Is anyone else surprised that GW is giving the oil co the go ahead to drill for oil off our coast.?

Question

Will this action help us by paying less for gas or will it mean that the oil companies continue to line their pockets

Answer 1

Investors in oil companies are celebrating, but the reality is that it will make very little difference in the price of a gallon of gasoline. Query 'peak oil' for more information about why oil prices are accelerating.

We need a leader who will provide direction and incentives to conserve and become more efficient. Sadly, most Republican and Democratic leaders have been bought by big business and must stay with that program to stay in office.

I suggest that you look to your local Green party for some leadership. As you might expect, Mr. Ralph Nader has articulated some of the most clear and insightful policy statements on this topic:

http://www.votenader.org/issues/energy/

Failure to anticipate and prepare for the inevitable increase in energy prices has been the downfall of Detroit and American industry. Other countries have been far more decisive at guiding their countries toward a green future. In the United States, media and the government have encouraged short-sighted inefficiency and waste. It's short-term profits over the well being of the people.

Answer 2

Yell I am

.. .. ..

And the only problem is

.. . ..

Will the two houses give the go drill OK

.. .. ..

You know there has to be a couple of save the beaches in both of them

.. .. ..

They are the ones who don't really care how much a gallon of gas cost cause when you got a  monthly income of $10,000 besides their government check

... .. ..

They ain't sweating all that much at the pump

Filling up their Hummer, "full size version" not the "H" series

.. . ..

Answer 3

GW is ignoring the timeline on drilling, and the fact it won't reduce the cost of gas.

When it comes to finding a sensible solution to the related crises of skyrocketing fossil fuel costs and global climate change, leaders in Washington are ignoring plain facts. Instead of serving the public interest, leaders in Washington, are no help at all.

Answer 4

Neither the oil companies, not the president control the price of oil. Like it or not, oil drives the world economy, and there is no true substitute for it at present.

The president has done the right thing in asking for congressional approval. He now should use the bully pulpit to bypass the congress and make a special plea to the American public, by televised speech. Our energy concerns must be addressed by the president, and the time for this is now.

Bush could do very well with the American public if he were to do this.

Answer 5

Surprised, no!  Thankful, YES!  It's about time the President of our country takes the lead.  Clinton could have done this eight years ago and we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now!  All we hear is, 'Our children!  Our children!"  Well, here's someone willing to help our children!!  Get behind him and get the job done!

Answer 6

I think Congress still have to act on it to make it meaningful. Theres no guarantee they'll be drilling more because of this just yet.

Answer 7

No, I'm not surprised.

At this point, though, his action is essentially meaningless.  The power to actually allow or ban such things rests with Congress, not with him, and it's fairly clear they have no intention of allowing it, as I'm sure President Bush was aware when he rescinded the order.

That essentially makes this a publicity stunt and a power play.  If Congress says no, then he can say "it's not ME... I tried to fix it, but they wouldn't let me!" and lay the blame at their feet.

If Congress says yes and it actually solves a problem, he can take sole credit for it and say he was leading the way.

If Congress says yes and it doesn't solve anything, the blame still gets laid at their feet.  By the time the storm blows in, he's out of office and retired, and we don't pass the buck down from one President to another the same way we do to Congress.  

The only thing that happens to him is he can still say he was trying to lead the way and faced with a difficult situation that called for some hard decisions and that was the best one he could make at the time, but that Congress should have done its research and known better.

It's a semi-clever political move, I'll give him that.  However, it isn't intended to solve anything, just put his political enemies in a position where they have to look like the bad guys no matter what they do in response.

If he was truly interested in alleviating supply concerns and keeping oil flowing to the consumers, he wouldn't have picked the time people were worried there wasn't enough oil to increase the amount he diverted away from consumers and into reserves he refuses to allow anyone access to.

Follow the logic...

"I'm not sure we have enough oil."

"All right, then I'll just take some more of it away and put it where no one can touch it."

"Now we definitely don't have enough oil!"

"Oh no!  Did you see?  Now we definitely don't have enough oil!  We're going to have to drill to get more!"

"What about all that oil you took and put over there?  Can we have some of that back?"

"No!  That's only there in case of a shortage!"

"Yeah, but we're in the middle of a shortage.  What's the point of keeping oil on hand in case we run short if we're not allowed to use it when we run short?"

"You can't touch it!  Now get drilling!  Maybe you haven't noticed, but we're in the middle of an oil shortage!"

I'm sorry, but these aren't the actions of a man truly worried about the fact there isn't an adequate supply of oil in the country.  He's got enough to relieve pressure on the market for quite some time (over two years if he releases a million barrels a day without putting any back, in fact... and how much has his administration been asking OPEC to increase production by in the short term?).

The terms under which he's authorized to begin a drawdown of the oil reserves are almost word for word the terms he's using to describe the current situation.  He's simply ignoring the fact the laws mandating the amount of oil we hold in reserve specifically allow him to disregard them and use the SPR as he sees fit if he feels there is an energy crisis which will cause "a major adverse impact on national safety or the national economy".

The current situation is exactly the sort of thing the SPR was created to help us pull ourselves through.  He's adamantly refusing to use it that way, though.

It certainly wouldn't be a permanent solution, but it would give everyone some breathing room and time to work on a more viable solution to the problem.

The fact he's withholding it and pressuring lawmakers into giving him something else he's wanted since before this crisis began tells me what's motivating his current actions isn't concern for the welfare of the American people.

Answer 8

The oil companies will continue to line their pockets. Once the world gets used to a higher price, no matter what happens the price does not go down again.