieberman/Warner/Chambliss/Wicker/Martinez/Graham/Wicker proposal which has been introduced and which doesn't provide for any windfall profits tax or any longterm solution at all?

[Ian_rd]

88. Haha! "Obama wants you to pay that 30 bucks! I will fight for you to keep it!"

What an inspiring oratory.