What do you think of Ron Paul's bill to reduce gas prices?

Question

"At present, the reality is that our economy is dependent on oil and will remain so for at least another generation. Thus our short-term goal should be to do what we can to ensure that the cost of both producing oil and refining it into gasoline is contained, so that gasoline remains affordable to American consumers. Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) has introduced new legislation, H.R. 2415, the Affordable Gas Price Act. The bill states its own purpose: “To reduce the price of gasoline by allowing for offshore drilling, eliminating Federal obstacles to constructing refineries and providing incentives for investment in refineries, suspending Federal fuel taxes when gasoline prices reach a benchmark amount, and promoting free trade.”

With this last, Dr. Paul means real free trade, not the managed, pseudo-free trade of NAFTA, CAFTA, and the like. The point is, the federal government has proven to be the biggest obstacle to our achieving energy independence and thus containing the alarming escalation of gas prices. Environmental groups may run a close second, but their influence is felt through legislation passed by Congress. What Congress has done in the past, it must now undo. H.R. 2415 would go at least part of the distance if it can obtain cosponsorship and support so that it will receive committee action and eventually come to the floor for a House vote.

Answer 1

it sure is a surprise that CHINA is drilling oil in cuba's waters, but it's actually so close to FL waters as to be our oil!!!  why isn't that all over the news???

i read in the news today that both mccain and obama recently stated  that we should stop using so much CORN, a food, to make into ethanol, but i do not hear them proposing how to replace it, when the answer is easy:  pond scum and sugar from sugar beets both make excellent ethanol, better than that made from the FOOD, corn, but ethanol is actually only a bandaid to a huge gash right at an artery.  it needs some serious surgery.

we have a democratic congress, full of bleeding heart liberals that side with the enviros, who, i saw by floating a question here about what their agenda really IS, are solely interested in the agenda of protecting the environment.  but i doubt that many of them read up on technological advancements that now would enable us to drill for our own oil and refine it much more safely and cleanly than in the past because they are too busy attending enviro political meetings and reading the sierra club magazine.  

i also have read that with both our coasts combined, some of our land, and the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), there is 200 years' worth of oil that goes untapped by us--200 years' of our own oil for our own citizens for our own country.  (i don't believe in exporting it, btw--why did the middle east cut back on its exports?).  

we need more than one generation to develop alternatives to crude oil.  do you know how many things, parts of our whole society, run on crude?  i just floated a question about what would we do tomorrow if there were no crude and only got a couple of answers.  the reason that we need more time than 20 years is due to how the idiots in the government allot money for projects that have no immediate need to us, for example, space exploration.  our planet is at risk here.  oh, do we really need to set up mars now to live on it after we destroy our mother, the earth, where we evolved?  but it is a BIG DEAL to government to continue wasting money.  

i don't think the enviros, most of whom are wealthy, understand the problem:  the middle east hates us for the many years that our noses have been in their business and trying to bring the middle east around to living in a culture like that of our own, which, in my opinion, shows signs of degradation much like that of all the ancient civilizations that were rich, at their end, for example, egypt, rome, and greece.  and so, there is the "blowback" from the middle east in the form of terrorism.  that should tell you why we should get our a**es out of dodge, i mean, over there.  as far as i am concerned, we should raise the prices of our food and other exports to them, if they want them, to be equivalent to what they charge us for their barrels of crude.  

i also don't think the enviros think much of the pollution created in the orient, where they, those that are CEOs of american corporations, send our materials to be made into objects that we are supposed to buy with our ever deflated dollar, as well as the fact that the outsourcing makes our own people lose their jobs.  

i read the article you so kindly provided in the link, DAR, but i must differ with it in one respect:  no, nuclear waste is not recyclable!  if it were, why do we send containers of it on trains to be put deep into the side of a mountain in NV?  so, using nuclear power to transform coal into liquid fuel is not yet refined enough to do it without danger.  and i am not a proponent of nuclear plants anyhow.  there are better ways to get power, but the technology is just now advancing, yet, the government does not provide incentives to make it better.  

as to the taxes added to each gallon of gas:  why do you see bridges and dams collapse, why do you see roads that are in such poor repair?  i thought the gas taxes are supposed to pay to keep the roads and bridges that roads run on up to par!  ha!  no way.  so, where do all those gasoline taxes go?  probably to cover up the true cost of the deficit, a deep abyss made deeper whenever the fed prints up more fiat dollars, as it just has.  

yep, i am 100% behind ron paul's bill, but i wonder how he will convince our bought-by-big-industry congressional members, who are dumb on top of it and who would rather listen to hollywood enviros than put time in, reading true facts.  they only work two days a week, after all.  even midas could not buy one more minute for a day or a week.  so i consider our representatives largely not acting in our best interest, and that they should be kicked right out of office, replaced with people that prove that they care about US, we the people of the united states of america.  

NAFTA and CAFTA are just not going to work, so why bother with those plans?  

it's time we pay attention to the people of the united states of america.  i do wonder this:

what amount of money per gallon of gas will be affordable to we, the people?  would drilling and refining our own oil (good, that will produce jobs) LOWER the price at the pump?  and, just what does ron paul mean when he states that federal fuel taxes should be suspended when gas prices reach a "benchmark?"  what is the benchmark?  is it $10/gl., is it $15/gl., is it $2.50/gl.?  if the gas taxes are suspended (which they should be, since they don't do anything to rebuild our infrastructure of highways...), then how will the roadways be repaired and built?  that would be nice:  i'd love to see some highways that would criss-cross those that we already have, to make travel easier and more cost effective.  

anyway, i am for it because i am for america.  this is my country, but so often i simply don't want to live here anymore, it is so full of BS.  i wish ron paul would open up a third party and run for president.  i think he'd get elected.

Answer 2

We may be as much as generation away from weening ourselves off a bizarre dependency on stuff pumped up from wells so deep our ancestors would laugh if they heard it.

However severe our addiction to fossils, this fact remains: the United States was - and is - built primarily on ingenuity; any resources employed toward that end place far behind, if they place at all.

And if it takes a generation (29 years in the modern world; 11 years farther south), we'll be in the unenviable position of catching up with nations whose technologies and breakthroughs we should be watching more closely, now.

...

Answer 3

Ron Paul is the only politician in Washington D.C. with any integrity.  He is right.  We are a generation away from replacing petroleum products.  We do need to look at expanding our capacity as our economy and our population continues to grow at a time when the rest of the world is rapidly increasing the demand for fuel.

That much said he, like all the rest of the politicians, will not attack the real problem, a problem for which they are all culpable.  That is the collapsing value of U.S. currency.  During the time oil has become more expensive in U.S. dollars it has stayed the same in other currencies.  We are wrecking the currency to pay for wars and social programs we cannot afford.  Only by cutting government spending will we get fuel and food prices under control.

That much said, I'm voting for Ron Paul in November.  I'm going to write him in.

Answer 4

Makes sense and reads well.  Anyways, why are we letting other countries like China drill on the coast of Florida when we can't even drill there ourselves?  WTF??

Answer 5

Is he gong to 'nationalize" the oil industry, naw just kidding.  He will face tough opposition from the democrats, rmember the spotted tailed jobberdo flys around out there.  that would be the quickest and they could have the wells on line in less than a year and yes it would take longer to build the pipline, but brages and such.

Didn't know he did this and great, I also feel the democrats will jump on board like the Iraq war.  It is insane to allow a few to dictate what a country shold do.  What the last refinery was in the 70s.  Funny even with millions more inthe country they have been able to keep up.  thee was a question about how do ypu republicans like the poll showing Obama ahead by double over McCain.

I tought to myself, now here is someone that is insane.  I would guess tha atleast half of the democrats ae fed up with what Dean and those nuts are doing and shortly more when they understand the party has been hijacked, have know this in the South for years.  then the folks who are lupset with the other party has got to reach upwards of 25-30%.

If you look at the democratic deal of the left wing the democrats and this election are hovering around 33% of the party, but lets say 40%.  So you have 60% they wold switch or stay at home.  I am pretty sure the "lock block" is around 70%.

Those two groups the conservatives of both parties could very well start a new party, then throw in the other in the mix. .  After that then what is the difference with the conservatives.  Look at the senator the democrats kicked out,they he won on an independant ticket.

So it will be intersting to see who votes with Dr. Paul and what happens.  But glad to hear it.  They have found a ton of shell and didn't produce becasue back then you conuln't give natural gas away and now with new stuff and the carbon (co2  injection), it is so feasible to bring it up.  ON land you are tlaking about shorter time as a smackoer at 15,200' may take seven months and a acotton valley at 18,500 a month more.  So it's there and ready.  Thanks again for the tip.  

Take care. It's getting to the point that there is no difference  and all or about 70% of the nation are tiered of it.

Answer 6

I like it.

Answer 7

It is dishonest and in-line with Republican policies .

"short-term goal "  -   majority  estimate the nearest  effect  will be in 7-10 years.

Answer 8

I only agree with half of what he said on this.   The  problem is that we will be dependent on Oil for our economy for well over a generation from now.  THe only reason why we are researching alternative fuel is because gas is so expensive.   Like in the 70's when oil becomes cheap again, laternative fuel would be puched back on peoples minds.   THe best way to get us off oil is to let the prices stay high, so people will demand alternative fuel.  

My feeling is to maintain a fuel tax, but to encourage building more refineries.  My belief that oil companies are purposefully downing their own refineries to cause shortages.   I am against drilling in sensitive area as well.   On the other hand, I would encourage FAIR trade.   I want corn subsidies to be scaled back, and to look at alternative alcohol source, and to import alcohol from Brazil, if they are reasonably price.   I do also agree the government is a major hinderance in being self sufficient.  

As for his proposal, I would only get upset if we start drilling in sensitive areas.   I use to stare at Platform Holly and think it's beautiful  and buy my Mussels from a vendor who harvest them from that oil platform, but I don't want to see more of them.

Answer 9

It's a good bill, and would reduce gas prices immediately, which is why the libs will vote against it.