A House committee grilled top oil executives on the Hill yesterday, with the Democratic congressmen yet again demonstrating both a fundamental misunderstanding of a complex problem and their uncanny ability to offer ”solutions” that make problems worse.
The Democrats are pushing the concept of lowering gas prices by taking away tax breaks for the oil companies. So, essentially, in order to reduce the price of gas they’re planning to raise the gasoline production costs for oil companies. It doesn’t take an economist to figure out which direction this will get gas prices moving, does it?
The oil execs tried to explain their business is cyclical and their current profits are in line with other industries. Granted, that’s not very convincing, but Democratic suggestions that tax breaks should be nixed and the money should go to the holy grail of renewable fuels is astonishingly irresponsible to anyone who has knows even a little bit about the current state of the “renewable revolution.”
Of course the best solution for reducing fuel prices in the short run is removing restrictions and opening up the U.S.’s own fuel rich reserves to drilling. It will take a while for these oil fields to be fully utilized, but the fact that such projects are ramping up would be a self-fulfilling prophecy when it comes to gas prices. When Congressman Sensenbrenner asked the oil companies what could be done to bring lower prices, that’s what they said.
The Democrats refuse to believe any of this. It’s part of their environmentalist religion to believe green innovation and renewable energy and earth-friendly whatnot are the solution to environmental problems and to everything else. It’s an article of faith with them.
Here’s an excerpt from Hebert’s AP article about the hearing:
“We need access to all kinds of energy supply,” replied Robert Malone, chairman of BP America, adding that 85 percent of the country’s coastal waters are off limits to drilling.
But Markey [D - Mass.] wanted to know why the companies aren’t investing more in energy projects other than oil and gas — or giving up some tax breaks so the money could be directed to promote renewable fuels and conservation and take pressure off oil and gas supplies.
“Why is Exxon Mobil resisting the renewable revolution,” asked Markey, noting that the other four companies together have invested $3.5 billion in solar, wind and biodiesel projects.
Exxon is spending $100 million on research into climate change at Stanford University, replied Simon, but current alternative energy technologies “just do not have an appreciable impact” in addressing “the challenge we’re trying to meet.”
Alternative fuels are not the answer. Neither is raising taxes on oil companies.
The Democrats’ grandstanding on the Senate and House floor, and finger-jabbing at oil executives creates the impression they’re really giving ‘em hell and doing something for the small guy. But if Democrats are successful at exploiting high gas prices for their environmental, anti-business agenda they’re going to end up costing Americans a lot more for gas then they’re already paying.
