Gas prices can be reduced immediately.
By on Apr 25th, 2006 at 1:22 pm
Gas prices can be reduced immediately.
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) explains how. Repeal gratuitous tax breaks for rich oil companies. Use the money to pay for a 60 day holiday on the federal gas tax. Gas prices will go down by about 18 cents.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
The leadership needs to get out front on this quick. That means flooding the House with alternative bills addressing oil prices. Once this happens the media will take notice in contrast.
April 25th, 2006 at 1:30 pmRidiculous. 18 cents whoopie, and we lose the tax revenues. Yes, repeal the tax breaks for the oil companies, but leave the tax on the gas alone. For that matter, increase it and invest in alternate energy. We can all do with less driving. Use the fuel for trucking companies and businesses. If necessary, ration the fuel. Make people wake up to the fact that we have problems.
April 25th, 2006 at 1:36 pm18 cents? That’s nothing. I want it to be reduced by a minimum of $1.60. We need to get it down to a maximum of $1.40 again. Dang, I remember when I was mad when the prices increased to $1.39. Now I live to see that day again!!
April 25th, 2006 at 1:38 pmAs if. I’m in favor of a windfall profits tax.
April 25th, 2006 at 1:38 pm#2: Agree. We must invest in alternative fuel research and development. It will be a pain in the keester but we’ve brought it upon ouselves by purchasing gas guzzlers and electing oil men to office.
April 25th, 2006 at 1:41 pmI believe that to get way out front is to call for the breakup of big oil through anti-trust legislation. Put it on the table, and we shall see the public anger grow into fury against big oil. Right now the GOP is blaming the Dems and environmentalist for the price of oil, cut the fu*kers off at the knees by putting them blame and oil corporations. This also, by default, blames the GOP for the problem.
April 25th, 2006 at 1:44 pmOnly the left would think raising taxes on “big oil” will solve the problem.
Bush should sign an exec order that allows drilling in ANWR and the Florida and Cali coastline. He is too chicken-shit to stand up to the radical enviroNazis to ever do that.
We are not in Jimmy Carter territory…. YET. If Congress insists on price controls and interfering with the laws of supply and demand, then yes, we will be waiting in lines.
Liberals are the biggest hypocrites on the environment and energy. The Vanity Fair cover this month exposes that hypocrisy. Unfortunate for America, I am afraid Bush and the GOP are too scared to do what is right and will cave to left-wing policy a la Herbert Hoover and 41. In the short term, that will help the left like it did with Nixon, but the long term will be a real Jimmy Carter like malaise.
“Why not go to war for oil, we need oil…”
April 25th, 2006 at 1:56 pmI, for one, prefer to see gas prices at $10.00 per gallon.
Then, we’ll see people take the bus to work, school, shopping, etc.
And then, in turn, we’ll see some SERIOUS developments in mass transit. For example… Buses going through everyone’s neighborhoods… taking them to the nearest light rail station. Light rail taking the people to the heavy commuter rail station. Commuter rail taking them to major places and cities in their region.
That’s what transportation is all about, people!!!
April 25th, 2006 at 1:58 pm“Liberals are the biggest hypocrites on the environment and energy.”
No squatting eunuch, you are too frightened to even address the issue. Go post where they don’t care if you have no balls (redstate is famous for cowards).
April 25th, 2006 at 2:03 pmMrBlueSky – I like your idea, but the lobbyists would fight it tooth and nail.
My husband takes the train and LOVES it. It is a 6 mile drive from our door to the train station so it does require some driving, but I would love to go from driving a minimum of 80 miles per day to 12 miles per day. I wish I could but the way the system runs it would take me three hours to get to work.
April 25th, 2006 at 2:08 pmI still wanna know how in the holy hell a bunch of high school kids can make a car that runs on soybean based fuel (and that goes 0-60 in about 5 seconds) yet auto makers, oil companies and our government can’t manage to find alternative sources.
I still wanna know how in the holy hell a country like Brazil can become oil independent, yet we still rely on 19th century technology.
Seriously … What.The.F***.
It honestly makes me weep for the future of our world.
April 25th, 2006 at 2:11 pmJules,
I have the same problem. Mass transit in Georgia is pretty weak when compared to the systems in place up north. It’s not too bad if you work right in Atlanta, Midtown or Buckhead, but tough to utilize in most other places.
April 25th, 2006 at 2:13 pmI am so jealous of people who can ride the train. To be able to sit and read a newspaper or book or just relax. What a concept! Why in the hell are we not demanding alternate modes of transportation in addition to altertnate fuels?
April 25th, 2006 at 2:21 pmActually, you are kinda correct. But drilling in ANWR is just smoke and mirrors.
Clinton (yes, Bill Clinton) sold off HUGE tracts of land in Alaska to oil companies, much of which is much more environmentally sensitive than ANWR. Just read this month’s National Geographic.
The problem, however, isn’t that we’re running out of oil — there is plenty of oil already out there on the market. The problem is that it will run out underground, yet we continue to rely on it, rather than finding alternative sources.
Drilling more wells is nothing more than a stop gap, not a true, long-term solution.
April 25th, 2006 at 2:22 pmBush should sign an exec order that allows drilling in ANWR and the Florida and Cali coastline. He is too chicken-shit to stand up to the radical enviroNazis to ever do that.
So George’s brother is an environazi? He’s against drilling off the coast of Florida, moron.
April 25th, 2006 at 2:32 pmTo Jules and Bluefish:
I understand the inconvenience you two are facing with mass transit.
(Twice each day, I curse under my breath about having to walk 4 km from my office to the bus stop, so you two are DEFINITELY not alone.)
However, if enough people agree to take mass transit, you will notice a lot of changes to your convenience.
Jules, you are 100% correct about the lobbyists fighting it. But again, money talks. If too many people switch to mass transit, there will be little money for the lobbyists to be effective.
YES, PEOPLE… I KNOW I AM DREAMING! But ya gotta dream BIG in order to solve BIG problems.
Jules… your husband is right on.
If my thinking proves correct (and assuming gas prices go high enough so that every bus stop gets swamped with people), then this could be an answer to this crisis.
April 25th, 2006 at 2:33 pmfrom cnn.com:
I believe that’s hell freezing over in the background.
April 25th, 2006 at 2:34 pmwhile i agree with repealing the tax breaks for the oil industry (why we EVER gave them any break in the first place is beyond the pale), i don’t agree with applying those savings toward a tax holiday on gasoline.
1) it would be only temporary and might even result in short-term hoarding and,
April 25th, 2006 at 2:36 pm2) those savings would be better employed helping us determine long-term solutions toward reducing demand (i.e. – r&d in alternative energy sources)
Ann:
Is this for real????
This is GOT to be wrong… he’s probably only giving lip service for election year grandstanding.
(Behind the scenes, he’s probably already stacked the deck to protect his buddies.)
April 25th, 2006 at 2:38 pmMrBlueSky – the last time gas prices reached $3.00 alot of people here in Dallas started taking the trains and buses. DART was going to start cutting out services because they said they could not afford the massive increase in usage. People who have been using mass transit for a long time were worried they would cut out the lines they used. Of course that is the menatality here in Texas. Forget about expansion of services to assist our citizens, decrease them to get them back in their cars to assist the oil companies!
April 25th, 2006 at 2:41 pmSome good stuff on where the oil money really goes. Let’s talk about which category we really have the power to control.
April 25th, 2006 at 2:46 pmYou got me there Jules.
Not sure how to respond to that… here in Seattle, there is a social engineering by the State and Local government to get people out of their homes and cars and into high-density “urban villages” that have few roads but have every-10-minute mass transit from the high rises to the major places people go.
I think your situation is the first instance of “Reverse Social Engineering” I’ve ever heard of!
April 25th, 2006 at 2:56 pmfrom cnn.com:
But he (Bush) did call on Congress to rollback $2 billion in tax breaks for oil companies over the next 10 years for items such as write-offs for some research and development for deep water drilling.
“Record oil prices and large cash flows also mean that Congress has got to understand that these energy companies don’t need unnecessary tax breaks,†said Bush, a longtime tax-cut advocate. “Taxpayers don’t need to be paying for certain of these expenses on behalf of the energy companies.â€
I believe that’s hell freezing over in the background.
Comment by ann — April 25, 2006 @ 2:34 pm
Funny…Bush didn’t have a problem with these tax breaks when he signed the energy bill into law…
April 25th, 2006 at 3:06 pmC-Sorms–
The solutions in that article to which you linked are laughable.
Once again, how does drilling in ANWR or any place else solve the long-term problem? It’s just another band-aid applied to a gaping chest wound.
Also, the notion that regulations have been responsible for a lack of refining capacity isn’t just ridiculous … it’s ricockulous. The gas companies chose to shut down refineries in order to reduce supply, thus driving up prices.
Next time, try to link to something useful, instead of pointless drivel.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:07 pmListen to the Rethugs and the media lackeys say “the Dems have no plan.” The Dems have many plans and ideas, the problem is getting those media lackeys to air them, and the Rethugs to shut up and take a breath now and then.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:18 pmI am all for Menendez’ plan; immediate relief for the driving public, and reining in the profits of the oil barons.
What’s wrong with a windfall profits tax? In other times of “war,” excessive profit-making was a federal crime (Bush’s favorite phrase is “we’re at war” to justify anything and everything, so let’s turn it on him).
MrBlueSky – you have no idea how much my husband and I want to move to the northwest. We would leave tomorrow if my daughter was out of high school. J
ust remember the next time you get mad because of too much rain, there are people down here spending 6 months out of the year with 100 degree temperatures and very few sane individuals in sight. What I would not do to live in an area where I was not the minority in my views. Where people actually thought before they spoke. Where the state and local leaders cared more about their constituents and the environment than a corporations pocketbook.
Can you tell I am green with envy?
April 25th, 2006 at 3:18 pmEven if the foolish idea of drilling in ANWR were to be allowed, it would be 7-10 years before that oil would reach the gas pump, and it would last less than two years.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:23 pmTo advocate that lame idea again is to exploit a serious situation for the personal gain of a few oil magnates and their oil rigging companies.
A federal gas tax holiday????
This is exactly the kind of political, political, political move that the Democrats should avoid.
Why?
Because it looks so POLITICAL — and does nothing to solve the real problem.
There is a supply and consumption issue that the mega-transnational energy corporations are exploiting. Light sweet crude oil production is past its peak. Heavy sour crude is harder and more expensive to refine into gasoline.
See: All Oil is NOT Equal – Earthside.com
Democrats and all good, patriotic Americans should be calling for the Congress to pass and Bush to sign an increase in miles per gallon standards for all automobiles made or sold in the U.S.
The Democrats should be proposing all kinds of incentives for energy efficiency.
But, it is true, nothing is going to help our gasoline supply and demand problem in the short-term.
Only conservation in the medium-term and a crash program to develop alternative energy resources in the long-term will help us.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:23 pmAs long as the oil companies can continue to control congress via “donations” and bush/cheney are in the WH, there will not be a federal “plan” to reduce our dependence on oil. These crooks are making too much money or, in the case of congress, receiving too much money to change. After all, they are responsible for the present situation. . . which is intentional ~ They get away with it each time it happens. What came from the congrressional “hearing” in which all the oil company CEO’s lied their asses off???? Not a damn thing. “Finding” more oil is not a solution or over dependence on oil.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:26 pmWhat would stop the oil companies from them raising prices, precisely by 18 cents, to make up for their reduction in revenue as a result of the “tax increase”? I agree that tax breaks for Big Oil should be repealed, but Menendez’ idea sounds like a shell game to me.
Let’s invent our way out of this by refusing to buy any car with oil as its sole source of fuel (or with less than a 35mpg standard). Vote with your pocketbook.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:34 pmJules:
LOL… well… I love the idea of 100 + degree temps (my wife and daughter are Brazilian ladies!)
But, I understand your talk of sane people. (I was mugged back in 1992 at the Greyhound Station there in Dallas.)
I know progressives aren’t looked at too kindly there in Texas… pretty much anywhere there!
However, I saw just this morning that there is only a 45% approval rating of Bushie there in your lovely Lone Star state.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:49 pmI am seeing fewer W bumper stickers. I love to drive in front of the cars that still have them with my Kerry/Edwards sticker staring them in the face.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:53 pmMr Blue Skies, from what I understand, Bush paid a lot of lip service to fewer tax breaks for big oil when the House first wrote the Energy Bill – they inlcuded $8 billion, the bill that Bush signed included only $6 billion. If he was opposed, he could have vetoed the bill (ha.) I imagine there was quite a bit of pressure from folks like DeLay to bring the home state some cash.
April 25th, 2006 at 4:01 pmYes, remove the gratutious tax breaks for the oil companies.
NO, do NOT repeal the federal gas tax for a 60 day holiday. My understanding of how the gas market works is that when you reduce gas taxes, the price of gas does NOT decrease substantially. Instead the price of gas may dip briefly, but then quickly regains the SAME level it was at prior to the rollback. This in effect then gives the money immediately BACK to the oil companies as another windfall profit. If anything, taxes should be increased to force people to conserve. I know this is a very unpopular idea with most people, but it will help force consumers to conserve and as a result we will then be less dependent on Middle East oil.
April 25th, 2006 at 4:09 pmYou know Willy, I like the idea of conservation, but when you have to drive 80 miles a day to get back and forth from work, it is not very feaxible. We need more and improved mass transit!
April 25th, 2006 at 4:11 pmHey Jules… wanna see a Seattle-area SUV with some really COOL (Progressive) Bumper Stickers????
Check out this one from Soul Rebel in South Everett, WA.
April 25th, 2006 at 4:11 pmAnn:
Yeah… that’s what I was thinking too!
He’s probably just grandstanding… he likely has already told Speaker Hastert to bury it right away!
April 25th, 2006 at 4:15 pmBlue, you don’t mind if I call you blue do you? That was great! I sent it to my husband already. He will love it.
April 25th, 2006 at 4:16 pmGo ahead… Blue is fine!
The sticker that sums up my whole politics is this one from the SUV:
“Jesus loves you… Bush doesn’t.”
April 25th, 2006 at 4:26 pmThe oil/gas crisis requires multiple solutions:
Drilling for more oil anywhere is applying a bandaid (noted earlier on this thread)
Subsidize R&D for alternative fuels
Subsidize alternative energy sources
Provide tax incentives to auto mfrs. to increase mileage; engineer cars to run on alternative methods
Invest in efficient and dependable mass transit for the commuting public
Tax the windfall profits of the oil companies
Eliminate tax subsidies presently awarded oil companies
The Menendez recommendation is a good start; it will bring immediate, if temporary, relief. But it must be part of a program; one that, if it had been followed up in the mid-70’s, we would not be in the state we are today. Let’s not be singing the same sad song 30 years from now.
April 25th, 2006 at 6:29 pm(That is if we are still here 30 years from now — we have to get rid of Bush&Co first, and repair their damage.)
[...] But the things that really might help will not even be considered. First stop our saber rattling with Iran. Iran is not an immediate threat if it is a threat at all. Three sources of oil are challenged at the moment and because of that oil prices are at least $20.00 a barrell higher than what they should be. Iran is one of those areas, Nigeria, and Venezuela are the other two. Help in smoothing out the instabilities in these areas would do a lot to reduce what we pay at the pumps. Another measure: Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) explains how. Repeal gratuitous tax breaks for rich oil companies. Use the money to pay for a 60 day holiday on the federal gas tax. Gas prices will go down by about 18 cents. And why not begin today with a “Manhattan” type, no kidding project for energy independence. Even if we do not achieve 100 percent energy indendence I am sure we can considerably reduce our reliance on foreign oil. What could more greatly help increase our national security? I think we are ready to make the kinds of efforts to make this happen. Where is the leadership? [...]
April 26th, 2006 at 3:20 amI do not agree with everyone that we need higher gas prices. Consider this: Higher gas prices mean higher freight cost for items that people by everyday at the grocery store and for low income families paying more for something may cause them to do without some things they need such as making the choice between a tank of gas and some prescription medicine. In most cases freight cost get passed to the consumer making them pay a higher price for something that used to be at a reasonable rate. President Bush, althought there is not much he can do about the situation, has not done anything for the working man to help reduce gas prices. When your average sallary is $300 a week and it cost you $100 is gas prices every week there goes 33% of the paycheck right there. Where will all of the tyranny end? Bush has done nothing but support the big profit of the oil companies and the outsourcing of American jobs to India and especially China. We need someone who will stand up to these big oil companies and fight for the working man of this country whether it be Republican or Democrat. Not everyone can afford another car and are often times stuck with what they have, and if they have a gas guzzler then they are the ones who will end up suffering the most.
May 6th, 2006 at 10:12 pm