Daily Kos

Energy speculation bill fails;  Inhofe gets dizzy from his own spin

Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:50:25 PM PDT

Lots of gnashing of GOP teeth in the Senate today:

The Senate failed to advance legislation targeting oil speculators after Republicans and Democrats remained at an impasse on adding an expansion of offshore drilling to the bill.

The chamber voted 50-43 — well short of the 60 votes needed to limit debate on the measure that would have addressed manipulation in the oil futures markets, primarily by adding more regulators at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Democrats had said the bill was the logical first step towards solving high gas prices since speculation was a large part of the problem.

GOP senators wanted to add language that would expand offshore drilling and pledged to block floor action unless they received a chance to amend the Democratic bill. Democratic leaders said they wanted to limit amendments for practical reasons — the chamber expects to adjourn in August — and because Republicans’ real goal was to protect oil companies.

In other words, the motion to invoke cloture was defeated. There were 43 Senators voting to continue a filibuster of the bill, including James Inhofe (R-Exxon).

He votes to continue a filibuster... and then he puts out this unbelievable mountain of craptacular spin, accusing the Democrats of trying to cut off debate on gas price relief:

Democrats [sic] Attempt to Shut Down Energy Debate Fails

"Today's vote shows that Republicans are willing to stand up and fight to ensure the Senate stays focused on providing solutions to rising energy prices," Senator Inhofe said. "When Democrats allow the Senate to reopen for business on the issue of bringing down energy costs, I am ready to put forward amendments to encourage the development of natural gas vehicles, prolong the feasibility and production from our marginal oil and gas wells, address the market distorting subsidization of fuels in other countries, and repeal federal prohibitions on importing fuels from the Canadian oil sands.

"Republicans in the Senate are serious about providing solutions to rising energy costs. I will continue to stand with my Republican colleagues to ensure the Senate holds a fair and open debate on the need to increase energy supplies.  I believe a large majority of Senators will vote in favor of amendments to open responsible access to America's plentiful energy resources.  Democratic leadership knows this as well.  That's why they're blocking a full and open debate."

Wow.  Just... wow.

::

Tags: Energy speculation bill, S. 3268, James Inhofe, oil speculators, gas prices (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 70 comments

Daily Kos Help

 Wow (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Luetta

I agree.

"Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" --Albus Dumbledore

by Luthien Tinuviel on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:52:48 PM PDT

 Note that he says "energy prices", not oil. (10+ / 0-)

As if people don't know they're trying to line the pockets of oil

"Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it." ML King

by TheWesternSun on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:53:59 PM PDT

 (oops) (8+ / 0-)

companies for as long as there's a drop of the stuff to be drilled for anywhere, including national parks and protected waters. What a bunch of liars.

"Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it." ML King

by TheWesternSun on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:55:13 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Honestly tho, is it really a "wow" (0+ / 0-)

 It's absolutely staggering. (0+ / 0-)

It's why I hit "post" prematurely. Jeebus.

"Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it." ML King

by TheWesternSun on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 07:00:50 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Craptacular. That about sums it up for me. (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Luthien Tinuviel

 The Democrats have got to tell the people (6+ / 0-)

what really happened.

 Yes, they are getting ready to cave (AGAIN!) when (0+ / 0-)

they should give the Republicans all the debate they want:

You want immediate relief, drilling does not do it, but releasing SPR oil does.
Speculation is driving up oil prices and legislation will have some immediate effect and prevent future runups due to speculation, drilling does not have any effect for more than 7 years.
Applaud Bush's efforts to (FINALLY!) try diplomacy with North Korea and Iran.  Because the Bush caused geopolitical crises created much of the runup it is having an immediate effect.  Obama's push for diplomacy (miraculously being followed by Bush) also helps reduce oil prices!  Maybe it's time to try diplomacy with Venezuela? (especially before Chavez eliminates any remaining vestiges of democracy.)
Tone down the rhetoric of belicosity in Iraq and elsewhere.  Every bomb and every brutal attack in Iraq (regardless of who's attack it is) pushes oil prices up. A stable Iraq where the US forces leaves (sooner rather than later) will also contribute to a stabilization of oil markets.

In essence, Bush's failed policies got us to $140 oil and now we need to reverse them in order to bring it back to something reasonable.

It really sucks, cause I can see it now: Reid will walk away with tail between his legs while giving big oil all they want (maybe even ANWR). It is sickening.

Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

by DefendOurConstitution on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 07:33:03 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 What is the goal of SPR release? (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Lesser Dane
Releasing the SPR would be like emptying your bank account in order to pay the next few months of your credit card bills long after the minimum payments have passed your monthly income.  Yes, that would forestall your interest rates jumping from 18% to 30%...  for a little while.  But that route is completely unsustainable, while declaring bankruptcy with some cash in a shoebox somewhere might be enough to get you on your feet before you're homeless & broke.

Bush's policies didn't get us to $140 oil.

Bush's failures to implement a reasonable energy policy didn't even get us to $140 oil.

Even the collapse of the dollar, which was partly contingent on Bush's policies, didn't get us all the way to $140 oil.

Supply and demand did.  We can continue to delude ourselves into believing that the rest of the world doesn't exist, and there aren't entire nations currently shutting off their electric grids amidst riots in order to save some gas money;  Or we can concede that this is a new century with new realities, the most immediate, important, and serious of which is that the continued prosperity of the First World requires either an utter and complete abandonment of the environment, or a shift to a non-fossil-fueled existence.

This thing isn't just a 2008 political battle.  It will be with us for decades, and some of us will be trying to make a life for ourselves during those decades.  Greenspan's palliatives were disastrous enough in the fiscal sector - I don't want to see them compounded by 'immediate relief' in the energy sector.  The country, and its populace, can't take it.

 Supply and demand is part of runup, but depending (0+ / 0-)

on who's view you agree with it is as much as 50% of run up or as little as 20%. The rest is all related to Bush's failed policies (Iraq, Iran, benign neglect of US$, weakening CAFE standards, etc.)

SPR release would have a short term effect on supply and demand which would ferret out speculation.

Jimmy Carter took a beating in 1980 because oil had almost doubled under him (whether it was his fault or not) and you are telling me that Bush is not even mildly at fault for oil prices going up 5 times?

Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

by DefendOurConstitution on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:42:53 AM PDT

[ Parent ]

 It happened on his watch (0+ / 0-)

And the country is going to suffer significantly more than it already is because of his failures to deal with it.  That doesn't make it 50-80% his fault, and the people who are telling you that don't know what they're talking about.

Iran - 4mbpd is worthy of a significant temporary price rise, but Intrade's futures on an attack dropped to 10% last winter and oil prices have actually gone up.

Iraq - We took 2.2mbpd down for most of a year before it came back online, and damaged an additional 0.5mbpd of infrastructure which hasn't come back online.  A slight pressure, perhaps.

US Dollar - Definitely...  but Bush flubbed a chance to fix the problem which had been going on since Greenspan's tenure began, and won't be over until Social Security is changed to a stable phenomenon.  The thing is...  we are at record oil prices when priced in Euros.  'Nuff said.

Weakening CAFE standards - ha!  They havn't even weakened under Bush's tenure, they just had the 'wide-enough-to-drive-a-hummer-through' exception until 2007, but that didn't have a major effect on US fuel consumption (not enough Hummers), much less world fuel consumption.

Under your theory, we've had extraordinarily high oil prices for five years now due to the mad but temporary reign of George Bush, and noone in the world has been able to say "Now's the time to empty our reserves, we'll make droves" and had a significant effect on supply or a downward pressure on price.  Or rather, everybody has, and the sum total of their ability has been to keep oil production about the same for the last few years.  We should currently be in a selloff frenzy as speculators see the horizon of the 2008 election.

Bush's abilities as a leader or the lack thereof don't have the power to quantuple world oil price in the sustained manner we've seen.  If Gore had been elected to 8 years and been successful in his current cause célèbre, we'd might not be dealing with $140 oil, but we'd definitely be dealing with oil trading in the $100-$200 range.

Frankly, this isn't the 1970's, with its politically-determined cartel-produced shortages - this is the the 1970's nightmare future, where we scrapped our alternative energy efforts and world oil supply peaked without any preparation on our part.

 Face It (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
DefendOurConstitution

When will you guys face it...the dems are not interested in you ..they are just like the republicans..they are interested in Power..they would sell out their mom if it means they get to stay in power..its all a big game

 Inhofe (9+ / 0-)

Sometime I think that Darwin was wrong.  There is no such thing as evolution.  For evidence I give you James Inhofe...asshole, first class.

John McCain: A Myth, Not a Maverick

by oxfdblue on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:54:44 PM PDT

 clearly you're mistaken (9+ / 0-)

if an asshole has developed to the point where it can pose as a US senator, not only is that conclusive evidence of evolution, but we're in some serious shit.

 come on (2+ / 0-)

Even an asshole has to blow some wind every now and then.

 touche (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Luthien Tinuviel

well played, ma'am, well played

 Loved this: (3+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
echatwa, Alohilani, Luthien Tinuviel

"James Inhofe (R-Exxon)."

And how true it is.

 I agree. (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
echatwa

Inhofe is a major asshole and unfortunately I live in Oklahoma. It SUCKS.

"Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" --Albus Dumbledore

by Luthien Tinuviel on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:03:18 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Unbelievable. (3+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
echatwa, llamaRCA, Luthien Tinuviel

I could never be a politician of that caliber. It makes me wonder if when they are alone with themselves they think 'Wow, I am SUCH a jackass!' before continuing to act like the armpits of society.

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi

by missLotus on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:55:57 PM PDT

 Sure, it's craptacular spin (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Luthien Tinuviel

But lots of people will still believe it.

 Call their bluff, just once. (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
7redwood

Put up an important bill that the vast majority of Americans agree with but Republicans don't, and force the Republicans to filibuster it for days, weeks, months, however long it takes.

Give the media no choice but to discuss how petty they are and how abusive they are of the filibuster.

In retrospect, seeing how they got their nominees through anyway, the Senate Dems should have let the Republicans go through with the 'nuclear option.'

 Why? (0+ / 0-)

Exactly why should we not do both? Speculation is one part of the problem but if we do not start drilling for more oil here at home we as a nation are going to be in a worse state 10 or 15 years from now and yet another congress will have to have this same debate. We would not be here now if they had opened up ANWR 15 years ago. The time is now!!!

Fixing the speculation loopholes will have an immediate effect, drilling will insure that we do not face this type of thing again. And in the interim of both we can still continue develop alternative sources of energy like wind, solar and even nuclear.

Seems to me that the Dems know that a drilling amendment would pass and are so blinded by Saint Al and the enviro-wackos that they will prevent a vote just to be able to claim "enlightened" status a little longer.

Drill now, drill here, drill often! The freakin caribou will be just fine thanks.

I was going to register as a Democrat, but sadly, my test scores were too high. My Blog: http://americanarmed.blogspot.com/

by Krav Maga on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:10:51 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Just to add... (0+ / 0-)

Oil speculation is the big problem.  It's just another deregulation designed to make more money for Bush's friends, and it's the primary cause of prices going thru the roof.  Get that thru your head.  Enviro-whackos?  My ass.

 Don't know why you're taking me on, but (3+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Pete Rock, Lesser Dane, echatwa

I'll play.

First, the US government is not stopping any drilling whatsoever.  What is at play, and what neither the Republicans or the media will talk about, is drilling LEASES.  Just because the US government grants a lease does not mean drilling will commence.

Drilling will commence when the oil companies damn well please, and as with the billions of other acres the oil companies already have under lease, they are just as likely to let them sit idle until they can exploit those resources at an optimum price.  After all, why take on all the risk of exploration and drilling when the US military is currently serving as your own personal valet to billions of very easily pumped crude.

Second, do you know what will happen once the US brings all this oil onto the market?  The Saudi's will start to produce less.  Perhaps.  But this just illustrates that giving the oil companies more leases is in no way going to ensure increased supply.

Third, we are not nationalizing this oil.  The fact that it comes out of US soil or waters doesn't change the fact that it belongs to Exxon/Mobile or whatever oil company happens to own the lease.  Thus, they can sell it to whomever the hell they want to sell it.  So not only will these new leases not guaranty that the world's supply of oil will go up, it will not guaranty the the United State's supply of oil will go up.

Fourth, we might all die if we burn all this oil anyway.  Unless you are some dogmatic global warming denier freak, you can't get around the fact that we need to stop using fossil fuels, so why even bother.

 Wrong (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
echatwa

Fixing the speculation loopholes will have an immediate effect, drilling will insure that we do not face this type of thing again.

It will happen over and over. It isn't a big fix.

  All that extra drilling, even if and when it gets done, will do is add about 5% to the supply available....worldwide. The Congressional bills demanding that US extraction go to USA first was defeated, led by Bush and the Republicans as a "chokehold" on the marketing and distribution plans of the major oil companies.

 Bush is attempting to lessen the royalties, take the already small share the taxpayers get and reduce it further as a sop to the companies like Exxon who made $40 billion last year.  There are no incentives for the companies to increase supply, either thru market forces or their own profit mechanism being weakened by adding to tight supply.Tthey will sit on the new resources unless they are cheaper to produce than the older ones.

Which explains Bush's aim to reduce royalties. It's a con game,a shell game.

Open up new tracts that haven't been listed before. place them in service at reduced royalty payments.  The companies bring them on line because they are cheaper and cost them less, and they will shut in the older wells that are more expensive. No additional oil overall to the market, and the companies make more money off the SAME amount of oil actually brought to market.
This isn't Economics 101, "the (hypothetical)free market", this is Economics 2008 the role of the 4 majors,their lobbyists and captive politicians, OPEC and the state run oil companies in sustaining a high price that benefits the producers and the international oil cartel.
It is the majors themselves (who do not own a great deal of the oil anymore) that are speculating on higher prices themselves to keep their customers satisfied with long term oil contracts. It happened exactly the same way in previous crisis, especially in 1979 and the volatility around Iran at that time.

To strive,to seek,to find, and not to yield. 1843 high school motto, Rhode Island.

by Pete Rock on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:36:36 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 And btw. (3+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Pete Rock, echatwa, Alohilani

They already have a ton of leases they dont develop.  They also haven't built any refineries in the past decades because they dont want to increase production=less $$$ for their product.  

 California has shut 23 to 25 refineries (0+ / 0-)

some are small,most were simply less efficient.They were closed anyway. That is in the last 25 years.

Some large units were expanded or rebuilt on site.

There is no incentive to provide extra gas to bring down prices. It has been all about close matching of supply to demand topreserve price floors,avoid drops.

That has been the scenario since 1929. Dreamed up by the largest American oil companies and their closest
rivals/partners like Shell and BP.

To strive,to seek,to find, and not to yield. 1843 high school motto, Rhode Island.

by Pete Rock on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:47:20 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Sheep (0+ / 0-)

When will you guys face it...the dems are not interested in you ..they are just like the republicans..they are interested in Power..they would sell out their mom if it means they get to stay in power..its all a big game

 Tool. (0+ / 0-)

When are you going to realize that places like this are not just into electing Democrats, but into electing better Democrats?

In a way, you are correct.  The Dems and Reps are too interested in staying in power.  But the difference is that the Dems weakness is not fighting hard enough to prevent the American people from getting fucked, while the Republicans actually do the fucking of the American people.

Scares the shit out of you that your movement is dieing while ours is just getting off the ground doesn't it.  In time, we will elect those better Democrats who are interested in preventing the American people from getting fucked, while you guys still battle it out amongst yourselves trying to determine what your 'brand' is.

 I'll believe him when he gets serious about Solar (3+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
paige, echatwa, Alohilani

"Today's vote shows that Republicans are willing to stand up and fight to ensure the Senate stays focused on providing solutions to rising energy prices, [etc, etc.]" Senator Inhofe said.

I'll believe him when he recognizes that Republican hostility to Solar Energy, Public Transit, and Conservation have played by far a bigger role in $4.00 gas prices than Democratic refusal to support only those remedies which keep the oil-auto monopoly intact.

Proud Citizen of Barackopolis.

by Judge Moonbox on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:58:20 PM PDT

 Where Are The Dems (0+ / 0-)

Remember when the dems promised if they could just get the majority they had a comprehensive plan for energy...well they have it..and what have the done..squat..but guess what..you will vote for them next time

 GOP are serious about helping oil buddies (4+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Farlfoto, Luetta, echatwa, Alohilani

GOP = Grand Oil Party

"I was judged eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor judgment, and I agree with that assessment." -- McCain on Keating 5

by noofsh on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:58:50 PM PDT

 Need a major information campaign (2+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Farlfoto, Alohilani

This is a losing issue for Dems unless they spend a great deal on information. It can be turned around. In this case, the Environmental groups should be very anxious to help.

But right now, McCain is trashing Obama with total nonsense. Time to act--NOW.

 No, this can be controlled by message. (2+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Lesser Dane, Alohilani

"This is an oil company give away that does nothing to bring gas prices down now and does nothing to ensure future supplies of energy.  It is typical Republican governance, using a crisis to scare America into letting them give our nations wealth and resources to their cronies."

That's it.  Over and over and over and over and over again.  Say it more often than McCain and his surrogates say 'the surge is working.'  Say it until the party is literally blue.  Eventually the media will flesh out the details, and prove that's exactly what is going on, as opposed to propogandizing the line that 'Americans want this.'

 Snowe and Collins are the only two Rs to (6+ / 0-)

vote for cloture. Christ, even Lieberman did the right thing.

Coleman, Sununu and Smith must have a death wish, their asses are hanging over the edge, just waiting to be beaten on for this. I hope the Democrats running against them beat them senseless for this vote.

Specter again shows what he's made of, and those folks who like Hagel? Look again. Grassley and Voinovitch show again their 'moderate' label is grossly overestimated.  

Next time I say something good about Republicans, remind me to shut the hell up.

The 50 State strategy works, thanks to Howard Dean! Donate!

by shpilk on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:05:28 PM PDT

 Republican Senators (0+ / 0-)

If they don't vote how they are told they don't get to be ranking member----Now for your re-minder

 They lie with impunity (2+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Alohilani, Luthien Tinuviel

because their "base" only watches FOX news. What Inhofe said is all they will ever care to know. Everyone else is a liar, to them.

I know, I'm preaching to the choir, but somewhere in here is the key to opening the eyes of those who refuse to see. We just haven't found it yet.

 For the love of Tesla... (2+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Farlfoto, Luthien Tinuviel

Why does the Republican Party hate decency? Not to mention logic and reason?
I swear, I could never be a right-wing politician. There must be an unspoken rule between Repubs about smoking your drapes. That's the only thing that would explain their communal idiocy. That, and unbridled greed.  

Consign corporatism to the dankest crypt, and assign justice to the highest crag. For A More Perfect Union.

by Alohilani on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:10:59 PM PDT

 Apparently (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Alohilani

The republicans attempt to create their own reality has turned them into pretzels. Even Imaginationland was more realistic.  

Do Pavlov's dogs chase Schroedinger's cat?

by corwin on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:12:43 PM PDT

 We need a Stronger Spokesman (4+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Farlfoto, mchestnutjr, dotalbon, Alohilani

Reid just acts like some wimpy church mouse. Until we are willing to stand toe to toe, and match insult for insult, in a stronger and incredulous tone the Republicants will continue to act like the pricks they are.

President Theodore Roosevelt,"No man can take part in the torture of a human being without having his own moral nature permanently lowered."

by SmileySam on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:13:50 PM PDT

 Dodd or Biden (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Farlfoto

Two good candidates for Senate Majority Leader next year.

I cannot imagine how we got stuck with Harry Reid.  Such a wimp.    

Voting Republican is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

by dotalbon on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:23:54 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Spokemans? (0+ / 0-)

Don't you spokesperson?  Just kidding.  I'm make my PC mistakes here and there.

See my post above.  We don't need a spokesperson.  We need the entire party and all of their surrogates repeating a mantra over and over and over.

 And in razzing you about PC (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
SmileySam

I make a typo in my title line.  Huzzah.

 These are the exact same people who today (5+ / 0-)

Voted DOWN the release of 10% of strategic petroleum reserve which has dumped prices 33%,9% in the past when it was done for that reason previously, and now cover up the role and connections of the speculators who of course are very close to their Party's coffers.Two bills, two filibuster votes about serious things that matter.

The airline CEO's wrote an appeal about the role of speculation is absolutely torpedoing their industry and begging for a spotlight on it, and the repubs diss them.  "Lowering gas prices! Hah!"

That's a twofer for keeping prices high:  the Republican Senate did filibuster twice with Bush's blessing (it wouldn't have worked as a minority block unless the President was completely in thrall to the fossil fuel lobby). The market prices for oil rose again today after a week of reversal on account of this news.

These filibusters ABSOLUTELY have to be hammered every day as the utter obstructionism and coverups they are for the next several days. Obama has to fire back  some serious broadsides about his colleagues taking an antagonistic position to the American people and American businesses outside the cozy club of oil and gas lobbyists/goons. His comments make news now.

These votes have to be hung around the neck of every Republican Senator who shoved this garbage  down the nation's gullet.

To strive,to seek,to find, and not to yield. 1843 high school motto, Rhode Island.

by Pete Rock on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:14:32 PM PDT

 The Press rarely mention the 80 plus Filibusters (2+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Farlfoto, Alohilani

or point out just how destructive they have been. Until the people that only watch to 6 O'clock news know the facts and start to push thie Congressperson in droves this behavior will never end.

Watching the hearing today and the Republicans that have drunk the koolaid was a lesson in thru the looking glass. That same 4 Republicants continue to deny the facts that are right in front of them. The Facts, not partisan spin. The Big 3 Networks should of been covering the hearing or lost their lic. It should of been rebroadcast during Primetime so the American public could hear the ridiculous way the Right lied.

President Theodore Roosevelt,"No man can take part in the torture of a human being without having his own moral nature permanently lowered."

by SmileySam on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:21:32 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Reid (NV) Nay? Check the link "was defeated" (0+ / 0-)

is that a mistake on the site or did Harry just lose his job?

Not Ideas about the Thing but the Thing Itself - Wallace Stevens

by catchlightning on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:15:22 PM PDT

 I'm going to assume... (2+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
echatwa, catchlightning

That it was Reid's bill (I believe it is), and through procedural technicalities the originator of the bill has to vote no on cloture in order to bring it up again.  Kagro or someone could provide more detail, but I've seen him vote no several times before for this specific reason.

 A Senator who votes with the majority... (2+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
echatwa, catchlightning

has the privilege of calling for the Senate to reconsider its vote at some later point in time. That's usually the Majority Leader, who will often switch his vote for that purpose when he sees a vote going the wrong way.

 Thank you (both) - that must be it (0+ / 0-)

because I think there is cause to think that a rollback of the Gramm "Enron Loophole" in the 2000 Commodity Futures Trading Modernization bill -- which allowed the creation of the unregulated over-the-counter (non-exchange-traded) energy markets -- is what is really called for.  If this is Reid's bill, which I assume you are correct in stating, then it needs to be rewritten -- not to deal so narrowly with "more CFTC regulators" but also with the currently unregulated energy markets and bring them under proper regulation as well.

Not Ideas about the Thing but the Thing Itself - Wallace Stevens

by catchlightning on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 09:28:40 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 How to STOP the Lies? (0+ / 0-)

Elect better Senator's----This is the year!! Send $5 to senators that are trying to get the Dem's a few votes more---Dem's leading in 5 and damn close in a couple more----It doesn't matter where you live ---support these canidate's with a few bucks---if you can afford it, and we all can afford $5 a month to help ourselves---only a few months left and we can all help ourselves

 Yeah, lets "increase supplies" (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Farlfoto

I will continue to stand with my Republican colleagues to ensure the Senate holds a fair and open debate on the need to increase energy supplies.  

Gosh, if he is so concerned with "increasing supplies" then I guess he's in favor of adopting the "use it or lose it" provision the Democrats proposed to encourage the oil barons to actually explore the 78% of current leaseholds that are completely untouched (HR 6251 (pdf)).

Too bad his buddies over in the House don't feel as he does...

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

by Mr Tentacle on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:19:03 PM PDT

 Propose drilling into Inhofe's head (6+ / 0-)

...should find reservoir of fossilized carbon.

"Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed." General Buck Turgidson

by muledriver on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:21:18 PM PDT

 I don't think he's a carbon based (2+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
echatwa, Luthien Tinuviel

life form.  Silica, maybe.  Or granite.  

Voting Republican is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

by dotalbon on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:25:02 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Oh. My bad. (0+ / 0-)

"Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed." General Buck Turgidson

by muledriver on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:27:28 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Is scumbag a life form? n/t (0+ / 0-)

 Note he never directly says that (0+ / 0-)

their amendments would ALLOW OFF SHORE DRILLING.  Instead, it's "I believe a large majority of Senators will vote in favor of amendments to open responsible access to America's plentiful energy resources."  My questions is, responsible access to what energy resources?  They won't even come right out and say it.  I won't even write what I'm calling them in my mind right now except to say they're MFSOBs.

Now, on a much happier note, for those who haven't seen it yet, here's a link to a video of Obama's speech in Berlin.  His campaign sent it out, so I imagine many of you have seen it and duly spread it around.  But those who aren't plugged in to the campaign, here you go.  

 This is a losing issue for Democrats (2+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Whimsical, Kos your wrong

Its time to compromise, this bill was a joke of stagecraft.  The off shore ban on drilling will be lifted, and it will be a good thing.  Also, there needs to be money for solar and wind in the bill as well.  I would also include nuclear.  We need to use all available sources to get rid of our addiction to foreign oil.
Everyday we rely on other people to destroy their land, pollute their eco systems while importing and claiming piety, it is a sham.  We need to rid ourselves of foreign oil, embrace all sources of energy, including wind, solar, hydro, natural gas, nuclear and yes oil.  
We have one losing issue this year,  this insane energy policy that is no policy as well. We have none, and as incredibly terrible a candidate Mccain is, they have us dead to rights on energy.  We cant be against every form of current energy and claim to have a plan, when the heating bills come, we are dead in the water, and my parents for one will gladly vote for the party that at least has a sensible plan on energy.  We need to get it together, just saying know is making us look like we just plain don't care about the plight of everyday Americans, sure, I love little turtles and sensitive eco systems, but we need to make out only loser of an issue this year into a winner.

This turned out to be longer then I thought.

 MMMM, maybe we can follow Al Gore's plan? (0+ / 0-)

Just a thought.

 No offense to Al Gore (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Kos your wrong

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...

I believe the alternative energy of Al Gores plan are bold, But I also think that ignoring every other possible energy source is a mistake, as do most Americans.  We need to do all we can to secure this country from foreign oil, Al Gores plan does not do that, it comes off as Al Screams at cloud. If we can get the % of energy we get from foreign oil from Wind, Solar, hydro and Nuclear, this country will have low energy costs and be free from foreign oil.

 Rasmussen is a Republican (0+ / 0-)

He puts out hack/push polls on the issues from time to time the results of which almost always show support for the Republican positions. What does that tell you?

His Bush job approvals were outliers for years most of the time drastically so. His recent OH Poll was a dramatic outlier (off by 15% from the trend shown by other polls taken together) as well. His polling should always be taken with several LARGE grains of salt. Likewise, Quinnipiac and Fox Noise polls. All of these people have agendas of their own to push.

~~

"If we can get the % of energy we get from foreign oil from Wind, Solar, hydro and Nuclear, this country will have low energy costs and be free from foreign oil."

That's roughly what Gore is saying (although on the nuclear front, he only sees need for only a slight increase in its use during the transition). Geothermal is another important renewable source of energy (since you didn't mention it.)

Gore's plan for converting 100% of electricity generation to carbon-free sources (Gore has a book coming up later this year which will probably spell out the full details of the path he suggests to get there. Don't forget that Gore is one of the best and details-oriented policy wonks to ever serve in an administration, with results like this to show for it) is probably doable in say 15-20 years, if not 10 years. If we start pushing for the 10 year target timeline, we may get there a few years after that there, which would still be excellent. If we throw our hands up in the air and do nothing, we'll NEVER get there and the planet will likely become mostly uninhabitable in a few decades.

Please see the following:

and something that I just came across (I'll have to go over it in detail myself):

Happy weekend reading!

Go Obama/Biden! Throw the bums out!!

by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 06:42:12 AM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Secure Our Nations Security (0+ / 0-)

I don't think we should exclude anything from the mix until we are independent from foreign oil.  I agree with you.

 Yup. (0+ / 0-)

We can either wring MASSIVE concessions out of the Republicans for lowering the ban, or get nothing, lose elections, and stand by helplessly as the ban gets lifted anyway.

It never fails to amaze how many supposed intelligent progressives on this site argue that the latter is somehow the better choice.

This country will NOT survive President McCain. Repeat until you get it.

by Whimsical on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 07:05:44 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

 Energy Policy (0+ / 0-)

I agree with you.  Not only is energy a pocket book issue, but it is an economic issue, and a national security issue.

I just have one question: why is it more environmentally sound to burn middle eastern oil than our own?

 Can we just get rid of Retards from Oklahoma? (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
Farlfoto

I know the WHOLE state isn't retarded, but given the 2 fascistic christianist assholes they have representing them in the Senate, maybe we otta cede Oklahoma back to TX, thereby limiting the RETARDED RACIST SOUTHERN SENATOR factor by 2.  If Oklahoma can't figure it out, maybe we otta do it FOR them.

-7.88, -6.72. "Wherever law ends, tyranny begins."--John Locke IMPEACH THE BASTARDS!!!

by caseynm on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 06:54:25 PM PDT

 Bush is oil merchant, Extraordinaire (0+ / 0-)

Its Bush's fault!!!!
He has made the flow of oil guaranteed unlike any time ever in history.
Because Bush has put the US military on top of the Persian gulf  the output of oil is a record high, and going higher.
Our troops have freedom to move around the Persian gulf at will.
Unlike the 70's oil embargo that tied us up politically (support for Israel), we now have free rein with 150,000 seasoned American troops.
This has unleashed a worldwide economic boom of historic proportions lifting 500 million people living in the mud into a middle class.
By the way no Government, Govt. agency or UN poverty panel has come close to helping so many people out of poverty like the Global market and  secure oil  has.

 James Imhoff (R-Exxon) (0+ / 0-)

...a true statesman!...very funny!!!

 Forget all the drilling/speculation debate (0+ / 0-)

Oil companies have said it should be somewhere around 55-60 a barrel to extract. Whatever that translates to as a gallon of gas, set up a system to rebate us the difference between $4 and that. Take the money out of the tax refunds for the oil companies. Then monitor closely what it actually costs to produce a barrel and adjust as necessary. We may or may not be at the peak, but we will be SOON.

No Bush investigation? NO SECOND TERM, Obama! (See Jerry Ford)

by Uosdwis on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 08:29:20 AM PDT

 hypocritical much inhofe? (0+ / 0-)

wasn't inhofe, among other republicans, the ones who complained that legislation in the congress was having a hard time getting passed because of unnessecary amendments, earmarks being attached to bills? if inhofe, and his ilk were so confident that his amendment to the bill had any validity at all. he would take his own advice, and submit it as a seperate bill, and let it pass or fail on it's own merits. there is no question now as to who his really against helping the average american with energy prices, and there is a capital R beside each of the senators names. lets be sure to do something about that this november.

 Energy Speculation Bill S. 3268 (0+ / 0-)

Hi,
I was watching TV the other day, and that lady senator from Alaska said what the republicans had against that bill was that it had a provision that no other energy measures would be considered before congress's vacation, recess or whatever you call it. She said they would support this bill without that provision.

That doesn't seem terribly unreasonable to me, but perhaps I don't know the whole story.  I do know I would like to see something done to lower gasoline prices.

Permalink | 70 comments


You are viewing a mobilized version of this site...
View original page here

Mobilized by Mowser Mowser