The Candidates on Oil

Since oil & gas prices are still at ridiculously high levels (and note how oilman Bush has done nothing about it; see article at )), let's see where Obama & McCain stand on the issue.

McCain
As of this writing, McCain supports opening up off-shore (coastal) sites to oil drilling (see .) He opposes drilling in ANWR (Artic National Wildlife Reserve). That could change, though, because he frequently flip-flops on issues (go to ). From his own website () you can see a list of items (click on Issues, then on American Energy) that he supports. He calls it the Lexington Project & #1 is more offshore drilling. He also includes a "clean car challenge" for automakers, a $300 million prize for a "battery challenge", & supports Flex-Fuel autos, cellulosic alcohol, & eliminating US tariffs & subsidies on ethanol. He supports "clean-coal" initiatives and building 45-100 new nuclear power plants. The very last item on his list is to encourage renewable energy (no dollars or numbers mentioned,just some sort of tax credit). In the meantime, check out his campaign aides & lobby money (go to and to for a video on the topic. And, from my read on his site, none of these would address the immediate issue.

Obama
From his website ()
He supports raising the CAFE (corporate average fuel economy), has sponsored or authorized legislation on the use of renewable fuels, a "healthcare for hybrids" act, a low carbon fuel standard act and he introduced the Oil Sense Act to eliminate oil tax breaks. He helped introduce the American Fuels Act to increase production, distribution & end uses of biofuels. So, his website supports that he has actively been trying to do something about the energy crisis. However, like McCain, many of his responses are also long term.

What both seem to be missing is the role of the futures market, speculation, and the Enron-loophole that allows speculation at ridiculously low initial investment. Americans, math anxiety in full mode, start to glaze over when you talk about this. So, here's the quick & dirty. When Bush Jr came into office, one of the first things he did was ease market restrictions (anyone know about the S&L Crisis of the '80's & how the Bush Family was involved?). Ergo Enron & all that entailed. These restrictions have never been rescinded. If we reduce the ability to speculate worldwide, I believe we'd see an immediate drop in prices.

We went into Iraq for oil, right? What if we took all those 150,000 US troops, offered oil jobs to Iraqis, & trained 'em to a) guard the pipeline from terrorists b) learn a new job skill in whatever area of oil production seems best c)provide housing & infrastructure on location and d) work with the Iraqi govt to ensure safety off all concerned. If oil starts pumping out of Iraq, supply will be up & prices will drop.

The reason there's so much uncertainty in oil is because data is so scarce. Go to . So, we're relying on incomplete data or possibilities to begin with--at least in terms of what oil exists and how much remains. This data is necessary, so perhaps we need to put a few more dollars into it for an earlier release.

A Crude Story

Crude Impact is a film currently playing on Sundance Channel. I recommend it, esp. for those who know very little about oil & how it affects everything. I've picked up a few other "crude snippets" over the last few months. Enjoy.

1. According to Congressman Robert Wexler (FL), the oil industry is sitting on hundreds of oil leases that have yet to be developed. Leases with proven energy deposits. In the meantime, the Republicans keep pushing for drilling in ANWAR & other protected areas (with no proof of energy deposits). Do we smell delay tactics in Big Oil? They're making tons of money now; why bother developing further? And Exxon is one of the biggest contributors to Republican coffers. (http://www.wexler.house.gov/).
2. What US company has the most oil interests? Nope, not Exxon. It's Morgan Stanley, a financial/investment services corporation. They own 60% of Olco Petroleum Group. . They also run an oil tanker business (see http://www.marinelink.com/Story/Morgan-Stanley-May-Run-Larger-Tankers-for-Oil-Trades-206124.html). They are the world's biggest trader in oil derivatives (see preceding article). So, what happens every time Morgan Stanley issues oil forecasts? They predict higher prices & lo & behold, the price spikes. Cha-ching. Right into the MS coffers.
3. Big Oil subsidies (reduced corporate income taxes for the oil industry, lower than average sales taxes on gas, government funded programs for big oil, etc.). These subsidies provide no incentive for anything to change. (see http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/fuel_economy/subsidizing-big-oil.html). Also see . Let's reduce or eliminate these subsidies & instead help solar, hydrothermal & wind companies.
This is pretty crude stuff, alright.

The Obama Express

Ok, the link will take you to a funny You Tube video (as long as that link remains), but that's the point. We need more humor in politics--just ask Stephanie Miller at http://www.stephaniemiller.com/home.php?PageId=85&PageSubId=. Stream her show or listen "live" if you live in Chicagoland.
So the Obama Express is heading for the Big Showdown, with Clinton conceding shortly (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24944453/?GT1=43001). The question everyone is asking, "Will Clinton be his running mate?" Does it make sense? What states can she bring to the ticket that Obama doesn't already have. Face it: politics IS politics. The Huffington Post has a list of Top 10 (): Jim Webb, Hilary, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, Brian Schweitzer,Janet Napolitano, Sherrod Brown, Chuck Hagel, Wesley Clark, Kathleen Sebelius, Tom Daschle & Mike Bloomberg. Ok, for the non-serious, go to 23/6-- it's a hoot. Oh, I think the real question right now is: Who will replace Obama in the Senate? Gov. Rod gets to pick the replacement until the next congressional election year. Would he chose Lisa Madigan? Jan Schakowsky? Rahm Emanuel? Jesse Jackson Jr? This is getting really interesting....