GOP Turns Up Heat After Obama’s Keystone ‘Double Back Flip’
On the Senate floor in the morning, four lawmakers engaged in a colloquy on pump prices and the Keystone pipeline: Hutchison and Sens. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), John Hoeven (R-N.D.) and Rob Portman (R-Ohio).
Portman noted that gas prices have risen 95 percent over the past three years, with a 17 percent drop in oil production in the Gulf of Mexico from 2010 to 2011.
“We’re not seeing an increase, we’re seeing a decrease” in production, Portman said. “We’ve got to produce it here at home to get away from the OPEC cartel.”
“What the president does favor is the Saudis increasing oil production, and increased use of solar, wind and algae here at home,” Hutchison said. “Mr. President, does that really substitute for an energy policy? Is that something that Americans can count on to increase the supply of energy in our country?”
Blunt referenced a 2008 quote by Obama’s energy secretary, Steven Chu, to the Wall Street Journal. “Somehow,” Chu said, “we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe,” where now gas averages $9 a gallon in Italy.
“We’re not Europe,” Blunt said. “We’re a big country that is dependent on transportation.”
While “every other country in the world” looks at its natural resources as economic opportunity, though, Blunt charged, the U.S. looks at its energy resources as an “environmental hazard.”
Hoeven, through whose state the completed first phase of Keystone enters the U.S., pulled out charts showing that on Obama’s Inauguration Day the average price of gas per gallon was $1.85. His chart made by staffers Monday was already out of date on Tuesday’s gasoline average, though, by the time he propped it up on the Senate floor: $3.70 a gallon, it read, though the price had jumped two cents.
“The projection is that by Memorial Day gas will be $4 a gallon and by later this summer it could be as much as $5 dollars a gallon,” Hoeven said.
To the White House’s “all-of-the-above” strategy,” he said, “I agree with that. The problem is that the administration is saying that but they’re not doing it. They’re actually blocking oil and gas development in our country.”
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) criticized the GOP senators’ colloquy on a day that the chamber was supposed to be taking up a highway bill — on which one of the more than 150 amendments filed is a Republican push for Keystone.
“These amendments have absolutely nothing to do with the transportation policies of this country,” Cardin said.
Another is a Blunt amendment on religious freedom and the HHS contraceptive mandate. Blunt later tweeted that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will allow a vote on his amendment Thursday.
In the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ranking Member Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) urged Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was appearing before the panel to discuss Obama’s budget request, to push for Keystone approval on national security grounds.
“Given the intensity of multiple crises in the Middle East and the certainty that threats to oil supplies are not limited to the current crisis with Iran, it is incomprehensible that the President has rejected approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline,” Lugar said. “Few national security decisions of the past several decades are more clearly at odds with core U.S. interests than the president’s pipeline delay.”
Lugar added that the delay of the project “sends a signal to markets and our overseas enemies that we are not serious about ending U.S. energy dependence.”
Senators at the Republican Policy Committee lunch received a handout detailing the harm that could result from “a transparent election-year attempt to look like he is doing something about skyrocketing gasoline prices” by tapping into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
“President Obama has still not refilled the 30.64 million barrels of crude oil he plundered from the SPR last year,” the memo states. “If the President were to release another 30 million barrels this year, he would leave the SPR with 665.9 million barrels of emergency oil reserves, a significant reduction from the 727 million barrels the critical reserve contained when he took office.”
On the House side, the Republican Study Committee released an infographic noting that Obama had approved 23 percent of drilling plans so far this year, down from the 73 percent historical average rate for such plans’ approval.
And a number Republicans kept drilling home all day: 830,000, the daily capacity of barrels that could be carried by Keystone XL, or 34 million gallons per day.
“How could the president say that won’t lower the price?” Hutchison said. “How could he say that?”
Sounds like a bunch of background noise to me.
Don’t they(Dems) recognize how much tax money they would collect if we took the billions (hundreds?) we spend on foreign oil and used it to purchase oil and fuel under US ground?
Don’t they know that as soon as the world sees America start producing more oil, the price will drop like a stone (IMH)?
The Administration is not full of idiots or bumbles, they know exactly what they are doing and enjoy watching everyone guess their intent. They must create a crisis (in this case an economic crisis) so they can be forced to implement the policies they want to protect you from yourselves. They HOPE to create economic collapse so they can CHANGE or fundamentally transform our country to the Progressive dream of Socialist society and finally join the global family, where they feel they will finally be free at last. Our country will finally be able to enjoy what all the other Socialist societies have historically provided. Within the first 2 years, they will be able to solve employment problems, healthcare overcrowding, because if we do like EVERY other Socialist society has done we should see around 20 to 30 million Americans starve to death before the central planners fix all the supply chain issues. On the upside we solved the housing shortage, job shortage and at the same time saved the planet because of all the CO2 that will not be produced by 30 million less breathing Americans.
I’m not sure they’re even as altruistic as wanting to transform the US to a socialist state with no capability of unilateral action, a common thought among the limousine liberal and faculty lounge communist crowd. I’m reasonably certain this lot just wants to loot the US.
Debt is their ally dependence their goal, without both socialists and socialism cannot function.
Our “Scary” President
Less than four months into the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama, Lou Pritchett, a former vice president of Procter and Gamble, posted an open letter to Obama on his blog which began, “Dear President Obama: You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.”
The original missive had been sent by the legendary corporate legend, noted public speaker, author, and teacher to the New York Times which chose not to print it although less distinguished publications did. It was subsequently accorded the seal of accuracy by leftist-leaning Snopes.com and only now has gone viral.
In retrospect, it’s understandable why the Times, a principal MSM Obama lackey, wanted no part of Pritchett’s letter but Obamians predictably came out in force to condemn Pritchett for his stupidity, ignorance, inaccuracies, and venom for daring to express his viewpoints on their Anointed One.
The letter reflects the author’s early and insightful realization that America was in serious trouble with our new leader and commander-in-chief.
Just months into Obama’s tenure, Pritchett noted Obama was unfit for office by virtue of his murky background, lack of experience and qualifications, radical past associations, arrogant sense of omnipotence and omniscience, his demonization of all opponents, and his extreme spending and health care plans which have since come to fruition.
In what is easily the scariest feature of Pritchett’s alarm was citing Obama’s mainstream media for its failure to vet candidate Obama as it had always done with previous presidential hopefuls and, since his election, has given him a free ride, never questioning his motives, never investigating his claims, never doubting his sincerity.
The remainder of Lou Pritchett’s letter follows: (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=15150.)
Thanks for the reference. Obama scares me too but not so much for what he is but for what his re-election would say about the American people. It would signify a triumph of immaturity and a rejection of democratic principles. As for what we could expect, he is already practiced in ignoring Congress. Suppose in a second term he decides to replace the democratic government of Honduras with Zelaya by force? He did not answer to Congress with Libya and got away with it. He is clearly delusional as well as a pathological narcissist. His behavior is not predictable.
We would have been better off electing Benedict Arnold president, he only wanted money.
One good thing, Pritchett’s letter about the democrats always supporting his spending is no longer true. Even they are rejecting his proposed budgets.
I agree with your post about the electorate. Even some European fellow said the saime thing – that America could survive an Obama presidency. What it can’t survive is an electorate that votes for an Obama.
One thing should be addressed before we throw in the towel on how stupid our people are and that is how good the democrats are at stealing races. If we could eliminate the fraud we’d have a better idea at how dumb our people are.
Another thing to remember is that only about 53% of the public eligible to vote do so. That means 47% of our people can’t be bothered. Depending on who these people are (welfare rats or responsible folks who have given up hope) would be another indication of where we’re at as a people.
We only know Obama by what he has done to this country and the little bit that has been spooned to us by his propaganda organs of the MSM. His apparacheki in the New York Times and Washington Post and others of the MSM suppressed all information about Obama’s past communist associations and continues to do so, the once ‘free’ press is now a thing of the Democrat ‘Green’ Party which is economically killing this country on purpose. Sun Tzu said that there are many ways to fight a war but one of the best is through subversion from within, its what we are seeing now happen in the United States with the suppression of all viable energy sources for windmills [which kill bird in the millions] and solar which doesn’t work at night when peak consumption is needed. Obama just gave the Chinese Communists the Canadian oil by rejecting the pipe line, just what would the Chinese have paid for that sure supply of oil energy for the next 50 years while making this country dependent on OPEC oil until were broke and 3rd world. The ‘greens’ and their associates have to be in the pay of OPEC for what they are doing to their own country; Benidick Arnold would have done the same.
This isn’t “promote energy production by ‘all available means.’” It is really crush the U.S. economy and psyche by every available means. Lying? Its just the usual taqqiya and tawriya. Deception is not lying if you work for the 0 administration. The MSM, the crony capitalist crowd, and the National Socialist Democratic Action Party continue to plague the American people. You can count on them to continue until the 0 is re-elected or the NSDAP is crushed. Your choice, America.
“He, being honest with the American people, makes clear that there are no silver bullets here, there are no quick fixes,” press secretary Jay Carney said of Obama’s “all-of-the-above” long-term energy plan.
Obama’s new “malaise” speech, only this one is about energy. There are so many things we could be doing to increase oil/energy production in this country and this president is not doing ANY of it. From drilling in Alaska to drilling off more of our coasts, we could be a lot better off when it comes to energy production. But we still have a president who is tied to his far-left base that would rather see us shivering in our homes burning our furniture rather than drilling for more oil. Shameful.
This article outlines Newt’s response to Obama’s “ain’t got no magic bullet” speech and outlines his proposals for bringing down the price at the pump. I urge everyone to read it.
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/29/obama-loses-his-first-debate/
If we want to drop energy prices, then we need to avoid repeating Jimmy Carter’s mistakes!
If we do not encourage Japan and Germany to re-start their currently idled nuclear power plants, both of those economies will replay the Washington Public Power Supply System (WHOOPS) debacle.
If they change course, they will reduce the combined demand for oil to generate power and heating oil to heat homes due to unusually low temperatures in Europe. Reduced demand equals reduced prices!
Supply and demand, how simple does it get???
I would be very interested in seeing a compiled list (chronological) of all the actions taken by Democrats in the past ten (or so) years blocking energy exploration and development under the excuse that allowing the development won’t cause an immediate change in gas prices. Although the statement may be true in the short term, in the long term the policy clearly reduces energy supplies and our independence. Such an observation could be used as a counter argument to the Carney-style points (i.e., ‘if you hadn’t blocked the xxx initiative yy years ago, we’d have more oil today’).
The Democrats favorite excuse to deny drilling has been “it takes too long (ten years) to develop new wells and more drilling will have no impact on current gas prices”. But notice how fast Obama took credit for today’s increased production levels, even though he’s been in power only 3 years. Obviously today’s increased oil production started way before he took office.
Way behind Jar:
Debby Wassermann Schultz (sp?) now says 20 years.
The goal of this President is to force Americans into habits and behaviours that they reject. Buy a Chevy Volt, and additional fire insurance. Buy mercury filled lightbulbs, and a hasmet suit. Big brother knows best. Bullshit.
“‘…there are no silver bullets here, there are no quick fixes,’ press secretary Jay Carney said”
And yet, that is all we’ve heard proposed or enacted by Obama for three years – magic quick-fixes.
In the summer of 2008 when gas prices topped $4. a gallon, President Bush announced that he was going to repeal the executive order moratorium on off-shore oil exploration in US waters. Candidate Obama at that time claimed that lifting the ban “would not have any effect on gas prices for at least 10 years.” Three months later, gas priced had been reduced to half. That is the Obama administration’s record on energy….DEAD WRONG!
“If we want to drop energy prices, then we need to avoid repeating Jimmy Carter’s mistakes!”
One of Carter’s greatest mistakes was locking up most of the federal land in Alaska in so-called refuges, the best known of which is the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). I assure you that if you flew over the Arctic Coast of Alaska you would not be able to tell the difference between the State and Indian lands around ANWR and ANWR itself; there is nothing unique or special about it and it doesn’t host any more or less “wildlife” than the area all around it. “Refuge” is just a catchall word for all the federal lands retained in Alaska that weren’t designated wilderness, national parks, or national forests. While those lands designated as refuges are on the plain language of the Carter Era Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) available for development, they have been treated as wilderness, just as have the national forests in Alaska.
The TransAlaska Pipeline is running at a quarter to a third of its capacity these days due to declining production in the legacy fields around Prudhoe Bay and the lack of development of new fields, the most promising of which are in ANWR and to the west of Prudhoe Bay, National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska, a long known province, one of Alaska’s first, which was first designated the Naval Petroleum Reserve Alaska (NPRA in either case). The latter rich province was specifically set aside for oil development for the then exclusively oil-fired Pacific Fleet way back in the Harding Administration, yet today it can’t be developed because of “environmental” concerns.
There are significant provinces on State of Alaska and Indian lands. While you can’t quite tell the US to put its rules where the sun doesn’t shine, it is much easier to develop a province on State or Indian land, there is virtually no private land in Alaska other than in and around the white majority towns and cities, and unfortunately Alaska’s oil wealth has created quite the NIMBY class here as well, so development that you can see if very difficult here as well. The oil under State and Indian lands is expensive to develope and is only economic at high prices. Unfortunately, thanks to Palin’s ACES tax regime, Alaska’s taxes at high oil prices are all but confiscatory, so there has been almost no new development in Alaska since the ACES regime was enacted in ’07, IIRC. The Parnell Administration and Republicans in the Legislature are attempting to revise the State tax regime but are being thwarted by the Democrats in the Senate who led its passage under Palin. Hopefully this can be sorted out by the end of the Legislative session in April, but it takes a long time to bring rigs and other equipment needed for exploration and development in Arctic Alaska. There is also a permit in place for Shell to explore offshore off Northwest Alaska, but they would have to find an elephant field to make that province economic.
Ummm. ANWR was created by Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, not Jimmy Carter.
According to the government ANWR website, ANWR was created in 1960 and expanded in 1980. It didn’t say how much it was expanded. Digging a little more, I found this:
ANWR lies in the top northeast corner of Alaska. The entire refuge lies north of the Arctic Circle and 1,300 miles south of the North Pole. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was originally formed on Dec. 6, 1960 with an original size of 8.9 million acres. In 1980 and 1983 ANWR was added to for a current size of 19.6 million acres comprising of three distinct legal areas of use within its borders. Despite its name ANWR is NOT entirely “refuge”. The southern part of ANWR taking 9.16 million acres is classified as officially “Refuge”. The central 8 million acres of ANWR is classified as “Wilderness”. The uses and definitions of these terms was legally stated in the Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. 1131-1136, 78 Stat. 890 — Public Law 88-577).
ANWR and its current land designations are products of Jimmy Carter’s ANILCA legislation. It was Sen. Stevens’ near death experience. Sen. Mike Gravel (D-Alaska), though a Democrat was opposed to ANILCA. Stevens with his eye on being Minority Leader in the next Congress was playing get along, go along and supported it, telling us at home that it was the best deal we’d get, so we’d best accept it. Gravel was up for re-election in ’80 and it was a major issue in the campaign (full disclosure: I was working for AFL-CIO/COPE in those young and foolish days and was assigned to Gravel’s campaign) It was dramatic enough that Commonwealth North, Gov. Hickel’s public interest group composed of about everybody who’s anybody in Alaska, arranged for Stevens to have a satellite feed from his DC office to the Captain Cook Hotel’s main ballroom (also owned by Hickel back then) so that he and Gravel could debate it with every camera and reporter and just about everybody who was anybody in Alaska there.
Stevens stuck to his “it’s the best we can get” position. Gravel said point blank: Carter’s going to lose and we’ll do better with Reagan. Gravel wasn’t always crazy. Back in those days business and labor could still work together on some things. I worked with some of the Commonwealth North types and organized labor and most of Alaska’s business community put up the money for double truck ads in just about every major market newspaper in the Country. Stevens had some cufflinks made when Hickel appointed him to the Senate. They were triangular and engraved around the sides was, “To Hell With the Politics: Do What’s Right For Alaska.” We put a blowup of the cufflinks in the middle of two pages. Accross the top we put: “Senator Stevens Please Come Home.” At the bottom was a list of everybody who contributed, a list Stevens couldn’t ignore. Somewhere in my “I Love Me” box I still have the screaming telegram I got from him the morning it appeared in the WaPo (yeah, some of you might have noticed the World has changed a bit since ’80). Anyway, Gravel lost the Primary to Clark Gruening, scion of Fmr. Senator Ernest Gruening’s clan, who in turn lost the general to Frank Murkowski. (somewhere along the way I became a Republican and finished my government career as a Murkowski appointee when he was Governor). The Stevens view prevailed and ANILCA passed. Locking up ANWR is the only bad effect that most of you have ever heard of but it was also terrible legislation on many levels and subsection D2 on Alaska Native “subsistence rights” has given the US jurisdiction in our State over all sorts of things the US has no business involving itself in. Anytime Stevens got out of line, all anybody had to do was remind him of ANILCA and he came to heel. In lots of ways I think his near-death, politically, experience with ANILCA made him into the driven “porker” that he became; he knew that he’d really, really, really screwed up and the State has suffered for it ever since.
So, SteveB, stick to Colorado; I know my way around Alaska history.
to Art Chance and all can any of the federal ‘refuges’ be resended and how would that be accomplished to return this Government confiscation back to the people?
They were created by act of Congress so they could be undone with one. It isn’t necessary to undo them though, you just need 50% +1 of the Congress and a President that won’t veto it to authorize exploration and development. We had it back in the ’90s and Clinton vetoed it. Realistically, in today’s World of ignorance and superstition, you’d need both bodies and the President to be Republican and 5 votes on the USSC to do it. Even if you passed a bill, the communists would sue and you’d have to hope you had 5 on the SC.
Comrade Obama has allowed Shell a permit for offshore exploration off Northwest Alaska. Even people here have grave misgivings about drilling rigs out in the Arctic icepack. (That said, I have a shot at being Captain of a lighterage vessel serving the exploration vessels this summer so I’m all in for the project.) Anyway, Alaska can’t get too enthusiastic about it because the money will all go to the US rather than us. Under the Statehood Act, we’re supposed to get 90% of the revenue from offshore development, but they only way we’d get it would be a coup d’etat, so we don’t much care other than personal interest for anybody working on it; money’s just gonna’ go to recharge the EBTs and breed more Democrats, but the communists in California will have a little cheaper gas for their Escalades. That said, it will be some damned expensive oil. There is no infrastructure out there, so even if they find another Prudhoe Bay sized elephant, it’ll be one Hell of a job to bring that oil to any place it can be used. Just go to your Google Maps and look for the Chukchi Sea; it’s a long way from anywhere.
Carney is a stooge. Obama has done everything he can to slow or cease energy production in this country, with the exception of his green energy policies. Keystone has been studies so long I am surprised it hasn’t grown a beard as long as the proposed pipeline. He has demonstrated his dedication to the betterment of America, as long as we depend on OPEC, Brazil, China and Africa for our resources he is happy.
There may be no “silver bullet”, but if the congress would get off its posteriors and do something positive it would help.
Everytime we come up against an oil problem all we hear is political rheotric. This problem has existed since the first oil crisis in the 60″s, yet as soon as the “crisis” was over nothing else was heard or done. Yet, the irony of the situation is that every “crisis” is man made.
“These amendments have absolutely nothing to do with the transportation policies of this country,” Cardin said.
Sure…because the cost of fuel has nothing to do with transportation policy nor could it have any effect on the mode of transportation currently being pursued by one Obama’s largest supporters(trains anyone?)
“GOP turns up the heat” – that is seriously delusional statement. The GOP has done nothing but postulate. Turning up the heat implies action; not rhetoric.
This bunch of GOP bozos couldn’t turn up the heat on a gas oven, never mind anything reeeeeeely important.
Given their limited reach (power) what is it you expect the gop to do? They don’t have the votes in the senate to even slow something down or bring something up for a vote. The House can send up bill after bill after bill and if Reid tables them all (which is what he’s been doing for the last year) there’s not a lot they can do about it.
Then the media goes ahead a smears the gop as the obstructionists. Lousy system we have here.
Someone needs to stand up to the Republicans and force them to explain why they support FOREIGN corporate oil interests building a pipeline to ship THEIR oil to be refined in a Foreign Trade Zone where it will pay NO U.S. TAXES and then be shipped to foreign markets. Obama and the Democrats definitely are doing a pathetic job of making that case.
We get maybe some trans-shipping taxes and maybe additional refinery jobs (probably a push when refinery jobs are lost in the midwest), some temporary construction jobs with some indirect support jobs, and a few hundred permanent pipeline operation jobs. But fuel costs will definitely rise in the midwest where Canadian oil is currently sent by pipeline for refining for U.S. markets and we will have to buy the refined Canadian oil at world market prices which will definitely be more than we’re paying now. Where is the advantage for the U.S. other than buying the oil from a neighbor instead of international oil bandits. If we want increased oil security then we should double the capacity in the midwest, NOT ship the oil to Texas and then let a foreign corporation sell it to the world market.
Meanwhile, the U.S. environmentt will bear the cost of the inevitable pipeline spills for the benefit of those 5,000 construction jobs (U.S. State Department). But, who will pay that cost? The world’s dirtiest and most abrasive oil will be sent through pipes made in China across hundreds of miles of fragile ecosystems. Have any of you looked into what happened on the Kalamazoo River spill? Do you have any idea how different and difficult the clean up was because it was tar-sands oil?
Once again, corporate interests privatize the profit while they socialize the costs. But, hey, what else is new,that’s bedrock Republican policy. Let all you nationalistic conservatives justify how private FOREIGN interests can take American land by imminent domain, put our environment at risk, and then get the gold while the American taxpayer and landowners gets the shaft.
these guys actually talking about honesty and truth to the American people?
mr. transparency ran for office promising one thing, while doing exactly the opposite the next day (hide all his records). the truth is a stranger to him, probably always has been. sinister alinski tactics is where he lives, in his ‘wheel house’ as they say; but, it only works on certain types of people.
experiment: pick a story for the web about Oenema, go to the source, no matter what kind of sickly slime the writer tries to spin, read the comments. 9 out of 10 times the vast majority will be treating Oenema like the %^&* he is. this makes me leary of the polls. imho, dem’s want everybody to think he is close in the polls so when the cheating on election day is questioned, it can be tossed off as more racism, or whatever. “it was always a close race” may well be the words of doom for real Americans. or, maybe to try to give legitimacy to fraud when lawsuits are brought. he’s throwing a hail mary for the end zone. we need to figure out just how many receivers he has downfield already.
I’ve been hearing for over 40 years that it would take at least 10 years for any increase in exploration, extraction, production, refinement, etc to show up at the gas pump. A, that’s patently absurd as has been demonstrated and B, what if we had started the whole process some 40 years ago? We’d probably be sitting fat, happy and independent by now, that’s what.
Chuckles Schumer thinks the answer is to persuade the Saudis to increase production. I guess increased US production wouldn’t affect prices but increased Saudi production will? Funny, that.
It’s a good letter from Boehner. Too bad no one will hear about it.
Excellent!!!!!!!!!
“While “every other country in the world” looks at its natural resources as economic opportunity, though, Blunt charged, the U.S. looks at its energy resources as an “environmental hazard.””
Absolutely. Consider that just a scant 2-3 years ago, large gas reserves were discovered in the eastern Mediterranean, just off the coast of Israel. As Canada has done with its reserves, Israel is intent on exploiting those reserves. (The fact that the gas line from Egypt has been blown up a dozen times in the last year has only added to the urgency.) Noble Energy, a US company, is already actively drilling and the first fields should be delivering gas next Year. Israel is also cooperating with Cyprus on its own gas discoveries, and both are talking with Greece as a transit point into Europe.
THAT is how a country that’s serious about exploiting its resources behaves. The US under this Administration, in contrast, puts up one stumbling block, one excuse, after another.