Thinking Right

By Van

June 21, 2007 8:42 AM | Link to this

Typical loony leftist thinking.

Lets raise taxes to pay for alternative fuels.

So the consumer will pay through the nose for the gas they need, to pay so some pointy head academic can drive his E85 mini car, while paying extra for the privilege.

And to add insult to injury, they will take a food crop and use it for making expensive fuel! End result, food will cost more. But do not worry, they aren’t using their money, they are using yours, unless you have a low paying job, they you will be fired, laid off or part of the cut back in expenses.

Since all taxes paid by corporations are all passed on to the consumer, the incentive is lost.

To break it down for those in mid-town, this is a lose-lose situation.

Food will cost more. Fuel will cost more. You will use “green” power, that cost more. Your vehicle will cost more, to use the “new” green fuels. Your taxes will go up to subsidize all this.

Where is the up side???

By RCH

June 21, 2007 8:47 AM | Link to this

getalife Missed your response yesterday. As you can see, 29 billion in NEW taxes. If anybody is gouging the price of fuel it is your own govt., which takes out a far amount more in taxes than the oil companies make.

By jbmlaw

June 21, 2007 8:47 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. We are all delighted to see our Congress pursuing corporate welfare so aggressively, ensuring taxpayer-funded markets for those who produce products that are not economically viable otherwise. As Jim properly notes, this is not exclusively Democrats feeding at the trough; the statists have two leftist Republicans and two farm state Republicans (the constituents of the latter would be primary beneficiaries of the corporate welfare) playing this game. I am certain our leftist friends are disillusioned - they really thought Democrats in power would be different from the corrupt Republican big-spenders.

By yawn

June 21, 2007 8:49 AM | Link to this

Jim’s blog only got 77 posts yesterday. Jim can’t blog about illegal immigration every day but Jim has a quota to meet. Every Jim blog from now on will contain a reference to illegal immigration regardless of how irrelevant it may be to the subject. Go Jim.

Oh, about the energy policy. Figures congress would tax the oil companies and then turn around and give them subsidies for developing and selling us alternate forms of energy.

By Redneck Convert

June 21, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this

Well, as a good GA redneck, I’m against using alcohol for anything but booze. Its just a shame to see Congress try to create a shortfall in the booze supply by forcing us to use the alcohol in our gas tanks. This will lead to all kind of evil things. Like rednecks stopping on the highway and getting under their trucks and screwing the bottom cap loose on the gas tank and taking a few sips.

Besides, the commies in Congress are against letting the oil companys make big money. But as that rich fellow explained at Billy Bob’s the other day, if the big fish are allowed to get their fill, then pretty soon us rednecks will get the leftovers. The money will just dribble on down the line. Nothing wrong with that. Me, I plan to buy a new doublewide with my share. I been waiting about 6 years for my share after the big tax cuts was passed, and its bound to come pretty soon. I imagine jbmlaw and Van and the other big boys that get the tax cuts are getting mighty sick of all that money by now and are ready to stop holding on to it.

Anyway, if gas gets to 6 bucks a gallon I’ll be mighty glad I don’t have to pay to fill up my beer truck.

There was a mighty big wreck on GA 400 this a.m. Two rednecks hit the wall and it looked like they was feeling no pain. Three lanes going south was closed off. I felt sorry for those good old boys, starting off their day by getting nabbed by cops after a night of drinking and having their cars wrecked besides. I hope they are able to make it to church on Sunday as all good rednecks should.

By RCH

June 21, 2007 8:57 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw When gas prices are high enough, the profiteers will step in with alternative fuels because a profit is to be made. It is not the responsibility of the Federal govt. to create a false market on yours and mine dime.

By Dusty

June 21, 2007 9:01 AM | Link to this

Dear Jim Wooten,

NO NO NO. I am NOT ready to pay $6 per gallon for gasoline. What in the world is Congress thinking? Are they thinking at all?

Seems like their idea of independence from oil is to make us all the walking poor. Therefore we could neither afford to ride or eat but we would be INDEPENDENT from oil. What a choice!

I suggest we put Congress on bread and water and make them walk everywhere. Give them a foretaste of what they are planning for us.

Van posed a good question. Where is the up side??

By ACT

June 21, 2007 9:02 AM | Link to this

Jim is just using another traditional Republican trick. Fear. It’s futile Jim. The cons are going to take some monumental azz kickins in 08 and your fearmongering isn’t going to change that.

By Joe

June 21, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this

If gas prices rise significantly, then that’s great news. To stop funding terrorism with our dependence on foreign oil and to mitigate the harm caused by global warming, we need to use less gas. Basic economics teaches that as prices rise, demand falls (notice the glut of SUVs on the market lately). Therefore, I support a tax that reduces the demand for gasoline. I’d rather adjust to high gasoline prices (we’ll have more fuel efficient cars and more demand for regional mass transit), then adjust to the effects of global warming (Australia is experiencing a catastrophic drought that has lasted six years now).

By Dave

June 21, 2007 9:19 AM | Link to this

Let the Democrats raise fuel taxes. No better way for them to lose both houses of congress and the 08 presidency. They are doing such a good job of showing who they really are, why get in the way?

By Rich

June 21, 2007 9:22 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw and others,

Read “Naked Economics” by Charles Wheelan. You’ll find much that you agree with, much you disagree with, and you’ll learn a lot. It’s a fast, highly readable book that anybody interested in this stuff would thoroughly enjoy — guaranteed.

By jm

June 21, 2007 9:33 AM | Link to this

personally, I would prefer to see some of the existing tax breaks that energy (read oil) companies currently get eliminated, rather than tax their profits. Those tax breaks are nothing than glorified corporate welfare.

Alternative energy sources are nice but are still not practical for large scale, 365 day a year production in all parts of the country. Despite the stigma, nuclear is still the best option in the short term to reducing dependency on fossil fuels. As for a location to put the radioactive waste, I would recommend Crawford Texas.

By Dusty

June 21, 2007 9:34 AM | Link to this

Yes ACT @9:02

You liberals don’t “fear” anything except fighting for this country’s war on terrorism. I guess you are saving all your “azz kickins” for 08 and one more mighty Democratic defeat.

Have you looked at your possible candidates recently? Larry, Curly and Mo looked better. In fact, I believe the “stoogies” are already serving in Congress as the so called Democratic “leaders”.

Wow, “Democratic leaders”!! That’s an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

By Curious Observer

June 21, 2007 9:37 AM | Link to this

So what is Wooten’s solution to the oil dependency problem? I see plenty of criticism of Congressional interference in his beloved free market, but I see nothing that will suggest an alternative—other than to continue to depend on foreign oil and thus put the collective national testicles in the vice grip of sponsors of terrorism.

Wooten and his slavish followers would no doubt oppose imposition of an immediate requirement that auto manufacturers hike the mpg of new automobiles, but that is one solution. Another is a move toward coal-based alternatives for heating and manufacturing. Still another is to ignore the shrill whining of the environmentalists about the supposed dangers of nuclear power. And still another is to accelerate work on fuel cell technology.

I agree that ethanol is not a sustainable solution. It is simply not economically feasible. But instead of taking the negative view of any alternative to the current dependence on oil, why not focus on those alternatives that can work, given a national will?

By Southern Democrat

June 21, 2007 9:39 AM | Link to this

The fundamental flaw in the argument today is the assumption that current gas prices are market-driven. They’re not. We receive the majority of our foreign oil through a price-setting cartel (OPEC) that operates outside the marketplace.

Further, the argument that subsidies for ethanol would drive up the price of food is simply inane. If that is a grave concern, then roll back the billions we pay in subsidies to farmers to let their land lie fallow (in direct violation of our WTO obligations).

Jim Wooten (and others, including Dick Cheney) seem to equate the ability to drive a gas-fueled car cheaply with freedom. Nothing could be further from the truth. The privilege of driving a car is subsidized by the state (artificially) at every turn (pun intended) through road construction and maintenance.

Finally, indulge me for sounding like a broken record, but for those in favor of market-driven initiatives, the Kyoto cap-and-trade system is ready when you are!

By RCH

June 21, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this

JM Technolgy is already being developed to use the spent uranium fuel for other products,(Same as they did with unusable coal slurry)so you may be giving Crawford Tx. an economic boost. We should have been building nuclear plants for the last 35 years. What stopped us?

By KR

June 21, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this

I’m not a fan of ethanol and I think the use of alternative fuels should be a personal choice.

That being said, Jim points out the horror that by 2016, gas prices might be over $6 per gallon, a 100% increase in 8.5 years.

To keep it in perspective, gas is currently priced at about $3.10 per gallon. Anyone want to hazard a guess at what gas cost in 1998? About $1.30 per gallon.

So, what is the real difference here? Congress’ meddling or simply the effect of inflation over time?

By KR

June 21, 2007 9:44 AM | Link to this

I’m not a fan of ethanol and I think the use of alternative fuels should be a personal choice.

That being said, Jim points out the horror that by 2016, gas prices might be over $6 per gallon, a 100% increase in 8.5 years.

To keep it in perspective, gas is currently priced at about $3.10 per gallon. Anyone want to hazard a guess at what gas cost in 1998? About $1.30 per gallon.

So, what is the real difference here? Congress’ meddling or simply the effect of inflation over time?

By Thrash

June 21, 2007 9:47 AM | Link to this

No wonder this Congress has an approval rating LOWER than the President’s and LOWER than any Congress in history. Welcome to the Democrat controlled world again.

By ATC

June 21, 2007 10:01 AM | Link to this

So Jim, please explain what happened to the price of gas between 1998 and present. Most of that time with a Republican congress no less. Jim you’re full of sh&t on this one.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 10:08 AM | Link to this

The consevative position to do nothing and keep paying higher and higher prices to the enemy is pathetic.

Then again, when Reagen decided to deal with immigration, he made it much worse.

The point being, they have to wean the oil addiction and stop funding the terrorists.

Americans will have to sacrifice even though most sacrifice nothing in the Iraq occupation.

Corn ethanol is not the solution but has created a better economy for corn producing states.

A combination of all alternative energy is the solution.

But lets not take the conservative position and do nothing.

By jm

June 21, 2007 10:11 AM | Link to this

RCH - two reasons no new nuke plants have been built: Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. America is full of nimbys and no one wants a reactor in their backyard (just like no one wants an oil derrick of their coastline).

By David

June 21, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this

Nuclear, nuclear, nuclear. Every state should have 3 or 4 reactors. Make all the rails electric, develop long running auto batteries. This is one area that France has excelled and we could learn from. The potential for disaster is far less from nuclear than economic and war disaster caused by having our energy needs controlled by Islamic extemists.

By Southern Democrat

June 21, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this

I feel safer.

http://judicialwatch.org/6322.shtml

Good golly!

By Anonymous

June 21, 2007 10:13 AM | Link to this

Of course he is. Whenever any path away from “cheap oil” is discussed, it’s the responsibility of Republican flacks to try to stir up fear and outrage.

Gotta keep those Texaco lobbyists happy, y’know.

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 10:16 AM | Link to this

Getalife, I think you are right when you stated that a combination of alternative fuels is the solution to this crisis.

Ethanol is not the cure all, we couldn’t produce enough to keep up with demand.

Another solution? Walk, bike, carpool, etc. Also, I think more money should be spent on (gasp) public transportation.

By RCH

June 21, 2007 10:16 AM | Link to this

getalif Hell must have frozen over. We finally agree on something:”A combination of all alternative energy is the solution”. But higher taxes on oil companies is not the solution. They will simply pass it on to the consumer. Encouraging alternative fuels with tax breaks and incentives will speed up the process of alternative fuels.

By Rick

June 21, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this

Lets see Oil Cos make .08 per gallon profit, gas Stations make around .04 per gallon. Between the state and federal government taxes the government makes an average of .60 a gallon. So WHO is gouging the public? All you LIBERALS who want to screw the oil cos, you better HOPE your pension plans are not into oil are you are gonna get higher gas price and less pension. WAKE UP!

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this

RCH, People who do not realize that oil companies will pass their expense along has their head in the sand. I don’t know about most, but I know that I can’t afford $6/gallon for gas. If it gets much worse, the Bosch’s will be walking everywhere.

Most people’s solution to increased expenses is to just put them on credit cards which will lead to a whole other crisis for our economy. I for one, would rather walk, than to have $20,000 in credit card debt.

By RCH

June 21, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this

Jm How many individuals have died in theUnited States from an nuclear accident. How many have died in the pursuit of oil. Take your pick!

By Anonymous

June 21, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this

If eliminating tax breaks for energy giants is viewed as “increasing taxes,” then I’m all for a huge tax increase.

By icecube

June 21, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this

You are all in complete denial about peak oil — which has already occurred (the sweet, light good stuff).

I will be very surprised if gas doesn’t cost closer to $16/gal — (SIXTEEN!) by 2016.

It will probably cost $6/gal. well before 2010.

By MG

June 21, 2007 10:26 AM | Link to this

I would think that as a conservative, Mr. Wooten would be in favor of letting consumers pay for the true price of oil so that alternative energies not reliant on the anti-democratic sheikhs of the Middle East. Our legislators are finally beginning to pursue an energy policy that will help keep us out of costly foreign wars and passing the cost on to everyone “equally” just like a sales tax.

But all Wooten can do is complain about the price of gas. So much for your ideological consistency.

By icecube

June 21, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this

You are all in complete denial about peak oil — which has already occurred (the sweet, light good stuff).

I will be very surprised if gas doesn’t cost closer to $16/gal — (SIXTEEN!) by 2016.

It will probably cost $6/gal. well before 2010.

And it doesn’t much matter what the Congress does.

By george

June 21, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this

You must take peak oil into consideration when talking about the rising price of gas. By 2016, I guarantee we will have already passed the peak in global oil production. This is why gas will be more than 6.00/gallon. In fact it will be a lot more than 6 bucks. Try 12 bucks or more and not readily available. Those days in the early 70’s will look like heaven compared to what we have coming. Just look up peak oil online and readup on it. You’ll see what I’m talking about. This is not a political issue anymore. We are talking about the survival of civilization as we know it.

By Aquagirl

June 21, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

The priviledge of driving a car is subsidized by the state (artificially) at every turn (pun intended) through road construction and maintainance.

Yep. And we subsidize the extra cops for traffic (except in Atlanta), the “public” lands that are for the use of oil companies only, pipelines, etc.etc. etc. Jim, in his continued depression, is assuming cheap gas is as natural as the two-party system. It just grew there and will remain forever, like Stone Mountain.

Don’t forget the cost of our foreign policy, being involved in the middle east. That costs troops and their lives, and lots of defense spending. All so the right-wing can cart their fat a%$#es around in gigantor SUV’s, as clearly enumerated as their right in the Constitution.

The upside to higher oil prices: less use. Ultimately that’s good, no matter what you Supersize-It-All types think. Less driving means less pollution. Less time commuting. Higher transportation costs means buying more locally. Of course, that means Supersize Americans will have to consider weaning themselves from Wal-Mart $5.97 spandex and produce grown in Chile.

This bunch won’t make any sacrifice whatsoever for the good of their children. And their support of a war launched by oil-financed terrorists is sticking a yellow ribbon on their gas-guzzlers. If we pull them out of the trough, expect a lot of oinking and squealing. It’s natural behavior for pigs.

By Lou

June 21, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

” the time has come the wisemen say..to talk of many things of sailing ships and candle wax of cabbage and kings” … I use to work to bring money home for a better life for my family. Now I work to keep the government going. When are the “rich” congressman going to realize that while $6 a gallon is tip change for them it is going to destroy our economy. And then will finish it off by raising taxes… Osama forget your suicide bombers congress is destroying us from within.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

Bosch,

Yes, it is called sacrifice and we need to get off our fat, lazy a*-es and sacrifice.

RCH,

If anything, our government should roll back the subsidies and cut the taxes they get to drop prices.

By Anonymous

June 21, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

Awesome. We might get some of those Hummers and other gas guzzlers off the road. It will be 2016, not 1916, I’m sure a loaf of bread and a gallon of milk will also be more expensive. A big pity party for those of the right who cannot face up to reality.

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 10:30 AM | Link to this

Rick, I hardly think that all the liberals in the country are out to “screw” the oil companies. We, just like you, want to have REAL solutions to this problem. And it appears to me, that some of the more level headed (conservative and liberal both) here this morning are in agreement to actual real solutions.

I, like many, are totally sick of the political games being played on both sides of the aisle. I’m tired of our dependence on oil, and the horrific consequences this addiction has caused, and the politicians blaming one another (again, on both sides) and nothing REAL being done about it.

Let’s all be a little pragmatic here and stop with the “the liberals are doing this/the conservatives are doing that” bullsh!t. In case you haven’t noticed, this is a AMERICAN issue, and an AMERICAN problem.

By Greg Del Secco

June 21, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this

We need to elect 535 new congressman/women, not considering anyone who is a career politician. Then find a president that is willing to take charge and lead this country in the right direction. With the choice of candidates given to us today, I understand why people don’t vote, even though I am not accepting of it. We still have to choose the lesser of all evils. Since there is really no candidate that is really in it for the betterment of our lives, instead continuing to en$rich$ theirs…..Nancy Pelosi is a great example of a tough talking lyer, who behind the scenes is as corrupt and unethical anyone before her…….

By Ray

June 21, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this

While I agree that the alternate energy movement is a joke, I must disagree that $6/gal is a bad thing. Actually, I would welcome it today as it would no doubt cut down on the traffic. Driving is a privelege earned, as is having a car, as is commuting a distance. Let those of us who can afford to do these things at $6/gal be allowed to do so.

By RCH

June 21, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this

My favorite long term energy solution is wave turbines. They are located off shore under water. They are not effected by drought or lack of sunshine. The impact on the environment is minimal and there is no waste product. I think this is the wave( no pun) of the future.

By w.adams

June 21, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this

Now we know why Congress has a 14% approval rating. These Liberals are DANGEROUS to this country. Alternative Energy you say?? Drill in Alaska and we won’t need the Arabs any more. It is really that simple. Fred Thompson in 08’

By tread

June 21, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Sure, the Heritage Foundation researchers say…whatever…I hope it does go that high, the sooner, the better, then only the fatcats will be driving…ride a bike to your anti-illegal alien protests. We should be paying for what we use, period. I’ll say it like some others have…SACRIFICE and stop whining about “big government.” The Republican around here so no issue with big oil making big profits as long as they can get gas for near nothing and continue driving the quarter mile to mcdonalds. someone even had the gall to mention pensions as it relates to oil companies…haha. that is a good one.

By Scott Alderman

June 21, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Before they are ever placed in office, every newly-elected member of Congress ought to be required to take a basic lesson in economics and capitalism. This energy bill is pure politics, and is so anti-economically based it is pathetic.

My 14-year old son figured it out: if we allocate more corn to be used as fuel, the price of corn goes up. If the price of corn goes up, the price of many, many food items goes up, including secondary ingredient items like beef, pork and chicken.

If we are trying to get away from oil and gas, the oil and gas companies and the investors (around the world, by the way) who own them will not invest in new capacity, R&D, etc. — so what happens to the price of oil and gas? Duh-h-h-h!

To all members of Congress who vote for this bill: Learn something about basic economics. Most of you are smarter than this, even if you don’t realize it.

By THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL

June 21, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Watching the hate America leftist filth on here puke up their irrational hate yet again is in one very limited sense kind of reassuring for normal patriotic Americans. Leftists thrive on fear, socialistic divisiveness and hatred. These witless apoplectic moral fascists tolerate NO opposition to their poisonous cut and run defeatism. It inexorably leads one to the inevitable logical paraphrase of an old saying brimming with unassailable wisdom.

THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL!!!

Its freaking hilarious how these puffed up eco whacko pinko scum refuse to take any blame for the failure to build even ONE new petrol refinery in how many decades? Whilst they hypocritically slither around, often in petrol guzzling convoys of SUVs and limousines bleating like constipated chattering monkeys about global whining.

WAY TO GO JIM - Your column today made the Drudge Report. So our witty merciless b!tchslapping of the cowardly leftist Bush hating turds will have a slightly wider audience today!!

WE MUST DEPORT THE 20 MILLION OR SO ILLEGALS LEECHES IMMEDIATELY!!

By Hyman Dos

June 21, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Jim Wooten doesn’t know what he is talking about. He is dismissed. “Poor” old Jim can always be the door greeter at the Miami Wal-Mart, oh no he couldn’t, he isn’t multilingual.

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

Getalife, Exactly, and as Aquagirl pointed out so, well, truthfully, many of the lazy, fatass, WalMart loving, Americans are not willing to make those sacrifices. They will lay around on their hugely obese fat asses (after an all you can eat buffet from Ryan’s) and complain all day not know that they are actually the problem.

By mw shadow

June 21, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

I like what thechristianpolitico dot cam has to say about this.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this

Watching C-Span, there are some really good debates on energy.

Peak oil reached its peak during the Carter years where we conserved, it dropped and then has been rising ever since.

At some point in the future the oil will be gone. Senator Dorgon was talking about a hydrogen car that emits water vapor.

Very cool.

By Gibb

June 21, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this

Of course the Heritage Foundation is going to come out with findings of a monsterous increase in gasoline, they are a conservation think tank (as the very first page on their own website will tell you). What else would you expect of them? Where is the analysis by an un-biased party, if there is such a thing anymore?

But to play devil’s advocate, let’s all assume that it is correct and that we will all be paying $6+ a gallon. Since so many of you seem to be believers of this report, what do you intend to do to prepare yourselves for this inevitability other than moan and complain? Hmmm, how about downsizing vehicles (you don’t have to buy a Corolla, but do you really need the Hummer?) or how about buying a house closer to work?

I see so many people complain about their commutes and the costs associated with them, but I rarely see anyone doing anything about it. You want the government to build more roads for you to be able to drive your 40 mile commute alone in your SUV, and somehow you don’t see that this is as much of a subsidy as the government offering more transit options to folks who don’t want to live as you have chosen.

If gas prices reach $6/gallon, I will welcome it because I’ve taken steps to prepare myself (and no, I am not rich or make a lot of money). The majority of you can sit there with your heads in the sand if you want.

By G Vander Plaats

June 21, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this

Just to clarify, the $.54 cent tariff on imported ethanol is to help offset the $.51 credit that all producers get. Thus, the real effect of the tariff is that it costs Brazil $.03 per gallon to bring ethanol here. They pay a $.54 tariff and obtain the $.51 credit. Without the tariff, the U.S. would subsidize foreign ethanol production.

By dgaggi

June 21, 2007 10:43 AM | Link to this

I hope all of you that voted for the Democrats becuase you were ticked off at the REPULICANS are happy. How soon we all forget what happens when the Democrats are in control. The government gets bigger, they tax the crap out of us to pay for their stupid pet projects, and last but not least we get poorer. I just wish that the Democrats lame brain ideas were reported more.

By GEbling

June 21, 2007 10:43 AM | Link to this

Corporations DO NOT PAY TAXES. Their customers pay the taxes for them through increased cost of the goods. A $10 billion increase in oil taxes is the same as a $10 billion increase in the price consumers will pay for gas. Anything that travels by truck to the supermarket will go up in price as the companies that deliver those goods will have to pass on the increased delivery cost. This is a formula for inflation and economic disaster. Left wing extremists are pandering to their ignorant constituents who believe this will stick it to big oil. Bend over America! The left wing extremists are about to stick it to you.

By Dan

June 21, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this

At least the Dems are working toward getting the US energy independent…instead of giving away windfalls to the oil companies leading us by the nose, like the last couple Congresses did… Besides, I thought conservatives thought proactively taking care of problems was the American way…Saddam anyone? Funny how getting servicemen and women killed over oil is better than a bunch of us taking a hit in the wallet over oil. Hypocrites.

By Patriot

June 21, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this

Folks: Instead of focusing on ‘this bad story’ and ‘that bad story’, all we AMERICANS need to do is to STOP DRIVING FOR ONE DAY. Period! If that doesn’t put the fear in the Big Five oil cartels that WE, AMERICANS are wide awake and wise to the cartels’ extortions, nothing will.

Everytime I read or hear about something that portends bad tidings about this country’s future, I’m reminded to do one thing - ACT NOW! while we still have a chance to reverse the vast amount of damage being done to THIS GREAT NATION. The longer we wait, the sooner it will be too late to do anything but RE-act, and that’s the weakest position one can take.

People, you have strength in numbers - you’re simply and constantly reminded that you don’t according to those who would have you believe otherwise. Stand up for your future!!!

By Roger

June 21, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this

Oil is waaay undertaxed. Oil markets do not have to account for the huge costs associated with maintaining a military presance in the mid-east. Sure, they price in “risk premium” but they never bear the full risk.
1) Military defense costs are external to the accounting of oil companies. They are free riding.

2) Oil companies don’t pay for any costs associated with Global Warming and unsual weather brought on by an increase in carbon emmissions.

3)Oil companies don’t pay for the health care problems created by carbon emmissions.

By Mackie101

June 21, 2007 10:48 AM | Link to this

All of you fearmongering goons had better wake up! If the oil companies hadn’t bought out all the alternative technologies in the ‘70’s and ‘80’s, we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in today. Oh yeah, and thank Reagan, Bush I and Bush II for further dragging our country’s collective asses on this one. If our country had decided to fund research for alternative energy during the last big oil crisis in the ‘70’s, we’d be sitting pretty by now. But no, idiotic Republicans conspired with the oil companies who had no reason to change their scheming ways in order to keep us on the oil-based path that’s been obsolete for the last decade or so. The result? We’ve been actively funding the very people who are plotting against our country and wish to make us submit to their complete and absolute tyranny (I’m talking about the Saudis, among others). And every red-blooded American knows just how much the Bush’s LOVE the Saudis! Their relationship with them has made them wealthy beyond belief, so do you really think George W. is going to rock the boat with himself and his Papa and the rest of the leeches inside? We’ve known this day was going to be coming for years. Stop complaining and deal with it. Obama for ‘08!!!!!

By Dennis

June 21, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this

In his column today, it’s interesting that Jim Wooten just reports these possibilities, and takes no stand on them.

Maybe it’s because Republicans raising taxes! My Gawd, the world is coming to and end.

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

By Good Sense

June 21, 2007 10:53 AM | Link to this

Ride a bike! You’ll be healthier, weigh less, feel better and it works better than makeup for women. Ride more -Drive Less!

Take a walk! You’ll be happier and healthier. Good for short errands. Walk more - Drive Less!

or

Be a slave. Work for the car. Work harder for the car. The car will tell you when to stop and how much work you will do for it.

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 10:53 AM | Link to this

So, what did King George II do for a living before he was Governor of Texas? I wonder what he’ll go back to doing after he is President.

I mean, he won’t make much money as a speaker after he’s president.

By h_charles

June 21, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this

Good. Maybe then Americans will stop wasting energy and drive fuel efficient vehicles instead of obnoxious Suburbans.

By Anonymous

June 21, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

GEbling, according to your logic we not only shouldn’t tax corporations… we should increase the subsidies, bribes, and other favors our legislature already does for them! Because after all, it “costs” nothing—and surely their savings will be passed along to us consumers, just as their expenses are.

Right? Is anyone dumb enough to believe that?

By THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL

June 21, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

I see the stream of ‘Drudge referred’ leftist scum is already adding to the usual pile of puke from Bush hating leftist turds.

Funny how these eco whackos NEVER discuss how the lefties global whining nutters and Greenpee ce types (geddit?)prevented ANY new oil refineries being built for decades!!!

Why don’t these smug leftist scum go drive their over priced Prius’ over a cliff en masse like good little lemmings??!!

By klynch67

June 21, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

The tree huggers are so smart….lets all scrap our gas burners and drive electric cars…thene the energy companies raise the price of electricity and have to build more coal fired power plants to keep up with demand….it will cost $100 to charge up your electric car and the power plants will pollute more than all the gas cars did. Good plan.

By RCH

June 21, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this

Bosch Lets see, Bill made 10 million last year telling lies.

By Mackie101

June 21, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this

All of you fearmongering goons had better wake up! If the oil companies hadn’t bought out all the alternative technologies in the ‘70’s and ‘80’s, we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in today. Oh yeah, and thank Reagan, Bush I and Bush II for further dragging our country’s collective asses on this one. If our country had decided to fund research for alternative energy during the last big oil crisis in the ‘70’s, we’d be sitting pretty by now. But no, idiotic Republicans conspired with the oil companies who had no reason to change their scheming ways in order to keep us on the oil-based path that’s been obsolete for the last decade or so. The result? We’ve been actively funding the very people who are plotting against our country and wish to make us submit to their complete and absolute tyranny (I’m talking about the Saudis, among others). And every red-blooded American knows just how much the Bush’s LOVE the Saudis! Their relationship with them has made them wealthy beyond belief, so do you really think George W. is going to rock the boat with himself and his Papa and the rest of the leeches inside? We’ve known this day was going to be coming for years. Stop complaining and deal with it. Obama for ‘08!!!!!

By klynch67

June 21, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

The tree huggers are so smart….lets all scrap our gas burners and drive electric cars…thene the energy companies raise the price of electricity and have to build more coal fired power plants to keep up with demand….it will cost $100 to charge up your electric car and the power plants will pollute more than all the gas cars did. Good plan.

By Term Limits

June 21, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

WE NEED TERM LIMITS ON THESE CLOWNS; SOME OF THESE SENATORS HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE FOR 40 YEARS - LOOK AT KENEDY WHAT A CLOWN ** WE NEED TERM LIMITS**** WE NEED TERM LIMITS**** WE NEED TERM LIMITS*

By Stiles

June 21, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

So What… Have you ever heard of Inflation”

I’m not going to defend the actions of Congress,but I would like to take issue with the title of Jim Wooten’s article. Why is $6 dollar gas such a big worry. Through inflation, the cost of gas will naturally rise over time. If gas hits $6 by 2014, it will have increase 7% per year over the increase due to inflation. I guess 7% isn’t nearly as provocative a number as the 104% that Jim parrots from the Heritiage Foundation.

By Jim

June 21, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

The price of gas will go up as demand increases and/or supply decreases. Simple econimics. As oter countries become energy pigs like the US, the price will go up! Get used to it. Not sure if it was mentioned because I got tired of the political complaining… but, why not buy some stock in an energy/oil service company??? If they are making all the profits and passing on any taxes to us down-trodden, why not become one of their owners? I bought some in February and have made enough to cover alot of price increases…

By Slick57

June 21, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

It all comes down to greed in one form or another that got us into this mess. We need to do our part individually to get us back on the right track. Why do Americans need 2 ton SUVs, cars with 300 hp and insist on traveling at 85 mph on the interstates? In the seventies we roughed it with 85 hp cars and 55 mph speed limits. Let’s do it again!

By Zute

June 21, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

It’s time to take back Amerika. We need a revolution to clean out the scum who have hijacked our way of life.

By Term Limits

June 21, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

WE NEED TERM LIMITS ON THESE CLOWNS; SOME OF THESE SENATORS HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE FOR 40 YEARS - LOOK AT KENEDY WHAT A CLOWN ** WE NEED TERM LIMITS**** WE NEED TERM LIMITS**** WE NEED TERM LIMITS*

By Term Limits

June 21, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

WE NEED TERM LIMITS ON THESE CLOWNS; SOME OF THESE SENATORS HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE FOR 40 YEARS - LOOK AT KENEDY WHAT A CLOWN ** WE NEED TERM LIMITS**** WE NEED TERM LIMITS**** WE NEED TERM LIMITS*

By Calvin Hobbes

June 21, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this

Water is a more precious commodity than gas and as the article points out we are experiencing severe droughts with shortages for farms as well as drinking water. With global warming and pollution contaminating supplies it will only get worse. We need to start dealing with this now. We may have to pay $6 for gas, but it will really hurt when we pay a lot more for food and water.

By Jeff B

June 21, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this

This bill is rediculous. I thought the dems were fighting big corporations and corp welfare. This bill just hurts the working classes to benefit the wealthy who can invest in this tech. It shows the true heart of the Dems….

By JB

June 21, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this

I Say Fire the whole bunch of them.What is government looking for? a social riot?Keep pushing ….

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this

RCH,

Touche’

You have to admit, Bill is a better speaker

I didn’t hear any of Bill’s speeches, so what kind of “lies” did he tell.

By THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL

June 21, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this

@mackieturd

tell us how many millions the Arkansas rapist Klinton has made off the fascistic towel heads in Dubai!! I note you predicktably make NO comment on that.

By catlady

June 21, 2007 11:07 AM | Link to this

jm, don’t forget Brown’s Ferry (AL) where a contractor checked for a gas leak with a lighted candle, as I remember. Or something similarly idiotic that has cost billions and billions of dollars to the ratepayers (TVA) and decades to “fix” the problem caused by an ignorant idiot. Also, TVA did a study, in about 1970 as I recall, that proported to show that the area was safe from earthquakes, a few years before they discovered the rift going through the area. And of course now we have terrorists.

Only God can use nuclear energy responsibly.

By erikvilius.blogspot.com

June 21, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this

I’m no liberal but it only makes sense that a significant increase in energy prices will produce more efficient cars, appliances, homes, etc - as well as stimulate a variety of energy alternatives. We need an economic Marshall Plan to keep us from being held hostage to big oil and the emerging petro-states. The time to begin is now.

By RonPen

June 21, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this

Let’s try a novel concept and let market forces determine where we go, rather than trying to have government pick the winners and losers. Already the refining companies are holding back on capacity given all of this discussion on “energy” policy. When a gallon of gas gets to the point where alternatives make economic sense, the market will go there. Already we are closing in on the break-even point on oil shale. Let the market work, period.

By Jeff B

June 21, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this

This bill is rediculous. I thought the dems were fighting big corporations and corp welfare. This bill just hurts the working classes to benefit the wealthy who can invest in this tech. It shows the true heart of the Dems….

By Steve

June 21, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

By Redneck Convert

June 21, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this

Well, as a good GA redneck, I’m against using alcohol for anything but booze. Its just a shame to see Congress try to create a shortfall in the booze supply by forcing us to use the alcohol in our gas tanks.

This is near sghted, I’ll pay $5.00 a gallon for alcohol as lomg as it is a good drinking grade, this will burn bettr in our cars. $5.00 a gallon to drive and drink!! now there’s a program I can get behind (well at least fall over from!)

By Greg

June 21, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

Huge piece of misinformation here:

“Ethanol requires more energy to produce than it generates as fuel…”

Ethanol produces 30% more energy than required to produce it. I’m guessing Brazil is ignored as an aberration of physics.

I’m amazed he didn’t include global warming in this speech.

Still, 30% is not enough of an energy bonus. While he derrides wind and solar as too expensive, he ignores the fact that their greatest cost lies in initial building of such facilities. We have an identical cost-benefit curve in the internet and telephone infrastructure. High initial cost, low maintenance, more profit in the long term.

Both wind and solar are the precusors to a hydrogen based economy. But, that would eliminate all the existing refineries, pipelines, and a total rebuilding of the energy infrastructure of the US. Long term it’s the ideal solution. In the short term, it’s all a huge cost.

Basically, this nut isn’t going to see any rise in the stocks in his portfolio. So, of course, he and every other fruitcake financial analyst out to make the most cash they can before they die is dead set against it.

By Steve

June 21, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

What better way to benefit the largest donors to both parties. 90% of farm subsidies don’t go to small farmers, but to large corporate farms.

The current scheme gives the farm lobby 50 cents for each gallon of ethanol from corn taken out of the food stocks. Soon we have a corn shortage and the price of corn skyrockets. This is nothing more than a legal way of stealing from consumers and taxpayers at the same time.

We will never be able to replace all of our gasoline with ethanol made here. There isn’t enough land. The market will find another option and it will take even longer to do that now that government is involved.

By erikvilius.blogspot.com

June 21, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

I’m no liberal but it only makes sense that a significant increase in energy prices will produce more efficient cars, appliances, homes, etc - as well as stimulate a variety of energy alternatives. We need an economic Marshall Plan to keep us from being held hostage to big oil and the emerging petro-states. The time to begin is now.

By erikvilius.blogspot.com

June 21, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

I’m no liberal but it only makes sense that a significant increase in energy prices will produce more efficient cars, appliances, homes, etc - as well as stimulate a variety of energy alternatives. We need an economic Marshall Plan to keep us from being held hostage to big oil and the emerging petro-states. The time to begin is now.

By Curious Observer

June 21, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

I hope all of you that voted for the Democrats becuase you were ticked off at the REPULICANS are happy.

I’m ready for another Republican administration—just as soon as I get a rectum replacement.

By ihateyou

June 21, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

You’re all idiots. Democrats. Republicans. You’re all idiots. Think for yourselves. Both parties are corrupt. You are distracted by American Idol and Paris Hilton. Wake up. They’re all corrupt. There is no difference between the left and the right. It’s all an illusion. The free market will fix it all in time despite what politicians try to do. Your dollars are your only real votes. Vote wisely. I wear a tinfoil hate. You’re all idiots and I love you.

By Dr. Brauwn

June 21, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

It’s insane to subsidise anything. It has to pay for it self to be viable.

In Sweden people drive Hydrogen for years without any trouble. Why all this bullsh!t here in the US? A whole barrel of fuel only cost $1.80 to refine and harvest, so why all the phony cost? It’s scam and they make us get used to it becasue they are worried losing their income when we go away from oil. Oil companies are backwards, and so are the politicians.

By harry

June 21, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this

I suggest that these clowns in Congress be forced to give up ALL OF THEIR PERKS FIRST. Then let them and their families lead the parade in paying higher prices at the pump. I’m guessing that the politicians have a government fillerup station where they can get gas cheaply (i.e., at tax payer expense). So let’s have THOSE PUMPS go to $3 a gallon more than the average in the neighborhood. And FORCE them to buy from those pumps.

By Norm Ezzie

June 21, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this

when it comes to this nation’s energy woes- they can’t tell the truth! That said…try us at: www.storminnorm.com “its all there,every damn bit of it”- and when did all the talk from the Net change a damn thing lately,heh? Think about it!

By Norm Ezzie

June 21, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this

when it comes to this nation’s energy woes- they can’t tell the truth! That said…try us at: www.storminnorm.com “its all there,every damn bit of it”- and when did all the talk from the Net change a damn thing lately,heh? Think about it!

By Dennis

June 21, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this

By yawn June 21, 2007 8:49 AM “Jim can’t blog about Oh, about the energy policy. Figures congress would tax the oil companies and then turn around and give them subsidies for developing and selling us alternate forms of energy.”

Seems most of today’s readers have missed this truism. ‘specially those on the right who support that policy without even realizing it.

All we’re waiting for is for the energy companies to get legal, exclusive control of “alternative energies”.

(And making your own, “homegrown” fuel will be against the law the same as making your own whiskey. Expect ATF to come knocking on your door if you try it).

In the “greatest country in the world”, that’s how it works, folks.

You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

By Jill

June 21, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this

I am so sick of the corrupt government (democrate and republicans alike) asking the tax payers to pay for this crap when they drive big SUVs, fly around in private jets, own several huge homes, etc. Al Gore is making a fortune off of scaring people about Global Warming. When the government cuts back then I will cut back. Between them asking me to pay for illegals and this crap I have had it. It is time to get rid of the whole bunch of crooks.

By Philip

June 21, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this

If Congress (and states) were really interested in lowering the price of gas, all they need do is roll back taxes on gas. These taxes exceed the profits made by “greedy” oil companies. One more step would finish the job: end all the foolish environmental restrictions on building new refineries, off-shore drilling and drilling in Alaska. Instant price decreases AND leverage against Islamo-fascist oil barons. Visit Doses of Reality for more!

By Dr. Brauwn

June 21, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

It’s insane to subsidise anything. It has to pay for it self to be viable.

In Sweden people drive Hydrogen for years without any trouble. Why all this bullsh!t here in the US? A whole barrel of fuel only cost $1.80 to refine and harvest, so why all the phony cost? It’s scam and they make us get used to it becasue they are worried losing their income when we go away from oil. Oil companies are backwards, and so are the politicians.

By Dr. Brauwn

June 21, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

It’s insane to subsidise anything. It has to pay for it self to be viable.

In Sweden people drive Hydrogen for years without any trouble. Why all this bullsh!t here in the US? A whole barrel of fuel only cost $1.80 to refine and harvest, so why all the phony cost? It’s scam and they make us get used to it becasue they are worried losing their income when we go away from oil. Oil companies are backwards, and so are the politicians.

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

RCH, So tell me about wave turbines (is that the right term, I didn’t feel like scrolling up), that’s interesting, I don’t know anything about them. How do they work?

I heard an interesting story on NPR this morning about how Columbus, GA is joining a lawsuit to sue over water rights. No one ever really talks about that, but that is a really serious issue.

By Jake

June 21, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this

The price of gasoline has increased by over 225 percent in the six years that that Bush was in office with a Republican controlled Congress. Despite this fact, today on this blog, GOP apologists have the gall to complain about Democratic policies causing the price of gasoline to rise? Talk about double standards.

By RP

June 21, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this

If only they were brave enough to show what this is and directly tax the middle and poor class who will suffer from the passed on taxes the most. Who is this going to hit? The single mother with two jobs that she has to drive to, to make ends meet. Way to show your love for the poor libs!

By Volum

June 21, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this

Many of us believe that gas prices should be outrageously higher.

I drive a car that gets 32/38mpg, and I try not to use it whenever possible. I take my own actions in my own life, and I don’t have any sympathy for those who don’t.

Oil and Gas aren’t renewable resources that we have the right to abuse to our whim. I have just as much a right to breathe clean air, as you have to drive. So, let’s meet in the middle, ok?

By Nap

June 21, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this

Ethanol is not the answer. Hydrogen research is needed with incentives to open hydrogen stations and technology. Hydrogen can power the process of aquiring more hydrogen, it can power our homes and manufacturing plants and our vehicles. It will be a major change but over 20 or so years our economy will adjust with little impact to the consumer.

By CA Desert Gal

June 21, 2007 11:17 AM | Link to this

What about using our own oil? I don’t want to go green. I don’t want to use our food supply for fuel. I want to use an SUV—it’s safer for my husband and me to drive our six kids around. Why should we be penalized for safety and being able to ride in the same vehicle? Why should we be force to someday use mass transportation because the gas will be too expensive for us to buy?

I also don’t live in an area where mass transportation is easy to use. I live five miles from a paved road, fifteen miles to town—to the nearest grocery store. I feel as if the dems want to raise my gasoline to get me to move from my private area that I live to go back and live in the city with people on top of me again and force us to use public transportation. Higher gasoline prices is also a ploy used by the dems to keep people living closely confined in cities so that these people have to use the government’s mass transportation and keep that in business.

Using our own oil and building more refineries will help. Our dependence on foreign oil increased because the environmentalists didn’t want us drilling in our own country.

By Steve

June 21, 2007 11:17 AM | Link to this

Talk about this government looking for a revolution ???? How much do they think the people will stand for, Remember why we broke away from England!!!!!!

By Sid Davis

June 21, 2007 11:19 AM | Link to this

What a mess!

If you study the oil depletion problem two things are evident. One is that every year it takes more energy to acquire energy. Back in 1930 it took 1 barrel of oil to get 100 back. Today it takes 1 barrel to get 6 back. At this rate of cost increase, by 2060 it will take 1 barrel to get 1 back, so the oil industry will end. The second problem is that informed projections show that after 2011 oil production will begin falling because for the last 20 years we just have not been discovering enough new oil to replace what we are using. The combined effects of these are unimaginable to the 6.5 billion population dependent on oil to survive.

As yet, no alternative has been discovered or invented that will come even close to adequately replacing oil. The efforts of government by giving subsidies to things that really do not work only hasten the day of reckoning because it takes energy to build these facilities that use as much energy as they produce. Anything government must subsidize to bring about should not have been brought about because it does not stand the test of viability.

If there is a solution, which I personally do not think exists, it will only come if government completely gets out of the picture and at least gives people a chance to solve the problem. Government has prevented new nuclear plants for example, and this may have helped somewhat, but now it is too late in the game. Once we reach the point where we have inadequate energy to keep up the current standard of living, where will the energy come from to invest in any workable alternative?

By Steve

June 21, 2007 11:19 AM | Link to this

Talk about this government looking for a revolution ???? How much do they think the people will stand for, Remember why we broke away from England!!!!!!

By Steve

June 21, 2007 11:19 AM | Link to this

Talk about this government looking for a revolution ???? How much do they think the people will stand for, Remember why we broke away from England!!!!!!

By Volum

June 21, 2007 11:20 AM | Link to this

Many of us believe that gas prices should be outrageously higher.

I drive a car that gets 32/38mpg, and I try not to use it whenever possible. I take my own actions in my own life, and I don’t have any sympathy for those who don’t.

Oil and Gas aren’t renewable resources that we have the right to abuse to our whim. I have just as much a right to breathe clean air, as you have to drive. So, let’s meet in the middle, ok?

By Terry

June 21, 2007 11:20 AM | Link to this

Lets see 30 million Illegal Immigrants legalized,Social Security for them all their Fasmily members, $6.dollar a gallon gas, Food will triple in price, We will have our Troops in Iraq, And soon Iran ,Starting next year Chinese cars being sold in the USA at a third of American car prices. Americans get what you deserve you voted the racals in office : Either wake up soon our lose your country ` There is no difference between both Parties -Simply put we have the best Gov’t $$$ can buy —- Viva Bush VIVA LA RAZA ! WE HAVE BEEN SOLD OUT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

By Z Cochrane

June 21, 2007 11:20 AM | Link to this

Wooten shows his ignorance of the energy business by repeating the urban myth that “ethanol (production) requires more energy to produce than it generates as fuel”. This is simply not true. In fact, the production of ethanol requires LESS energy per btu available from the ethanol than in the case of gasoline.

The real benefit however, lies in the fact that the oil well will run dry, but you can plant another crop of corn.

By Terry

June 21, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

Lets see 30 million Illegal Immigrants legalized,Social Security for them all their Fasmily members, $6.dollar a gallon gas, Food will triple in price, We will have our Troops in Iraq, And soon Iran ,Starting next year Chinese cars being sold in the USA at a third of American car prices. Americans get what you deserve you voted the racals in office : Either wake up soon our lose your country ` There is no difference between both Parties -Simply put we have the best Gov’t $$$ can buy —- Viva Bush VIVA LA RAZA ! WE HAVE BEEN SOLD OUT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

By stopmakingsense

June 21, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

Like it or not, even at $3.10 per gallon gas is approximately 4% cheaper than it was in 1983, when adjusted for inflation. Don’t believe me? Check it out for yourself. This is an emotional issue for most, that has little to do with reality. Here’s an insightful, if a somewhat dry and nerdy, story to put in into perspective. Link: http://www.omninerd.com/2006/09/15/articles/59

By Terry

June 21, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

Lets see 30 million Illegal Immigrants legalized,Social Security for them all their Fasmily members, $6.dollar a gallon gas, Food will triple in price, We will have our Troops in Iraq, And soon Iran ,Starting next year Chinese cars being sold in the USA at a third of American car prices. Americans get what you deserve you voted the racals in office : Either wake up soon our lose your country ` There is no difference between both Parties -Simply put we have the best Gov’t $$$ can buy —- Viva Bush VIVA LA RAZA ! WE HAVE BEEN SOLD OUT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

By spivey jean

June 21, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

I hope it passes. Then in 10 years when gas prices are this high we’ll finally vote out the liberals and be done with their nonsense forever. Free markets solve the problems fools! The problem with gas prices are that the FTC started allowing the major oil companies to merge back in 98-99. We went from 11 to 5 majors. Gas prices have risen ever since. Competition, competition and more competition! Not government intervention you liberal morons!

By freakslaon

June 21, 2007 11:22 AM | Link to this

We are not a peak oil. We have more oil available to us today then we did 50 years ago. They are finding new oil all the time. Just because you say it, doesn’t it make it true.

Liberalism is a disease, and the only cure is death.

By hotelbravo

June 21, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this

So the price of gas will about double in ten years, thats seems a lot less then the last ten years.

By Laserbeam

June 21, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this

There is finally a solution! I’ve found a website which offers a ‘Price Cap’. I “CAPPED’ my weekly fuel consumption at $3.22/gal. from July 1, through December 31, 2007 for $95.00! If the EIA published rate is above my CAP they will reimburse me for the diffrence, and yes they are Insured. The site is www.gaslimit.com. Check it out.

By Terry

June 21, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this

Lets see 30 million Illegal Immigrants legalized,Social Security for them all their Fasmily members, $6.dollar a gallon gas, Food will triple in price, We will have our Troops in Iraq, And soon Iran ,Starting next year Chinese cars being sold in the USA at a third of American car prices. You Americans get what you deserve , You voted the racals in office : Either wake up soon our lose your country ` There is no difference between both Parties -Simply put we have the best Gov’t $$$ can buy —- Viva Bush VIVA LA RAZA ! WE HAVE BEEN SOLD OUT !!!!!!!!!!!!

By getalife

June 21, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this

According to the CEO of Exxon when asked how he can achieve record profits when his costs of oil increased, he stated he is responsible to the stockholders and not the American consumer. He said he will charge enough to make the stock holders lots of money.

Fine, that is capitalism and they have a monopoly on gas. Americans are stuck with this monopoly unless there are alternatives to compete against this monopoly.

The Heritage foundation is a con group probably paid for the study by big oil.

By Rick

June 21, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this

Gas will not get to $6/gallon since there are cheaper options. With gas at $3/gallon we are seeing a decline in SUV sales and an increase in Hybrid sales. The use of Biodiesel, SVO, and electric cars is also on the rise. We all used gas since it was very cheap. As it becomes more expensive many will abandon it. This is classic economics 101.

Yes, congress is stupid to think that their subsidities will have a lasting effect on the situation. They haven’t taken their basic econ courses either. The only thing that will make a difference in the increase in cost.

By Melvin Leppla

June 21, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this

Just read all the above posts, how long have Americans been saying the very same things that are being posted? Same complaints just different elected officials and different generations of complaining Americans. But the same knuckleheads keep getting elected that allows a politician to homestead. Year after year these politicians keep acquiring more power and their heads just keep getting bigger and bigger. The percentage of Americans who vote is pitiful. Majority of Americans are more interested in Paris Hilton or what Britney Spears isn’t wearing instead of having a rudimentary knowledge of what government is doing against them. Congress knows that there is only a small vocal voice that keeps track of what they are doing and they are also aware of the vast majority who are so wrapped up with their personal lives they don’t care what Congress is doing let alone being knowledgeable of the issues. So we have no one but to blame but ourselves. Bottom line government from the local level to the Federal level needs one gigantic enema to clean out all the crap that has been allowed to collect in the governmental sewer.

By Timothy

June 21, 2007 11:26 AM | Link to this

Our politicians are not very bright and only cater to the corporate a##holes.

By Jerry

June 21, 2007 11:27 AM | Link to this

Hot Air. We need a Manhatten Project Style emphasis for energy. There is no magic bullet. We need to invest in Oil drilling, Wind, Solar (where economically feasible), Coal, Natural Gas, and what ever else we can come up with. We are have bowed down to environmentalism and a shakey theory of global warming. This is about national security. WE get most of our energy from people that don’t like us and never will. We need do do this yesterday.

By jim Watts

June 21, 2007 11:27 AM | Link to this

Hello,

Lets all quit our jobs and move into small lower value homes and see how the government tries to tax us then! I’m willing to relocate if taxes get to high.

By JOHN C. SNEDEKER

June 21, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this

Jim:

Thank you for shining light on the latest nonsense from our (bipartisan) Federal Government. We are energy engineers and have been researching S.1419 for a follow-to to testimony given to the DOE last Friday. The mandate that utilities must obtain 15% of their power from renewable sources omits the one source that can provide base-load capacity with zero emissions —- nuclear power.

By Uncle Sam

June 21, 2007 11:29 AM | Link to this

Well, this is a tough one. First of all, a $3 sandwich will also be a $6 in nine years of the inflation we have coming up. Second, I suspect the middle east (and most of the oil producing countries) will be the ones who hurt the most when our exported foods become harder to buy, so there is some benefit there. I think ethanol is a reasonable mid term solution (especially if Washington will not allow drilling). Three better solutions should be used however (and would if the market was allowed to work). (1) More drilling, (2)Ethanol….comes from cellulose instead of food products and (3) Hydrogen….at least the portion produced by power companies during times when demand for electricity is low (midnight to 6 AM)and the cost of shutting down the plant is prohibitive so that the plant runs all night making electricity that is not being used….ie. use the hydrogen produced in order to levelize the power production. Just one brilliant engineers ideas.

By Crawfish

June 21, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this

You think this is bad. Just wait and see what happens when Hillary gets to runin I mean run this country. Gas prices will be the least of our worries.

By Crawfish

June 21, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this

You think this is bad. Just wait and see what happens when Hillary gets to runin I mean run this country. Gas prices will be the least of our worries.

By Crawfish

June 21, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this

You think this is bad. Just wait and see what happens when Hillary gets to ruin I mean run this country. Gas prices will be the least of our worries.

By larry

June 21, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this

I’m ready to throw all the bums out representives senators, and the so called king george….

By JerryMandered

June 21, 2007 11:34 AM | Link to this

“So the price of gas will about double in ten years, thats seems a lot less then the last ten years.”

Exactly. I was hoping I wasn’t the only one who thought that $6 would be cheap, especially if this includes inflation. This equation means that gas will be getting cheaper in the future, and I think that’s the opposite of the spin that the “Heritage Foundation” is trying to puke out into the public.

And yes, as every scientist and geologist who isn’t paid by the big oil industry states, peak oil happened last year. There isn’t any new oil, and it will be harder and harder to extract from the earth as time goes on. The hacks at the “Heritage Foundation” either don’t know what they’re talking about, or, as usual, their spinning their brains out trying to trick us all… .again.

Sorry NeoCons, it doesn’t work anymore. We’re a lot smarter than you.

By Candy

June 21, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this

GEbling @10:46,

You and your economics professor, Neil Boortz, are mistaken when you say that, “Corporations DO NOT PAY TAXES. Their customers pay the taxes for them through increased cost of the goods.” In a competitive free market, prices are determined by supply and demand, not taxes or any other wholesale expenses. If companies were able to pass dollar for dollar tax increases (and other expenses) onto their customers with impunity, no company would ever lose money or go out of business (you do know that millions of companies lose money and/or go out of business).

I suggest that you consider finding a new economics tutor. Boortz is a con-man.

By Bill

June 21, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this

The government should be stimulating a push to use alternative resources. The reasons are innumerable and self-evident.

The problem is that they are doing so in a haphazard manner. Instead of accepting that America does not produce much of anything at the best cost and most efficienty,they choose to subsidize agri-products which invariably causes the rise in our energy and food costs. You can blame liberals or conservatives if you want but if you really want to blame someone, blame the farm lobby.

We could make abundant Ethanol from Sugar-cane, but sugar-based ethanol is primarily produced outside the US and is taxed at .54 to the dollar. People should not be afraid to import their energy needs, they just need to realize that diversification will reduce the cartels’ influence. (Note: sugar based ethanol still needs improvement but it isn’t far away)

By harold

June 21, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this

awesum! harold says gasoline should cost $8 a liter like it does everywhere else. it will at least help with the obesity epidemic.

all roads should have tollbooths to collect money for their maintenance and repair.

there should ABSOLUTELY NO tax money used to support any road that private vehicles are operated on.

harold is damn sick and tired of paying taxes to maintain the insanely inefficient “private vehicles on public roads” public transportation half-system

efficiency is NOT transporting 2,000 to 6,000 pounds along with every person NO MATTER HOW FAT THEY ARE!!!!!

By Crush Liberalism

June 21, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this

The cons are going to take some monumental azz kickins in 08 and your fearmongering isn’t going to change that.

No, but your party’s 14% approval ratings, including a 3% approval ratings on immigration, would do the trick.

By Sid Davis

June 21, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this

Steve, there will be a civil war. It will happen when we reach the “revolution point”.

For at least 100 years government has engineered wealth out of the hands of the majority into the hands of the privileged through laws that grant special interest economic advantages, the Federal Reserve Act for example. Because of energy, the economic pie has been expanding during that time frame, with a lesser share of that expansion going to the majority. We have not had talk of revolt because even though the majority is taking a beating, they still see some advance. The “revolution point” occurs when the standard of living starts to decline and suddenly they realize they have been fleeced by this system of plunder and control. We are getting very close to that point, perhaps within the next 15 years. Already, current times are reminding me more and more of pre French Revolution times with debased currency and where the aristocracy and government ignore the plight of the majority and just party on.

By Paul

June 21, 2007 11:38 AM | Link to this

You write this piece as if we are entitled to cheap fuel. How arrogant we have become in the USA. The average American will be lucky to afford food and shelter by 2016, if we keep progressing with our selfish ways. Too bad the people have no say anymore. This country is run by big business, as is your paper.

By harold

June 21, 2007 11:38 AM | Link to this

harold does agree with the wooster about bike paths, though.

BIKE PATHS SUCK. they are useless for anybody but joggers and stroller pushers.

Roads simply need wide right lanes so there is plenty of room for bicycles. Not bike lanes, not bike paths, just wide right lanes. That’s all.

Bike lanes are used for parking and dont get swept. Bike paths are ridiculously dangerous at every intersection. Only wide right lanes are suitable for bicycle commuting.

By Jim

June 21, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this

The only thing that will accelerate our oil independence tomorrow is a low gas price today.

There will be no such thing as a family SUV in 50 years.

There will be no rush hour traffic in 100 years - then Atlanta might be a place my grandkids would want to live.

By Tim

June 21, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this

First of all, Ethanol produced by corn is the most inefficient way of producing it. Switchgrass produces 20 times more ethanol than corn, grows easier, only has to be planted once every 10 years, instead of every year, resists drought, flood, is native, and is an all around better solution in every way. Switchgrass is a weed, it grows 10 feet high without the farmer watering it. One great use of it would be to plant it along the Nations interstates and highways, they might as well be making money off the land sitting there doing nothing. Ethanol made from switchgrass is a very good alternative to gasoline.

Cars also do not need to be remanufactured in order to use ethanol 85 either. Most Ford, Chevy, Dodge, and Chrysler SUVs and trucks already can use Ethanol 85. You can also buy a kit to convert your vehicle so it can use both Ethanol 85 and gasoline. All it really does is replaces some gaskets so they are not rubber, and you have to have a metal gasoline tank instead of plastic. The only reason current vehicles do not run ethanol 85 is because over time ethanol ruins the parts. However, current fuels already contain around 10% ethanol already.

Second, we do not get hardly any of our fuel from the middle east. We produce around 25% of our own fuel. The other 75% is imported. Of that 75% around 40% comes from Canada, around 35% comes from Mexico, and around 20% comes from Venizuela. Only about 2% of our imported oil comes from the middle east. If you do not believe these facts, look it up yourself. Just search for it in google, it will not take long to find.

Third, nuclear power is by far the most efficient and clean way to produce power. France has over 40 nuclear power plants and their liberal citizens never commplain about it.

A little known fact is that Chernobyl did not kill thousands of people, it killed 30 people total. Yes, hundreds were exposed to radiation because the Soviet government never told the nearby towns about the accident, but even they did not die. Some developed cancer, but most of the cancers they developed were curable. The reason Chernobyl happened was because the Soviets never installed the failsafe tools. They did not even have the pool of water the reactor rods were supposed to fall into. It didn’t expose people because of an accident, it did it because of neglegance of the government.

Now Three mile island is always shown on the news with green clouds of radioactive death, but did you know that there is more radiation in your cell phone than was released from the island. Yes, the reactor failed, but the failsafes worked exactly as planned. Instead of showing how dangerous nuclear power is, it should have shown how safe. The worst thing possible happened, and no radiation was release or even had a chance of being released.

Last, everyone calls republicans big spenders, but that is not true, Bush is a huge spender, and most Republicans do not like him because of it. Did you know that the last time the National debt went down was back in 1960? A republican was president at the time. Dwight D. Eisenhower. However, the two largest spenders ever do happen to be Repulicans. One has an excuse, the other does not. Regan is by far the largest spender, however he outspent the Russians which ended the cold war. It was an exceptable expense. Bush however is the second highest spender, and he does not have an excuse. He is also increasing the size of the government which is not a conservative thing.

By Paul

June 21, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

You write this piece as if we are entitled to cheap fuel. How arrogant we have become in the USA. The average American will be lucky to afford food and shelter by 2016, if we keep progressing with our selfish ways. Too bad the people have no say anymore. This country is run by big business, as is your paper.

By philip

June 21, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

Re: $6.00 Gallon gas Prices. Get Ready.

What a bunch of alarmist poppy c**. This article is a great example of newspaper columnists that need to put out product to justify their high paying jobs. If nine years from now gas prices aren’t in the $6.00 range Detroit will never move towards cars that get high gas mileage. We have to face it, we’re sucking the world dry of natural resources especially oil. Conservation as a means to save what’s left is our answer. And Congress wis going to force the issue because, consumers, China & India sure ain’t! Detroit and Without a reason to conserve and a mechanism to do so it won’t happen. Happy motoring!

By philip

June 21, 2007 11:41 AM | Link to this

Re: $6.00 Gallon gas Prices. Get Ready.

What a bunch of alarmist poppy c**. This article is a great example of newspaper columnists that need to put out product to justify their high paying jobs. If nine years from now gas prices aren’t in the $6.00 range Detroit will never move towards cars that get high gas mileage. We have to face it, we’re sucking the world dry of natural resources especially oil. Conservation as a means to save what’s left is our answer. And Congress wis going to force the issue because, consumers, China & India sure ain’t! Detroit and Without a reason to conserve and a mechanism to do so it won’t happen. Happy motoring!

By Paul

June 21, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

You write this piece as if we are entitled to cheap fuel. How arrogant we have become in the USA. The average American will be lucky to afford food and shelter by 2016, if we keep progressing with our selfish ways. Too bad the people have no say anymore. This country is run by big business, as is your paper.

By Leonard M.

June 21, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

There they go again. It is ironic how libs want rights, but they keep trying to take away ours. Forget about the costs, forget the Constitution, forget how active judges circumvent what is the rule of law, forget the politicians who favor all the moral wrongs and try to tell us we agree with them regarding phoney surveys. Forget about what is right. Forget about the lies about stem cells, illegal aliens, life time jobs of ruining our Country, not theirs only. The list can go on and on. Lets get what is moral, just and the rule of law. Lets vote these phonies out of office, especially life time jobs and nepitism. Leonard M.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

Well congratulations Jim on getting posted on the “Fudgepacker” Report.

We see brilliant comments like this from “Crawfish”:

You think this is bad. Just wait and see what happens when Hillary gets to runin I mean run this country. Gas prices will be the least of our worries

Can she really be a bigger disaster than w?

Do you remember the Clinton years?

Many Americans long for those years of peace and prosperity and counting the days to the end of the w disaster.

By Daniel

June 21, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

Two questions, has the government involvement ever fixed anything? Has the government involvement ever screwed things up. Why do these idiots think money can fix everything. More and more taxes, WE the consumer will pay as we always have and the problem with still exist.

By Lara Barker

June 21, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

You should also have noted that along with taxes on Oil Companies..which will be passed along to us..there is a 54cent tax on Ethanol as well! Up here in Ma we already have 10% Ethanol added to each gallon..so that is another 5.4 cents ..ADDITIONAL. What on earth will we be paying up here for Heating oil and natural gas..oops..we buy from Chavez and HE WON’T BE TAXED! When the Government gets involved in things like this they tend to make the situation WORSE. I know of no law that says you cannot Charge what you wish for anything..including your own Labor. If you overcharge, generally, unless you are a Picasso..you will be out of business! One cannot cut off the only energy source we have at present ..and expect things to be BETTER! I am not an expert..but I do know that Oil is not an infinite fuel..however, I am also sure that Energy producers realize that and are working to resolve it..once the Government steps in, picks favorites..gives money to ONLY those they LIKE..it tends to create a group of folks who TAKE THEIR SWEET TIME RESOLVING ANY ISSUE THEY WORK ON..UP HERE WE CALL IT JOB SECURITY.. A friend of mine got a job on the Big Dig..70,000 a yr to be a resident archiologist ..just in case indian artifacts were found underground..She actually started in the late 70’s and finally is finished. During all that time..she got her 70K and worked on other jobs and finally got a Professorial position in a State College! That is Job security! In my town we all STOPPED using CITGO and now THEY have the lowest prices..on Gas and Repairs…Government up here is in the dairy business..mandating Union wages ..compound that with the price of (corn based) animal feed and we are really getting hit for MILK! they ..our Government also hates Sweets..Pepsi, Coke, etc..but they are cheaper now than MILK ..not a way to influence or create GOOD HEALTH!

While the Gas prices rise..so will the “Public Transportation Costs”..what goes around comes around…we will all be RIDING DONKEYS TO WORK SOON IF GOVERNMENT GETS THEIR WAY!

By mick thomas

June 21, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this

Don’t you all see? It is a game and we are all screwed.

By milwolf

June 21, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this

Our country , from the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court to City Hall and the School Board, is being driven into chaos and ruin by a bunch of educated fools and traitors. Our birthright is being stolen and given to the highest bidder. Thankfully, there is a day of judgment for these people!!!

By Gerry Calgary Canada

June 21, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this

We are already paying upwards of $1.16 a litre! You do the math per gallon. The sad thing about it is that we produce and refine it. Our gas is shipped down to Montana where it is cheaper. Have a look at the massive profits the oil companies are reaping. And the oil companies are complaining? I well remember when oil was just over $10.00 a barrel and the oil companies said they needed $20.00 to make a good profit. At over $60.00 what does that tell you. We need to start boycotting oil companies on a weekly basis.

By milwolf

June 21, 2007 11:45 AM | Link to this

Our country , from the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court to City Hall and the School Board, is being driven into chaos and ruin by a bunch of educated fools and traitors. Our birthright is being stolen and given to the highest bidder. Thankfully, there is a day of judgment for these people!!!

By milwolf

June 21, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this

Our country , from the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court to City Hall and the School Board, is being driven into chaos and ruin by a bunch of educated fools and traitors. Our birthright is being stolen and given to the highest bidder. Thankfully, there is a day of judgment for these people!!!

By milwolf

June 21, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this

Our country , from the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court to City Hall and the School Board, is being driven into chaos and ruin by a bunch of educated fools and traitors. Our birthright is being stolen and given to the highest bidder. Thankfully, there is a day of judgment for these people!!!

By BC

June 21, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this

And if you live around Hamilton Ill or Duncan Creep, you’ll use a tank a day, thanks to all the wrecks and gridlock.

By yawn

June 21, 2007 11:48 AM | Link to this

Here is a good article from an apparently unbiased source that explains why we need an energy policy now, and the pros and cons of each alternative fuel that is being developed for consumption today. Redneck Convert should appreciate the reference to beer drinkers. The obvious conclusion is that future energy needs will be supplied by a combination of fossil fuels and alternative forms of energy depending on the application.

http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article2656034.ece

By James

June 21, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this

Alarmist indeed. $6 a gallon gas…in 2016. That’s 9 years away, and frankly, I’ve got other things to worry about between now and then. At the rate things are going, it’ll probably $9 a gallon anyway. Lets worry about, say, tomorrow, rather than years from now.

Oh, and the whole drought in south Georgia thing—how long has that been going on? Better yet, how long will it continue. If there is still a drought in south Georgia even several years from now, then that could be an issue. Try worrying about areas that are more drought-prone: the Midwest to start.

By Ratt

June 21, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this

Big Oil is raping us, and our fine bought and paid for Politicians are embedded with them. They have let BO merge till they own everything, all the way from the wellhead to the gaspump.

I mean if Big Oil is not a monopoly then why can’t we go shopping for cheaper gas ? I can go shopping for a cheaper steak.

By Clay

June 21, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this

Excellent points made by Roger at 10:46!!!

The other day, I filled up my tank for about $2.90 per gallon. But as Roger pointed out, I’m paying a lot more for gasoline than that –

The portion of my taxes that goes toward military activity in the middle east (exponentially growing interest on the debt to finance such military activity), the portion of my taxes that goes to subsidize health care for children and elderly that are suffering as a result of poor air quality, and the portion of my taxes that goes toward preventing or correcting the harmful effects of global warming are also the price I pay for the gasoline that I put in my tank. These expenses don’t include additional expenses incurred by those directly affected (lost income to families of soldiers who gave up their jobs in the private sector to go to the middle east, medical expenses for caring for a person with asthma, etc.).

These are just some of the costs we incur as a result of our addiction to oil. If I can pay $6.00 a gallon and have a more peaceful/stable middle east, cleaner air and mitigate the damage caused by climate change, then I’m better off financially (and otherwise).

(For you economics buffs — study the concept of “externalities”.)

By Reba

June 21, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this

CA Desert Gal, you are deluding yourself if you think you and your children are safer in an SUV.

By andres

June 21, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this

The “upside” is that we don’t continue to send American boys and girls to die overseas so that we can fuel our monstrous SUVs with cheap oil. Would YOU sacrifice your child to fill your tank with cheap gas?

By andres

June 21, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this

The “upside” is that we don’t continue to send American boys and girls to die overseas so that we can fuel our monstrous SUVs with cheap oil. Would YOU sacrifice your child to fill your tank with cheap gas?

By Darn

June 21, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this

Oh dear… you all seem to have forgotten that there are laws of politics: 1st Law: Get Elected 2nd Law: Get Re-Elected 3rd Law: Help your party-mates get Elected/Re-elected… but only if this does not conflict with the first two laws. These are the only duties of a politician . ALL OF THE ISSUES are supported or ignored through the filters of these 3 rules.
Our ENTIRE system has been corrupted by power-hungry individuals, lobbyists, and special interest groups, and we-the-people are the patsies… and we -the-people will pay the price.

By A Nobody

June 21, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this

http://netowne.com/technology/important/

http://www.hempcar.org/ford.shtml

The solutions have been with us the whole time, but the power of mamon keeps the common man enslaved. Please read second link with an open mind if the government hasn`t closed it to tightly.

By Mack

June 21, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this

“Raise the taxes” that’s the answer to all of America’s problems and our caring and trully understanding politicians can alway be counted on for that. I guess it’s still doesn’t make sense to drill in our own yard for that precious black gold that is keeping our nation at the mercy of the peaceful & loving Arab Nations.

By Thomas

June 21, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this

Perhaps they should provide some practical alternatives before taxing me. Flex fuel and hybrid aren’t very convincing.

By Steve Parker

June 21, 2007 11:56 AM | Link to this

I’m all for this bill, and think it is great. There is no doubt that it will go a long ways to fixing our energy problem. Just read the fine print, it calls for wind turbines in both chambers of congress - now that is renewable energy!

By Clay

June 21, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this

Dear Mr. Wooten,

I’m a big believer in free speech, but you can’t shout “fire” in a crowded theater, and it seems to me that people shouldn’t be allowed to post with the moniker “THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL”.

What do you think?

By Jeff

June 21, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this

increasing competition for energy sources are leading a couple of ways that disrupt US workers and their place in communities. Working from home and moving closer to work are two modes of addressing oil dependency. The second option, moving closer to work, is a generational shift. Property owners…huge opportunity to create urban communities for families. Get to work.

By Paul

June 21, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this

I just got lots of free gas reading this!!

By Barry Machado

June 21, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this

Have these senators lost thier minds? They should take economics 101 over again if they ever did in the first place. Surely there are some senators with some common sense that will stop these guys.

By Typical

June 21, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this

Typical….Yet another idiot who says “no taxes to disrupt our way of life” and “renewables are too expensive/won’t work”, yet offers ABSOLUTELY NO ANSWER to the growing problem of oil scarcity/dependence and the direct ramifications that are about to occur to our suburban oriented, gasoline craving, global warming way of life because of it.

Other than changing our way of life, or by some technological breakthrough last-minute-to-keep-the-cars-running miracle, there is no answer.

Jim, you’ve added NOTHING!

By JerryG

June 21, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this

What do you expect right-wing think tanks such as the American Heritage Foundation to say other than gloom and doom? The AHF is void of any moral code vis-a-vis taxation. Ironically, they’re a “subsidized” entity whose benefactors read like a Fortune 500 list!

In order for the renewable energy industry to get up and running it needs subsidies. Not all subisidies are taboo. If a subsidy is well legislated and specifically targeted the benefit will eventually exceed the cost. The problem with subsidies is that once an industry is profitable and no longer in need of them eliminating it is like trying to convince grandpa to get rid of that old lazy-boy he’s been sitting in for the last 25 years!

One thing you can be absolutely sure of is that if the price per gallon of gas escalates to $6+ in 2016 it won’t be because of S. 1419.

By Mike

June 21, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this

Mike from Greenville

By JerryG

June 21, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this

What do you expect right-wing think tanks such as the American Heritage Foundation to say other than gloom and doom? The AHF is void of any moral code vis-a-vis taxation. Ironically, they’re a “subsidized” entity whose benefactors read like a Fortune 500 list!

In order for the renewable energy industry to get up and running it needs subsidies. Not all subisidies are taboo. If a subsidy is well legislated and specifically targeted the benefit will eventually exceed the cost. The problem with subsidies is that once an industry is profitable and no longer in need of them eliminating it is like trying to convince grandpa to get rid of that old lazy-boy he’s been sitting in for the last 25 years!

One thing you can be absolutely sure of is that if the price per gallon of gas escalates to $6+ in 2016 it won’t be because of S. 1419.

By John

June 21, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this

Our govt in its finest FORM! What can I say but ARGHH, we elected these bamboons!

By Kimmie

June 21, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this

Good God! Let’s just start over in this country!

By Derek Thomas

June 21, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this

As said by another comment writer; if you raise taxes on corporations, it is passed on to the consumer. Corporations don’t ‘pay’ taxes, they merely collect taxes from their customers.

And, yes, the Ethanol push will cost us all dearly. It’s far better to study using frozen methane hydrates as the fuel of the future.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

Clay,

That guy is an illegal immigrant who escaped a mental facility in England.

The bloody wanker is this blog’s local lunatic.

We ignore that troll here.

By Obiwan

June 21, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

Why don’t we all just go back to riding horses and buggies? We could even use the horse puckey to power our furnaces in our houses. Convert lanes on the highway to commercial traffic and emergency vehicles only. We could elimate road rage, major accidents, etc. Just imagine it. It works for the Amish and you don’t hear them complaining about gas prices do you?ill aorund

By mind

June 21, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this

$6 to go 35 miles? still seems like a bargain to me.

bike paths are great when they’re made from converted railroad track. there’s one around here that’s pretty level, and in a 10 mile stretch, has 15 road crossings, most with great visibility. and they do alleviate traffic congestion - for those who bike!

having said that, i’m much more concerned about the coming crash of the USD

By Pip of Stockport

June 21, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

Mr. Wooten’s column is alarmist(conservative?) finger pointing. This article is agenda based journalism and a great example of newspaper columnists that need to put out product to justify their high paying jobs; and scare people. Of course the government is going to raise taxes on oil. If nine years from now gas prices/gas taxes aren’t in the $6.00 range Detroit’s hand will never be forced to move towards cars that get higher gas mileage. We have to face it, we’re sucking the world dry of natural resources, especially oil. Conservation as a means to save what’s left is our best answer and add to that a national security priority. The person we ought to be angry at is President Bush for doing NOTHING about the problem. Congress is going to force the issue because American consumers, China, India and Detroit sure aren’t. Without a reason to conserve and a mechanism to do so it won’t happen. This appears to be that mechanism. Gouging? We’ve already been gouged and it hasn’t saved a thing. What is Mr. Wooten’s point then? That he is against higher gas prices or against conserving a precious natural resource? Oh I see it’s the scoundrels fault. Gouge us; pay for their corporate jets and life style. Can anyone say ‘highest percentage of disposal income in the world’? Americans are blessed and will be so going forward relative to the rest of the world. Higher gas prices won’t be the end of the world. However if something isn’t done soon to pull back our consumption of oil, that may be.

By jollyboy

June 21, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

its not gonna be easy fitting our gigantic rear ends into smaller, more fuel efficient cars is it. sure will be easier to park though…we might even have to take public transportation..,or…gasp…walk more…just like the illegal aliens.

By Flip Wilson

June 21, 2007 12:10 PM | Link to this

At some point maybe Jim and some others will begin to reconsider their opposition to investment in the kind of rail infrastructure that our country needs (and that most other civilized nations have). … Yes, it would have to be subsidized, but as Jim points out, we are fixing to subsidize gas at the pump by 50 cents a gallon in the form of tax credits. Plus we have spent ONE TRILLION dollars on a war that just might have something to do with oil. If you don’t want to ride trains to work or for travel to other cities, fine. Keep driving or waiting in line at the airport. But don’t deny others the choice on the false basis that the government should not subsidize transportation. We’re already doing it. And it’s about to get a lot more expensive, any way you slice it …

By MPinTN

June 21, 2007 12:13 PM | Link to this

If you must use tax to help reduce oil usage then why don’t you Tax the gas guzzlers? Before you all get your panties in a twist here is my idea.

Every vehicle on the road is supposed to be registered. So why not have a bar code that gets affixed to the inside of the gas door (or on the window) that you have to scan before you start pumping gas. This barcode would tax the vehicle based on it’s MPG rating.

There would be exceptions for this such as people who are handicapped that must drive Vans with lifts and such, Farmers that must have heavy duty vehicles, etc. But let’s eliminate these SUV’s with one person in them running down the interstate at 80 MPH to get to their job as an accountant.

I’m an avid fisherman who is looking at buying a boat. Of course I need a truck to pull it but I wouldn’t qualify for the break so I’ll be smart drive my 4 banger Honda to work and buy a cheap guzzler to go to the lake 2 or 3 times per month.

By THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL

June 21, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this

How hilarious and predicktable to see a number of the leftist scum on here posting their mindless bollocks 2-3 times … presumably these arrogant brain dead liberal parrots “think” HA HA HA - as if? - that moronically repeating their drivel and Bush hate several times might give it “more” effect. All it does is make them look like puerile childish morons who either are new to blogging or typical leftist moral fascists who try and crowd out any logical factual dissent from their vile perfidious cut and run bollocks!!

Cheers for whining so plaintively wanker clay - that was fooking funny!!! My pragmatic ‘moniker’ is simply inexorable logic wittily distilled into the kind of bumper sticker that Johnny I did my best to exploit my wife’s cancer Edwards would doubtless puke up a fab hissy fit over!!!

DEATH TO LIBERALISM!!

By Occidentalist

June 21, 2007 12:18 PM | Link to this

Supporting big oil which refuses to increase refining capacity and makes record profits every year is ridiculous. Buy a hybrid or just more fuel efficient car and save money. Give the oil co.’s less of your cash. They’ll get the message.

One thing the Feds could do is declare OPEC an illegal monopoly and refuse to allow them to do business in the US. It’s ok to sue the Chinese who make tainted dog food but not ok to put the hammer down on sheiks who kill us by stealing our hard earned cash? Non-OPEC oil producing countries would love us and the competition to supply the US would be fierce.

Just a thought.

By Tuco-bad

June 21, 2007 12:19 PM | Link to this

Based on normal inflation, gas will be about $5 per gallon in 2016.

By Alex

June 21, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this

And what exactly is wrong with $6/gallon? If it would cost five times that some people might be forced to evolve.

By JC

June 21, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this

$6/gallon in 2016? Sign me up! That’s only a 100% price increase in the next 9 years. Gas has gone up 300% in the previous 9 years, so that’s a bargin in my book.

Don’t people in Europe already pay $6/gallon for petro? How has it hurt their economy? Last time I checked the Euro was kicking our azz.

I don’t mind higher taxes on fuel as long as there is an equivalent tax reduction on income taxes. Net impact to the average consumer s/b zero.

I don’t claim to be left, right, dem, or rep, just an American who wants what’s best for America. This plan doesn’t sound like it will fix the problem, maybe just create some new ones if energy companies continue to rely on subsidies for alternative energy. When will the gov’t get some balls and start putting stipulations on the subsidies that require the energy companies to produce CHEAPER ALTERNATIVE ENERGY or pay back the subsidies. As the article states (correctly or incorrectly, I don’t know), it makes no sense to produce Ethanol as a fuel IF it requires more energy to produce the fuel that the fuel provides.

By Soldier1

June 21, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this

Let’s see… 10 years ago, gas was $1.50 a gallon, ten years before that, around 75-80 cents. Gas seems to double in price every ten years, so it makes sense for it to be $6.00 a gallon ten years from now. Hopefully we will have many renewable resources in place to offset the cost. People, cheap gas is gone, if we don’t do something about it now… When?!

By Kevin

June 21, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

Mr. Wooten, correct me if I am mistken, but our fight for independence from Great Britain in the 18th century was partly due to taxation without representation.

Since we don’t presently have represntation in Congress, I think a movement needs to be started at the grass roots to turn out EVERY member of Congress. Is it not time for a second American Revolution before we spend ourselves into bankruptcy although we are probably technicall there already? When are we as a voting public going to stand up in a dramatic fashion and say enough is enough you Congressional crooks!!

By MPinTN

June 21, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

Another idea…

Why don’t we make better use of the rail system. I haven’t done any research on this (hence the idea) but I bet a train can move a lot more product per gallon of fuel than a truck can. Once you get to a distribution point then you could use those Dodge Sprinter vans that they advertise at 30 MPG. Think of all the fuel Wal-Mart alone uses!

By Kevin

June 21, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this

Mr. Wooten, correct me if I am mistken, but our fight for independence from Great Britain in the 18th century was partly due to taxation without representation.

Since we don’t presently have represntation in Congress, I think a movement needs to be started at the grass roots to turn out EVERY member of Congress. Is it not time for a second American Revolution before we spend ourselves into bankruptcy although we are probably technicall there already? When are we as a voting public going to stand up in a dramatic fashion and say enough is enough you Congressional crooks!!

By THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL

June 21, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this

poor old maggot brain @ 12.04 - aka as craponlife etc … as a gutless greaseball illegal Cuban commie spy and far left arselicker it is one of several everyday ultra soft treasonous pinko targets on here.

By Darrell

June 21, 2007 12:27 PM | Link to this

All I here is blame, it’s the liberals, conservatives, liberals, conservatives. The entire problem is due to the enviromentalists preventing us from drilling, building new refineries, and stopping nuclear power plants. And now we have a group that wants to put Al Gore in power who is King of the Dip S_ts. This is crazy, where did all of this stupidity come from???

By BG

June 21, 2007 12:27 PM | Link to this

Oh, boo hoo. We’re going to have to pay more to destroy the planet. How are we ever going to afford to put that much needed additional CO2 and NOx into the atmosphere?

By Fred Little

June 21, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

We have invaded Iraq. They have lots of oil in the ground. Some say only second to the Saudis in reserves. If our invasion is all about oil, as many libs complain, why don’t we have a glut in oil, now that we have bought Iraq with our soldiers’ blood? Take the oil. It is ours. And lets have no more trouble with high gas prices.

By Mike M

June 21, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

All I have to say is the people in Washington are out of touch with reality. Why would the politicians care about the price of gas? They fly around the country and the world on our tax dollars. And they wonder why their approval rating is so low. It’s not Bush’s fault…it’s the leadership in that capital building. Hang on America we are in for a bumpy ride!

By Art D

June 21, 2007 12:33 PM | Link to this

Europe has been paying 5 dollars a gallon for years now, they live just fine. I have thought for a long time that there should be a 3 dollar a gallon tax on gasoline, for the following uses: one dollar goes to rebuild and modernise the transportation infrastructer, one dollar towards a TRUE mass transit system, and one dollar towards alternative entergy system(s). Because we never had the courage to face any of this, we now invade other countries to “solve” our problems, while idiots like the author of this column whine about doing what needs to be done. Truly the far right really is spineless, but then so are most of the rest of us as well.

By harold

June 21, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this

SUVs are the safest vehicles on the road as long as their driver doesnt swerve.

Just dont swerve. You’ll win. Whatever it is, just hit it straight on! They shouldn’t have pulled out in front of you anyway so it’s their own fault if they get killed.

By Kevin

June 21, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this

One more thought. What would happen if on 09/11/2007, 20 million people marched on Washionton DC demanding the resignations of all Congressional members so fiscally responsive memebrs could be voted in? I know the members would not resign but it will take such a demonstration for Congress and the President for that matter since he has been delinquent in using his veto pen, to get the message across that we will not be taxed without proper represntation.

By Van

June 21, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this

JC,

Last time I checked the unemployment in the EU was around 7%. They combined only account for 30% of the global GDP, while this little ole country accounts for 25%.

On a per-capita bases, we are trouncing them.

They have a heavier tax burden and terrible health care. Thats why they come here for medical care.

By Roger Rouse

June 21, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this

I think the simple solution to the oil problem is that every barrel of imported oil should be taxed to reflect it’s true cost on our society.

We spend countless billions securing foreign oil supplies, and instead of putting that cost where it belongs (at the pump), we tax income and pretend that it doesn’t cost anything to secure that oil.

What is the ultimate cost of the Iraq war, for example? About a trillion dollars?

But wait — what does Iraq have to do with the cost of oil? Well, if it wasn’t for our utter dependence on oil, we almost certainly would not have gotten involved in the first Gulf war (Saddam had his armies parked next to the Saudi oil fields, which was the real concern). And we hadn’t gotten involved in that war, 9/11 probably wouldn’t have happened (parking our army in Saudi Arabia was the primary irritant). And if 9/11 hadn’t happened, we wouldn’t be involved in the current mess.

And let’s not overlook that the vast majority of countries who sell us oil are authoritarian, non-democracies who often use our petrol dollars to arm themselves to the teeth in preparation for the next war.

If you were to add in the hidden cost of securing each barrel of foreign oil, $6 a gallon gas starts to look pretty cheap.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this

“lies”,

Just letting our Drudge visitors know:

Do not feed the troll:

“THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL”.

By Crush Liberalism

June 21, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this

Supporting big oil which refuses to increase refining capacity and makes record profits every year is ridiculous.

Spoken like a true economic illiterate. Libs aren’t exactly down with that whole “supply and demand” or “capitalism” thingy.

“Big Oil” profits about $0.10 for ever gallon of gas sold. “Big Government”, on the other hand, makes twice as much, despite having invested NOTHING in the procurement, refinement, marketing, or distribution of it. I don’t see them exactly volunteering to forego THEIR share in order to bring us relief.

The reason for “Big Oil“‘s record profits are simple supply and demand, which is why it escapes your comprehension: more gas is being bought worldwide. If I profited a dime for a gallon of gas sold, then what’s going to bring me more money: selling 10 gallons or 100 gallons? My profit MARGIN remains the same, but due to increased volume of demand, my profit goes up.

If my supplier raises MY cost (i.e. when the cost per barrel of crude goes up), am I supposed to take it in the shorts and eat the cost when I’m already clearing a pitiful dime per gallon? I doubt it.

Also, “Big Oil” doesn’t build refineries in this country because (a) enviro-nuts have made it damned near impossible to build any more; and (b) the profit margins for refineries aren’t much better than they are for “Big Oil” and as such, it would take decades to recoup the staggering costs of building a refinery. I’m not gonna build anything if I’m not gonna get my investment back for 40 years!

Buy a hybrid or just more fuel efficient car and save money. Give the oil co.’s less of your cash. They’ll get the message.

NOW you finally get it! If you don’t like the cost of anything, be it gas or a car or whatever, then for Pete’s sake, don’t friggin’ buy as much!

By Opinionated One

June 21, 2007 12:40 PM | Link to this

Maybe, the welfare receivers have got it correct. Just don’t work, let the government support you, have lots of kids. Darn it. I have worked all my life to support other people who is too sorry to work. Thank goodness I made enough so I had a little also.

By rob

June 21, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this

Conservatives seem to have difficulty seeing the long term. Alternative sources of energy are absolutely necessary to our economy in the near future. Perhaps we could not give giant corporations such huge tax breaks and divert some of that money to speed up the process of developing new sources of renewable energy. I am all for the American dream and working hard, but keep in mind that Exxon/Mobil broke all records for corporate profits this year while the citizens of our country paid record prices for gasoline. Seems like they don’t really need those tax breaks.

By rob

June 21, 2007 12:44 PM | Link to this

Conservatives seem to have difficulty seeing the long term. Alternative sources of energy are absolutely necessary to our economy in the near future. Perhaps we could not give giant corporations such huge tax breaks and divert some of that money to speed up the process of developing new sources of renewable energy. I am all for the American dream and working hard, but keep in mind that Exxon/Mobil broke all records for corporate profits this year while the citizens of our country paid record prices for gasoline. Seems like they don’t really need those tax breaks.

By Petesburgh

June 21, 2007 12:44 PM | Link to this

There was considerable uncertainty about the elasticity of demand for fuel prior to the hurricane season of 2005. Prices were forced to escalate, and the industry was shocked to learn just how inelastic demand really was in the US. Given this bit of information, gas is unambiguously cheap, and it is only a matter of time until market clearing prices are reached and could easily exceed $6/gallon in a much shorter horizon. I’d post the link if I recall where I have read this, but some economists suggest that in today’s dollars, the mrkt-clearing price (the price at which the “typical” consumer is indifferent to buying a unit of gas and not) is most likely around $7.50 (but there was considerable variation). Either way, if we don’t adjust soon, it’s going to be a roller coaster ride for the macroeconomy that will be perilous.

By Roger Rouse

June 21, 2007 12:47 PM | Link to this

I think the simple solution to the oil problem is that every barrel of imported oil should be taxed to reflect it’s true cost on our society.

We spend countless billions securing foreign oil supplies, and instead of putting that cost where it belongs (at the pump), we tax income and pretend that it doesn’t cost anything to secure that oil.

What is the ultimate cost of the Iraq war, for example? About a trillion dollars?

But wait — what does Iraq have to do with the cost of oil? Well, if it wasn’t for our utter dependence on oil, we almost certainly would not have gotten involved in the first Gulf war (Saddam had his armies parked next to the Saudi oil fields, which was the real concern). And we hadn’t gotten involved in that war, 9/11 probably wouldn’t have happened (parking our army in Saudi Arabia was the primary irritant). And if 9/11 hadn’t happened, we wouldn’t be involved in the current mess.

And let’s not overlook that the vast majority of countries who sell us oil are authoritarian, non-democracies who often use our petrol dollars to arm themselves to the teeth in preparation for the next war.

If you were to add in the hidden cost of securing each barrel of foreign oil, $6 a gallon gas starts to look pretty cheap.

By tjse7en

June 21, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this

Thanks everybody for sending us back to the f*** dark ages!!

By Michael

June 21, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this

Enough is enough! When is the American public going to wake up and throw these guys out of office!!!!!? No, not just some of them - ALL of them! Yes, even your favorites. Throw them out - let’s get some people in there that haven’t partaken of the Washington DC water. They just don’t get it!! Democrats - Republicans - they are ALL to blame. Everyone says ok, but lets not get rid of “so and so”. Yes, let’s do! ALL OF THEM! What kind of people continue to do what Congress has done in the past five years? Are they responding to the American people? Of course not - and it’s getting worse. If we continue to simply sit on our rear ends and let them do as they damn well please, ie, the interests of the lobbyists, big business, big government, etc., we have no one to blame but ourselves - and we will continue to pay the bill. The “we don’t care what the public thinks” attitude is getting bigger and bolder every week in Washington. They truly believe they know far better than the American people what is good for us. This immigration and/or energy fiasco is only the tip of the iceberg. This is only going to get worse folks - and if you can’t see that - you’re not paying attention. Send them home to live under what they have created out here. Send them ALL home!!!!!

By Crush Liberalism

June 21, 2007 12:50 PM | Link to this

Alternative sources of energy are absolutely necessary to our economy in the near future.

My car doesn’t run on Crisco, pal. It runs on gas. Until that changes, I want to the pay the least amount possible for what will run my car today. I’m funny that way.

Perhaps we could not give giant corporations such huge tax breaks

No disagreement here. Government’s job is not to subsidize business.

I am all for the American dream and working hard, but keep in mind that Exxon/Mobil broke all records for corporate profits this year while the citizens of our country paid record prices for gasoline.

See above where I debunk the “record profits” meme.

By Lewis

June 21, 2007 12:53 PM | Link to this

Does anyone remember that gas was under $2 a gallon before George Bush and the republicans started the war with Iraq? The price of gas doubled under a republican administration and a republican congress.

The one sure-fire way we’ll see $6 per gallon gas is if the idiot prince decides to bomb or invade another Middle Eastern country.

By Jim in VA

June 21, 2007 12:54 PM | Link to this

TIme for Draconian action. From 1 Jan 2010, all vehicles maunfactured, imported and sold in the US must, by no-waiver law achieve 40 mpg Highway, 35 mpg City. This is for all vehicles. SUVs will be considered light trucks and will have to get 35 highway and 30 city. No exceptions, period. In addition, all speed limits will be reduced to 55 mph on all interstate highways and intrastate highways. Can this happen? Yes, but will it…never because no one has the political will to do it.

By Ron Beagles

June 21, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this

GREAT!!!! Another out of touch law that restricts my right to happiness in the supposed land of the free!

By getalife

June 21, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this

Well, the Senate just voted no for cloture on the Baucus amendment for $32 Billion in tax incentives for alternative energy producers.

Looks like this bill will fail by about 5 votes. The gop is voting no except the ones in corn country.

By F.N. Libs

June 21, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this

Art, do you actually believe for one second that GIVING money to a government agency to create anything (IE. redistribute) will prove efficient? They already get 43 cents/gallon and do nothing with it. Has the government ever done anything but burn money. When will you libs realize that money only grows in the hands of a free economy. Let the oil companies drill for domestic oil so that we can stop buying from countries who hate us. Let the economy evolve based on supply and demand. (economics 101) Stop believing Al Gore. The globe is warming, and cooling, in cycles, the way it has since God spoke it into existence. It amazes me how gullible educated people can be.

By Rob

June 21, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this

Using corn to make ethanol is just stupid. The countrys that do it right are using beets. You don’t hear about that, do you? Look it up. Read some books, do some research and find out about those corn lobbyists…

By Energy Efficiency

June 21, 2007 12:57 PM | Link to this

Bring on the $6.00 per gallon gas! It is about time the gas-guzzling Hummers, large pick-up and S.U.V.’s are forced to be parked in the backyard. I am truly looking forward to the increase in gas for all the careless consumers. It will clean up the environment and stop the careless drain on our natural resources.

By Elvis IV

June 21, 2007 1:00 PM | Link to this

A few thoughts: 1. The Federal Government makes more money per gallon sold (.17) than the oil companies (.09), but produces nothing. 2. Our own domestic oil supplies can be safely exploited (ANWR, offshore) and don’t have to be defended. 3. At the rate technology increases each year, the idea we will be totally dependent on fossil fuel in 20 years is remote, and there is little the oil companies can do about it. 4. The only energy the federal gov’t should subsidize is a “Manhattan Project” on fusion power, which is possibly within reach in 25 years. Fusion will revolutionize humanity more than the use of fire. 5. In the meantime, there are new, very safe, very small nuclear reactors available, such as the “pebble bed” type. They are fail-safe, cheap, and expandable, and the small amount of waste is much safer to dispose of (Google it.) 6. Price controls, which this bill will require, have been a disaster every time they have been used, from the Roman Empire (Diocletian) to the Carter years.

By Duane

June 21, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this

Congress has an approval rating of less than 20%. This country needs a government overhaul. Our government no longer works. It is terminal. We the people no longer exists. There needs to be another tea party….

By Dave

June 21, 2007 1:03 PM | Link to this

The simple solution to our energy problem (as I see it) would be to increase the production of nuclear power. With the surplus energy we would get lower electric bills. Then we can convert our cars either to electric or use the extra electricity to create hydrogen for hydrogen cars. Problem solved.

Nuclear power is the only solution which will allow us to protect our national security and drain funds from the middle east.

By THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL

June 21, 2007 1:03 PM | Link to this

In Old Albion the petrol taxes are around 80% and go up annually (usually above inflation) in every budget. In addition there are annual road vehicle licences which used to be about $225 a year when I left about 10 years ago a year for all vehicles - but are now banded, based on engine size, and are now up to $600 for the biggest SUVs etc. In addition local parking permits are viciously expensive, even for local residents. Despite the motorist being hammered by the corrupt, vile NU Labour govt/local council the greater London area is virtually gridlocked in most places all day now well into the evening, even with numerous bus lanes and extensive, exorbitantly expensive public transport. Congestion charges are being extended further out, ruining many small businesses who just happen to be based in the arbitrary zones designated by a far left terrorist loving, anti-semitic mayor of London.

The lefties in England, after a decade of Tony B.Liar sleaze cannot manage traffic in the LOndon area which geographically is not much bigger than the Atlanta metro area. Higher petrol costs will NOT deter folks from driving who have to have cars in the rural and semi-rural areas or those who have to commute. With the unwanted ever increasing massive illegal leeches infestation and the equally unwanted yankkkee infestation from the nasal whining north the future for driving in metro Atlanta does not look good.

By Cynthia Thius

June 21, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this

It’s about time I buy some land, grow some crops, and build my own moonshine still. I only need to distill about 1500 gallons of the stuff a year so I can get to work. Surely I wouldn’t get in trouble for doing that and helping to save the world. Would I?

By Shawn

June 21, 2007 1:06 PM | Link to this

Considering all the money we throw away at other counties why cant we stop doing this and invest it in our country. This global war on terrorism that we alone seem to be paying the bills for is going to send this country into financial ruin. Unfortunatly the American populus is to lazy to do anything about this and there is no massive movement to rally behind to get what the people of this country truly want.

By Spencer

June 21, 2007 1:10 PM | Link to this

This turd won’t float. If only the dems would go down the tubes with it.

Spencer

By Spoonman

June 21, 2007 1:11 PM | Link to this

$6/gallon for gas in 2016? Oooooooo, we better start being worried NOW! Perhaps we could prepare for those higher prices by not using gasoline. I think 9 years is enough time for every auto maker to replace their entire line with hybrids, don’t you? The hippies are happy because less gas is being used. The consumers are happy ‘cause they don’t have to buy as much overpriced gas. And, the righties are p** because the oil companies have been screwed. It’s win-win all around!

No price gouging? Really? Are you seriously that dense and stupid? Price gouging goes on every day. Here’s the experiment: in the morning, on your way to work, note all of the gas prices. Then, on your way home, note the prices again. How many changed? I’ll bet if you’ve found one that’s changed, every other one in the immediate vicinity has changed, too. Did they all get their fuel deliveries that day? I would seriously doubt it. what happened was one of them decided to raise his price. The others said “well, if he can raise his price, I’m going to raise mine, too!”

But, wait, isn’t that contrary to a free market? Wouldn’t the logical thing to do be to LOWER your prices when your neighbor raises his? In most cases, that’s true, but gas is an essential, like food or water. It’s nice to believe everyone could bike to work or use some kind of alternative fuel, but the first ain’t feasible in rural areas and the second’s of limited availability. That makes the whole “gas” industry a monopoly made up of smaller companies. When one station raises his prices, the others know they can get more money for each gallon of gas now. Some will play it “cool” and raise theirs to within a penny of the highest, but they’re rare. Why lose the penny? It’s not like people can just drive by, they MUST by gas. Muwahahahaha!

Seriously, this bill missed the point entirely. The real, simple solution is to force station owners into a stable profit margin per tank. If they get a delivery today and it costs them $x/gallon, then they need to stick with whatever profit percentage they put into place until they get a new tank. When the price changes, you can change your price. Until then, you can’t arbitrarily raise prices just because you can.

Finally, enough with the left-right rhetoric. It’s stupid, myopic and stupid (yes, I said it twice). Grow up, learn some reality, form your own opinion and stop looking to morons like this Jim guy to do your thinking for you. The lefties are wrong and so are the righties because neither has any clue what they’re talking about. We don’t have a two party system, you know. We can vote ‘em ALL out!

By Curious Observer

June 21, 2007 1:12 PM | Link to this

Profoundest apologies to our visitors for the daily ravings of The Only Good Liberal Is a Dead Liberal. Also known as Time for the Truth, he uses numerous other monikers. Believe me, he is not representative of most bloggers here.

Just as just about every extended family has a crazy aunt living in the attic or a pedophile in prison, so Wooten’s blog has The Only Good Liberal Is a Dead Liberal. He has only a few supporters—people like jbmlaw, Van, RCH, and the lunatic feminazi named Dusty. In fact, they sometimes exchange compliments for composing exceptionally vicious entries.

Most of the sane people who inhabit Wooten’s blog wish no ill on our opponents. However, in the case of The Only Good Liberal Is a Dead Liberal, we are willing to make an exception.

By Crush Liberalism

June 21, 2007 1:12 PM | Link to this

Bring on the $6.00 per gallon gas! It is about time the gas-guzzling Hummers, large pick-up and S.U.V.’s are forced to be parked in the backyard.

Idiot. People who drive Hummers and big SUV’s can afford the cost of $6/gallon. The “little people” for whom you leftards pretend to care, on the other hand, will be $crewed harder than a cub scout at a Michael Jackson sleepover.

By josh

June 21, 2007 1:12 PM | Link to this

I just read the bill. It states nowhere in it that prices on gasoline will be raised. It does state that the definition on price-gouging has been changed. The definition outlined in the bill allows this ot happen though. Please report that correctly. and here is the link to the bill: http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cfm?doc_name=lb-110-1-91

By golo

June 21, 2007 1:15 PM | Link to this

In 1998, which is nine years ago and about halfway through Clinton’s last term in office, the national average price of gasoline was $1.115/gallon, according to the World Book Almanac. Now we are midway through Bush’s final four years (let’s hope), and the price of gasoline is $3.14/gallon. That’s an increase of about 280 percent in nine years. According to your own figures, the increase to $6/gallon would be an increase of merely 104 percent. So it looks to me that the congressional plan you criticize actually is kinder to consumers than the Bush administration has been over a comparable period of time.

By charles

June 21, 2007 1:16 PM | Link to this

OOH, nice scare tactic. Where the heck were you when this disaster of an administration raised gassed prices 200% in just five years.

If there is enough gas to drive all of these fancy SUVs by 2016 consider yourself lucky.

By THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL

June 21, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this

By Spencer

June 21, 2007 1:10 PM | Link to this

This turd won’t float. If only the dems would go down the tubes with it.

Spencer GREAT POST MATE … which treasonous leftist pres candidate were you specifically, with your judicious use of “turd” referring to?

By JR.Inghram

June 21, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this

Are any of the American People really surprised by this ? I think not.

As foreign investors and nationalist slanted corporate giants tighten controls over our political system , the quality and security of all Americans on the lower scale of the social economic ladder will produce more and more and receive less and less.

The immigration issue is only one step in assuring the death of America as it was intended to be from conception.

America needs to set the number of those allowed to apply for citizenship instead of a limit on those seeking to work seasonally.

We need to turn down all that have broken our immigration laws as a deterrent to further invasion.

Set the limit at 200,000 a year allowed to apply.

Make it as it should be , a chance , not a right.

TB is on the increase as are many other illnesses that kill and most are being carried in by illegal.

Yet if one Muslim from the wrong side of the war in the Middle East showed up in our country and was caught with TB we would scream terrorist and demand something be done about it.

I find that mentality morally lacking in common sense and dignity. Hypocrisy knows no end when it comes to politicians kissing babies for votes.

Corporations issuing Demands with their campaign contributions.

Polishing corporate shoes for funding to seek election while contriving ways to deceive those they claim to represent should be a hanging offense with a short rope.

A firing squad is to good for those politicians that are engaged in it.

Deduct a set amount from our tax returns each year for elections and make it a criminal offense for any one to add to that amount in any way.

Same goes for air time in the media, every runner up given equal time. It will end the ridiculous parties that exist today and narrow the field to parties of substance that will represent the people, not their predators.

In the near future , clean water will cost you close to .25 cents a gallon from the tap.

Gray water for bathing a little less. That is one of the goals of the global warming movement band wagon our political gods are pushing now.

You probably wont Believe it until it creeps into the second or third water bill you receive that reflects my statement regarding it.

It requires secondary water delivery systems over those that currently exist that will cost a fortune to tax payers and lines the pockets of your favorite government contractors.

From birth to grave they have us pegged.

Welcome to the new world order.

JR.

By Kevin

June 21, 2007 1:18 PM | Link to this

Joe, This is terrible news; higher gas prices will effect transportation costs for every single commodity. Seeing that the demand for SUV’s and other gas-guzzling vehicles is relatively price inelastic, the quantity of said cars being removed from the roads won’t nearly outweigh the strain on disposable income — especially when we look at lower income families. Suggestion: Subsidize energy alternatives.

By Laserbeam

June 21, 2007 1:18 PM | Link to this

Do you really want to wait until gas goes to $6 before the govrnment dos anything if at all? There is finally a solution! I’ve found a website which offers a ‘Price Cap’. I “CAPPED’ my weekly fuel consumption at $3.22/gal. from July 1, through December 31, 2007 for $95.00! If the EIA published rate is above my CAP they will reimburse me for the diffrence, and yes they are Insured. The site is www.gaslimit.com. Check it out.

By TD

June 21, 2007 1:19 PM | Link to this

I see a lot of whining here. I don’t see any solutions. Try to come up with something better that pleases everyone and see how far you get. You have 3 coices. Shut up and pay the gas prices. Come up with a viable solution which will earn you the right to complain. Move to Saudi Arabia.

By mfreeze

June 21, 2007 1:20 PM | Link to this

Peak oil! No such thing. The new theory is that oil is a product of the earth heating up methane gas from deep inside the planet.Not from decaying dinosaurs. All the capped oil fields once thought to be unproductive because they were thought to be tapped are now being uncapped. They discovered most of these wells have filled back up. It seems that each of these has a fissure at the bottom where the oil is being pushed up from deep inside the earth. Our problem is that we need to allow our country to drill of our coasts which China happens to be doing in the very places where activists will not let us because of fear of endangering the environment. Apparently China doesn’t feel the same way about our coastlines.

By bobby boy

June 21, 2007 1:20 PM | Link to this

Practical Solutions? What if the government mandated that all gas caps had to be on the same side of the car. Think of the millions of gallons of gas that would save by eliminating the need for people to back around all over the place in filling stations to get to the pump. This is the kind of government intrusion I like. Doesn’t cost anything, doesn’t bother anybody, and really works … but a bit too practical.

By Scholar

June 21, 2007 1:24 PM | Link to this

When I got to Atlanta in 1997 gas was .98 a gallon. Today it is 3.14 (using Jim’s figure), which is a 224% increase over 10 years. Compare that with the 104% increase over the 9 years until 2016. If these figures hold true the price of gas will inflate slower than it has over the past ten years and we will be working towards alternate energy and (hopefully) be driving more fuel-efficient cars. Just a thought.

By Don Reagles

June 21, 2007 1:25 PM | Link to this

Let’s blame the environmentals for not letting the oil companies drill everywhere.

Without environmentalist groups, then there would be MORE JOBS in coal mines. MORE JOBS in steel factories to make oil drilling equipment. MORE JOBS drilling for oil. MORE OIL and LOWER PRICES ($1/gallon) so the average Joe can afford to drive his F-150 40 miles each way to the coal mine every day. Of course health care costs would skyrocket due to more black lung, but the avg life expectancy would get shorter and this would benefit social security and also help with over population (which leads to global warming).

In the end, middle/lower class Americans would have more wealth and a better, albeit shorter, life. The upper class would likely relocate to another country with cleaner air and something to look at besides oil rigs everywhere.

By harold

June 21, 2007 1:27 PM | Link to this

IF ONLY STEM CELL RESEARCH WERE LEGAL WE COULD GENETICALLY ENGINEER SOME DINOSAURS AND THEN ACCELERATE THEIR AGING LIKE WITH CARBON DATING TESTS (USING A BIG MICROWAVE BASICALLY) AND TURN THEM INTO MORE OIL

By allan smith

June 21, 2007 1:30 PM | Link to this

I think americans will be paying $6 a gallon a lot sooner than 2016.

By **THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL**

June 21, 2007 1:32 PM | Link to this

I see with understated quiet satisfaction that the execrable child molesting leftist - curious peeping tom has puked up another classic hate filled unhinged hissy fit aimed at yours truly and other sensible centrist conservative regulars. Cheers for that rib tickler bollock chops. Have a pint of liquid oxygen on me bubbaturd!!!

PS does your San Fran Sicko based AIDS ridden husband know you’ve got the laptop today?

By N Little

June 21, 2007 1:33 PM | Link to this

Again, politicans have to realize that there is only so much money in an household income. We need to go to work so that we can feed our children. While the transit and food industries are neccessities the luxury industries will weaken. Eventually the economy will fall bringing disaster. No one is going to let their children starve but vacations, textile, home, automobile etc… industries will suffer. People will pay $10 a gallon for milk but they won’t pay $10 for a movie ticket when you can rent! It is just a basic law of economy. Demand and availability as well as necessity.

By Dan

June 21, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this

Unfortunately this problem started in the mid to late 1960s. And at the time it had nothing to do with energy. But with taxes and Cities. What does taxes and cities have to do with energy prices? Well in the mid 1960s the crazy tax and spenders began to take power. This wasn’t so much a federal issue as with local cities. The cities taxed the businesses which moved out. Usually to the suburbs. Manufactoring closed or moved far away from the cities. With cities devoid of business or growing businesses local labor had to travel or if they could not travel they become unemployeed (leading to of course crime). So the cities, particularly the portions just outside of the Center City areas, became bad places to live. High Crime, long commutes, and limited public transportation. Limited public transportation because now the labor and the working locations were spread out. Previously public transportation could run like spider web out to the various areas of the city and back to the center area. Now they are spread out. If you live in the suburbs and need to get to your job in the suburbs you have no realistic public transporation method. Bang high demand on gas. Higher gas prices.

In addition the not in my back yard people are all over. Before you could go 40 miles outside of the city and set up anything you want. But now there are people there. So setting up a nuclear plant is out of the question.

But one of the reasons for the economic growth of the US post 1950s has been the ability of business to move. Local officals curropt, then move the business some place else, just outside of their control. To see examples of this look at philadelphia. Center City Philadelphia is alive and well but three or four miles outside of City hall and it all falls apart till you get to the city limits on the PA side and outside Camden city limits on the NJ side. Then its nothing but office complexs. Business and people spread out in the suburbs in the end mean more reliance on traditional transportion and less on public transportation.

By Joe

June 21, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this

It’s time to clean house in Washington, all incumbents need to go whatever party, Should have a 3 term limit in the house and 1 term in the senate w/no departure benefits. Serve the the country or stay home.Spending 20-30 million to get elected in the senate etc. should tell us all something abt the potential for corruption that goes on. What a sorry state of affairs our country has come to.Who stands for the good of the country and it’s people.In my opinion the whole govermental system is corrupt..sad,sad,sad.

By FreeThinker

June 21, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this

WOW, all this left - right stuff is exactly what the overlords of America want to continue. As long as the two groups spend all their time insulting each other they won’t wake up to the fact that BOTH parties are corrupt millionaire clubs that are working closely with the OPEC leaders. Anyone who thinks it is good to force working Americans into paying $6, $16 or $50 for a gallon of gas is so uneducated it is unfair to attack them. Wake up and dump the two parties, they both get millions from oil companies, foreign governments, other rich criminals and corporate sluts. These a-holes sell off all our manufacturing jobs to a commie hell-hole like China, allow illegal aliens to come here and take a large chunk of good jobs like construction work, pay millions to sit on their asses and collect welfare and you get on here and defend one or the other of the elitists like they are really trying to better your life. As long as you vote Dem or Rep, you vote no longer counts

By Iona Juman

June 21, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this

There will be a revolution if these elitest keep raising taxes and more taxes… Gasoline car taxes at the pump Car repairs oil change License renewal State taxes yearly decal including car tax known as personal tax(Virginia) Food taxes Medicine clothes, apparel, shoes, etc. social security tax Small business tax up the wazu Gas taxes for truckers and sales people stationery tax appliances tax house purchase cost to buy and sell Well, tax confiscate and spend travel tax telephone Heating one home taxes Cooling one home taxes Utilities, such as water and trash interest on savings AMT taxes there are other taxes I did not add BTW, please do not die and leave anything, you see there is a death tax…even after you die confiscation do not end.

Soon they might devise a way to charge for breathing.

By FreeThinker

June 21, 2007 1:35 PM | Link to this

WOW, all this left - right stuff is exactly what the overlords of America want to continue. As long as the two groups spend all their time insulting each other they won’t wake up to the fact that BOTH parties are corrupt millionaire clubs that are working closely with the OPEC leaders. Anyone who thinks it is good to force working Americans into paying $6, $16 or $50 for a gallon of gas is so uneducated it is unfair to attack them. Wake up and dump the two parties, they both get millions from oil companies, foreign governments, other rich criminals and corporate sluts. These a-holes sell off all our manufacturing jobs to a commie hell-hole like China, allow illegal aliens to come here and take a large chunk of good jobs like construction work, pay millions to sit on their asses and collect welfare and you get on here and defend one or the other of the elitists like they are really trying to better your life. As long as you vote Dem or Rep, your vote no longer counts

By BC in CA

June 21, 2007 1:35 PM | Link to this

Perhaps we should all write to Congress, reminding them that it was taxes that led to the American Revolution.

I find it ironic that the Democrats pander to “the common people” while raising taxes at every turn to finance social experiments, trashing the economy on which those same people depend. These are the same people who for decades have blocked nuclear power plants from being built and blocked offshore drilling to take advantage of our own resources.

By BS Aplenty (Capitalist Pig)

June 21, 2007 1:36 PM | Link to this

As a good capitalist I must tell you that the role of government in managing energy (or other commodity) is to promote a smooth but market-based transition - to limit the price spikes but not alter the long-term trend.

On a personal level, we all have to make a decision on where we spend our money - no government nannies to hold your hand.

By the way, for those interested, I’ve got my mega-luxe SUV for sale in the Atlanta Auto Trader (only $1.95)…

By FreeThinker

June 21, 2007 1:37 PM | Link to this

WOW, all this left - right stuff is exactly what the overlords of America want to continue. As long as the two groups spend all their time insulting each other they won’t wake up to the fact that BOTH parties are corrupt millionaire clubs that are working closely with the OPEC leaders. Anyone who thinks it is good to force working Americans into paying $6, $16 or $50 for a gallon of gas is so uneducated it is unfair to attack them. Wake up and dump the two parties, they both get millions from oil companies, foreign governments, other rich criminals and corporate sluts. These a-holes sell off all our manufacturing jobs to a commie hell-hole like China, allow illegal aliens to come here and take a large chunk of good jobs like construction work, pay millions to sit on their asses and collect welfare and you get on here and defend one or the other of the elitists like they are really trying to better your life. As long as you vote Dem or Rep, your vote no longer counts

By Adam

June 21, 2007 1:42 PM | Link to this

What Happened????

Did someone leave the door open today?

By Brett

June 21, 2007 1:42 PM | Link to this

You say Ethanol costs more to make than produce, huh? Why would they even make it then? This is more spin by the big oil lobby crowd. Certainly farm tractors use some gas but so do oil tankers, rigs and drills ect.

Please sir, Ethanol may not be the answer for us in the long run but dont give us this line of nonsense, Brazil runs a huge portion of there vehicles on ethanol and your trying to tell us they use more oil to produce there ethanol than what they get from it. Liar

By getalife

June 21, 2007 1:42 PM | Link to this

The gop will not pass this bill.

Big oil wrote past energy bills and this bill effects big oil, big auto, big utilities, etc…

It will not pass cloture for a vote.

The conservative position to do nothing and let corporate utopia run free in this country.

It is all talk.

By Thermodyman

June 21, 2007 1:44 PM | Link to this

Hey! Not to worry, with gas at $6.00 a gallon, E85, the wounder fuel, will be only $5.00 a gallon! Course you only get to go 2/3rds as far on a gallon, so the idiots that use it (aka libs), will be paying the equivalent of $7.50 per gallon! Don’t you love lib mathematics ? Yup! kinda reminds me of Jimmy Carter days.

By georgia 74

June 21, 2007 1:44 PM | Link to this

Any body who believes anything the Heritage foundation says is an idiot.

By mfreeze

June 21, 2007 1:45 PM | Link to this

Environmental rights groups are to blame. Sure there is a necessity for some oversight, however, making blanket rules that govern is like banning food because you might become obese when eating is crucial to living.Environmental groups contribute to the middle east getting richer, buying better weapons to kill us infidels and eventually conquering the world. Its coming, start kissing the floor now.

By Rod

June 21, 2007 1:46 PM | Link to this

So whats stopping the oil companies from charging $6.00 a gallon now? Nothing.Given that fuel has risen a dollar a year for the last several years it will be $6 a gallon by 2010.Thats also the same year that the American Union takes effect too. Thats when the borders between Mexico,Canada, and USA will be removed.The things you have to go thru to become a third world nation.I hope you like eating stoned ground corn.

By mfreeze

June 21, 2007 1:47 PM | Link to this

Environmental rights groups are to blame. Sure there is a necessity for some oversight, however, making blanket rules that govern is like banning food because you might become obese when eating is crucial to living.Environmental groups contribute to the middle east getting richer, buying better weapons to kill us infidels and eventually conquering the world. Its coming, start kissing the floor now.

By Rod

June 21, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this

So whats stopping the oil companies from charging $6.00 a gallon now? Nothing.Given that fuel has risen a dollar a year for the last several years it will be $6 a gallon by 2010.Thats also the same year that the American Union takes effect too. Thats when the borders between Mexico,Canada, and USA will be removed.The things you have to go thru to become a third world nation.I hope you like eating stoned ground corn.

By Fumbleroosky

June 21, 2007 1:50 PM | Link to this

I’m sure there are plenty of problems with the Dem proposed bill, so don’t think I’m trying to defend it.. It probably deserves to be attacked.

But in my opinion, the Heritage study is seriously flawed. They claim $6 gasoline by 2016.. I’ll trust their analysis on that. But then they claim: “consumers would spend an average of $1445 more per year on gasoline in 2016 than in 2008.”

However, if you read the fine print in their study, that total annual expenditure is based on the 2004 per capita gallons consumed, not per capita miles driven. In other words, they’re simultaneously claiming $6/gal gasoline and assuming a US fleet-wide efficiency of 18mpg. That’s pretty goofy. If gas does go up that high - and it very well might - market forces will take care of things and bring the average gas efficiency up to compensate. Current technology (not to mention 2016 technology) already allows for it, and consumers will adjust accordingly.

Anyway, I’m just saying.. Heritage, normally the champion of market forces, conveniently chooses to ignore them on this occasion.

By Rod

June 21, 2007 1:52 PM | Link to this

So whats stopping the oil companies from charging $6.00 a gallon now? Nothing.Given that fuel has risen a dollar a year for the last several years it will be $6 a gallon by 2010.Thats also the same year that the American Union takes effect too. Thats when the borders between Mexico,Canada, and USA will be removed.The things you have to go thru to become a third world nation.I hope you like eating stoned ground corn.

By Rod

June 21, 2007 1:53 PM | Link to this

So whats stopping the oil companies from charging $6.00 a gallon now? Nothing.Given that fuel has risen a dollar a year for the last several years it will be $6 a gallon by 2010.Thats also the same year that the American Union takes effect too. Thats when the borders between Mexico,Canada, and USA will be removed.The things you have to go thru to become a third world nation.I hope you like eating stoned ground corn.

By Retired

June 21, 2007 1:54 PM | Link to this

Why do these flaming liberals insist that auto manufacturers make small, death-trap cars? If they want one, they can buy one today—Mini, Aveo, Versa, etc.

No, what they want is for YOU to buy one so that there will more oil left over for them.

Just like Algore, the publicity hound, whining that Paris Hilton is getting all the press and not him—waa waa waa.

Last time I saw Al, he was in a Surburban—but the little people don’t need one.

When are the flamers going after Jon Carry’s five houses and Kennedy’s Hyannis estate (near the famous Chappiquidic (sp?) bridge?

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 1:54 PM | Link to this

Americans will not sacrifice anything. If they don’t have the cash to buy their luxuries, they will simply put it on their credit cards like they always do.

Don’t have the cash to fill up the gas tank? Simple, put it on the BP card. Don’t have the cash to go to the movies? Simple, put it on the Visa. Don’t have the cash to buy clothes? Simple, put it on the [insert dept. store name] card here. Don’t have cash for groceries? Simple, put it on the Master Card. Don’t have cash for McDonalds? Simple, put it on the second, third, or fourth Visa Card.

For this crisis to be resolved, Americans are going to have to sacrifice something in their lazy, fat existence.

Americans are willing to go more and more into debt just to have their luxuries and heaven forbid you let any of your neighbors or friends know you are strapped for cash. That would make you seem like such an unsuccessful loser and no one could stand for that!

By clarese

June 21, 2007 1:56 PM | Link to this

All I know is that it hurts my wallet, and that is enough for me to be against this. Those wonderful wealthy environmentalist democrats will be driving while average working person have to bus it. These folks have a third world peasant mentality, and will not be satisfied until we live like good little socialists.

By THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL

June 21, 2007 1:58 PM | Link to this

To swiftly at least begin to solve the petrol shortage/high prices

Build at least 10 large oil refineries in coastal areas of CA, Seattle, Miami, Boston, SC and NJ. Expand the capacity of several of the refineries in TX.

Immediately drill in Alaska wherever there is oil!! Sod the moose!!!

Same in FL coastal waters - start to drill wherever there is a decent amount of oil. Any drooling eco whacko who whines feed them to the sharks on PPV TV!!!

Double the petrol taxes in liberal/yankkkee states as they just love higher taxes and use the money to improve the roads in the south and also in and around the Mexican border to facilitate faster deportation of the 20 million or so illegal leeches.

Swiftly and quietly remove (applying the classic black power mantra) “by any means necessary” Comrade Chavez in Venezuela. He is an evil murderous commie thug like Allende!! This will give the lefties something to really really whine about and leftist whining is always fabulous fun to watch!!!

By mule

June 21, 2007 2:01 PM | Link to this

Our congress never seems to find a simple solution to anything…Thanks to Pelosi/Reid the only simple plan is the total demonization of the current administration..forget what is good for America, it’s all about the next election. They might take a look at their first 100 hours in which Pelosi promised major legislation would be accomplished = 14% confidence rating. Personally, I like gridlock…otherwise it just gets worse.

By Fred

June 21, 2007 2:03 PM | Link to this

No wonder congress is at a 14% approval rating. E85 doesn’t stack up anyway. I drive an E85 suburban and decided to try a tank. I saved about 15% on the fill up. Acccording to the experts this should have covered the efficiency difference. Wrong!!! I had 25% less efficiency. I asked my service advisor and was told that E85 has only 65 to 70% of the calories than regular 87 octane. With E85 at 105 octane it still does not cover difference. Why are these experts trying to fool us? I would rather eat the corn.

By Dr. Watkins

June 21, 2007 2:03 PM | Link to this

I think that the taxes on the international oil companies is good. We need to have American oil companies owned by Americans to develop our American oil reserves to be independent of the Muslims. This will be good for Israel as well. Gas is too cheap in America to burn in SUV’s. Oil’s highest and best use is in chemicals.

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 2:03 PM | Link to this

Clarese, “Those wonderful wealthy environmentalist democrats ” — besides Al Gore, name another.

Quit blaming one party - it’s not a democrat v. republican problem, it’s an American problem. It’s a lazy American consumer problem. It’s a society of spoiled, fat, debt-ridden hypocrits problem.

By Thermodyman

June 21, 2007 2:03 PM | Link to this

Dear Lib Brett… It cost more ENERGY to make etanol than it gives back when you burn it ! It takes energy to plant corn, energy to make fertilizer, energy to put the fertilizer on the corn, energy to make and put pesticides on the corn, energy to harvest corn, energy to ferment the corn beer, energy to distil the ethanol, energy to truck the ethanol around, cause you can’t transport it in the petrol pipes. All of those energy inputs are supplied by fossil fuel… ie. oil, coal and natural gas! The Brazillians DON’T BURN THEIR FOOD ! They use sugar cane that doesn’t require fertilizer and pesticides… you idiot lib! Take a course in Thermodynamics AND economics!

By Scholar

June 21, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this

Change is painful. Gas prices are in a correction. If you don’t like it, don’t drive.

By Flyoverman

June 21, 2007 2:06 PM | Link to this

In the spirit of bipartisanship, may I just say as a proud Iowan, I can state that beyond any doubt that our two US Senators, one Republican and one Democrat, take a back seat to no one interms of their cluelessness and utter stupidity. They both are leading the charge that will take the Congressional approval rate, now at 14%, and drive it deep into single digits.

They are both depriving some Iowa village of its idiot. Only when Congress is in recess, do I breathe a sigh of relief.

By bobr

June 21, 2007 2:06 PM | Link to this

those of you that are so insistantly repeating the mantra of our dependance on mid east oil might find it interesting that we get almost no oil from the mid east. we import oil primarily from mexico, canada, and of all countries, russia. we also import most of our gasoline from venezuela who boasts the worlds largest refinery. it might also interest you to learn that most of the price increases you see in gas arise from the fact that our domestic refining capacity is insufficient for our needs due to the fact that no new refineries have been built in the last couple of decades nor are there any under construction. the market forces we hear so much about relate to the laws of supply and demand. demand for gas goes up every year but our ability to meet that demand continues to flag. no matter what the commodity that is a sure fire recipe for increased prices. ethanol is a pretty good idea if we start making it out of sugar cane or some other product than corn, especially since there are several other products which produce an energy positive result instead of the neutral to negative result from ethanol. ask yourself, if ethanol from corn is such a good idea why is it necessary to pay someone to bring it to market? if it were a good product there would be any number of companies competing to make money on it just as there are on all the other consumer products out there. it seems to me that if i owned a company that was manufacturing any product and something happened to reduce my profits i would have to raise my prices to get my profits back in line. i suspect the oil companies will respond in just that manner and all those taxes we are about to hit them with will be paid by us in the form of higher prices for their products. maybe not but i think that’s how it will play out. bob

By john

June 21, 2007 2:09 PM | Link to this

I have the cheapest commute available right now and it will always be the cheapest.——Ride Marta. I can live with Marta’s faults if and when gas prices increase. Hell, I even found round trip flights from atlanta to orlando for $24 each way. My truck has never had it easier.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 2:10 PM | Link to this

Well, this thread confirms that Americans only care when it effects their wallets.

Too bad they are way too late to the party that destroyed our country, the gop.

This bill will not pass and oil companies will continue to increase prices without any alternatives to their monopoly.

Stay the course, if you will.

By Van

June 21, 2007 2:12 PM | Link to this

Fred ,

How true, if we really wanted to get a efficient fuel we would all switch to diesel. More energy than gasoline and easier to refine(fewer steps in the process). E85 is a step back in time to lower octane rated fuel.

By THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL

June 21, 2007 2:14 PM | Link to this

WOW … AfriKa is actually even more backward and oppressive than I gave it credit for being!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6226274.stm

By jerry

June 21, 2007 2:14 PM | Link to this

I think it is good, even though I may pay a little more for gas. Maybe all the idiots driving huge and completely unnecessary SUV’s will realize how stupid they really are. People buy these gigantic vehicles with 3 rows of seats and maybe use the 3rd row once every 5 years and destroy the environment because they want to look cool.

By Last Days

June 21, 2007 2:18 PM | Link to this

Global warming is not a result of our dependence on fuel – it’s an act of GOD. Read your bibles. It says that during the second coming of Christ that the world will be destroyed by fire. Global warming is your last warning from God that our days are numbered and quickly coming to an end. Everybody should get right with God now…. before it’s too late. Are you ready?

By Last Days

June 21, 2007 2:18 PM | Link to this

Global warming is not a result of our dependence on fuel – it’s an act of GOD. Read your bibles. It says that during the second coming of Christ that the world will be destroyed by fire. Global warming is your last warning from God that your days are numbered and quickly coming to an end. Everybody should get right with God now…. before it’s too late. Are you ready?

By Last Days

June 21, 2007 2:20 PM | Link to this

Global warming is not a result of our dependence on fuel – it’s an act of GOD. Read your bibles. It says that during the second coming of Christ that the world will be destroyed by fire. Global warming is your last warning from God that your days are numbered and quickly coming to an end. Everybody should get right with God now…. before it’s too late. Are you ready?

By FreeThinker

June 21, 2007 2:21 PM | Link to this

According to Bosch we should stop being the greatest civization ever, and start modeling ourselves after some turd-world dump like Crapiztan. If you feel so guilty that Americans are FAT, move to Darfur. I can see the food police in our future with Bosch-type thinking. “You only need 900 calories to live a happy existance, eat your commie gruel.” We do have an excess problem, but turning our country into a Marxist concentration camp is not an answer. I guess we should create another bloated Federal money pit - Dept of What Car You Can Own and What Credit Card You Can Have. Obviously Bosch is having a hard time not showing his neighbors that he is cash strapped. Live your own life a-hole and let others live theirs. I hear the Elitists are looking for some true belivers to keep the great unwashed in line. They have some really nice looking Brown Shirts too.

By Michael

June 21, 2007 2:23 PM | Link to this

I like how so many people are blaming the Democrats for this…its almost like they aren’t reading the article. for example:

With the the concurrence of the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, Charles Grassley of Iowa, and others (Gordon Smith of Oregon, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Pat Roberts of Kansas, all Republican), the committee is proposing $29 billion in new taxes on oil companies.

By cara

June 21, 2007 2:23 PM | Link to this

if gas even gets to $4-$5 a gallon i’ll be in trouble. i already live in the middle of nowhere, i have to drive about 10 minutes to get to the nearest store!! and i drive an hour to work every day.

if gas prices go up that much, i won’t be able to afford the gas to work and back. i barely can now, and i drive a honda!!

somebody needs to fix this. hydrogen looks to be our best bet at this point.

By DJ

June 21, 2007 2:23 PM | Link to this

$6 a gallon for gas? Why? Is another Bush going to get elected president?

By Will Smith

June 21, 2007 2:24 PM | Link to this

Anyone else see the resemblence between the Government’s war strategy and the movie iRobot?

The Gov’t starts wars in other countries where we don’t think their politics (or political leaders) are correct. In the movie, the robots took control of society (killing anyone who tried to stop them) because people were a threat to their own existence.

Just goes to prove that the leftists in hollywood have no creativity and steal all of their ideas from the gov’t.

By RCH

June 21, 2007 2:25 PM | Link to this

getalife You finally see the light.” Well, this thread confirms that Americans only care when it effects their wallets.” Welcome to the real world. And now you see people starting to vote that way too.

By Lee

June 21, 2007 2:26 PM | Link to this

The solution? www.constitutionparty.com

By truth

June 21, 2007 2:27 PM | Link to this

I’m so sick of all you liberals spending my money for me. You neo-stalinist nazis. Why don’t you get a job and spend your own money you lazy bums.

By Robert

June 21, 2007 2:28 PM | Link to this

To qoute an old saying: If pro is the opposite of con, then progress is the opposite of congress!

By LDF

June 21, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this

By Joe

June 21, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this

If gas prices rise significantly, then that’s great news. To stop funding terrorism with our dependence on foreign oil and to mitigate the harm caused by global warming, we need to use less gas. Basic economics teaches that as prices rise, demand falls (notice the glut of SUVs on the market lately). Therefore, I support a tax that reduces the demand for gasoline. I’d rather adjust to high gasoline prices (we’ll have more fuel efficient cars and more demand for regional mass transit), then adjust to the effects of global warming (Australia is experiencing a catastrophic drought that has lasted six years now).

You, sir are what us ‘CONS’ call a non-normie. We have enough oil in our own country to be self sufficient, but you non-normies are worried about ‘global whining’. Only a self-indulged non-normie would believe that humans can actually affect mother nature. You are nothing more than a communist in training! Trying to place your junk- science religion on the rest of America to promote a cause that does not exist. Global warming has been going on for billions of years you freakin moron.

By farmeratheart

June 21, 2007 2:33 PM | Link to this

Wait. I thought the Republican party supported ethanol as a way to generate fuel in the homeland and help American farmers at the same time. If it takes too much energy to produce, then we should look at some other home-grown solutions. I heard some non-food crops like grasses could work. That’s what most of these fields were before corn came along, so it seems to fit.

And as for raising the taxes on oil companies, I see this as a very conserative thing to do too. If the government takes in too much money in taxes, we’d all yell about cutting them. So how are these big foreign companies sucking up our money and getting away with it? They’re obviously not lowering the gas prices with their profits, so why not make let them know that can’t take it off our backs?

By Patina

June 21, 2007 2:34 PM | Link to this

Truth, “Why don’t you get a job and spend your own money you lazy bums.”

Questions are ended with a question mark, not a period.

By Zev

June 21, 2007 2:35 PM | Link to this

Yeah let it go higher. I live in the city. I work downtown, minutes away. I’ll have enough discreitionary spending to drive my car to work everyday, while the masses share the bus. Who do you think will be driving on all those Highways when gas is $6 to $16 per gallon? Me. Really rich people, congressfolks. They HAVES just won’t have to sit in traffic anymore. The poor and middle-class will be sitting around waiting for the #16 to downtown in winter. I’ll be parking my car in my paid parking spot when the rest of you will be parking your a* next to your new buddy from that “Great” part of town the bus goes through. Enjoy!

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this

Free Thinker, You’re a sad individual and very judgemental. I have one credit card that I pay off every month. How about you?

Does the country with the most “stuff” win? Just because we have more “stuff” than anyone else, does that make us the greatest civilization ever? What twisted logic you have.

My point is that many Americans are not willing to make the sacrfices neccesary to fix the problem. We are all too spoiled an expect things to be fixed immediately. It’s the microwave mentality.

By Justin McCarthy

June 21, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

I consider myself a conservative, but I get a kick out of the panic and frenzy that avowed conservatives get into when someone suggests “subsidizing” alternative energy.

We are “subsidizing” $300 billion per year of imported oil (a substantial portion of our trade deficit) to the tune of another $250 billion if you consider that the majority of our defense budget is used to maintain a force structure needed to stabilize the Middle East and now to project force into Central Asia where oil exists. This does not include the trillion dollar lump sum payments the Iraq adventure will represent. The federal government uses our taxes to build roads which is another effective subsidy for oil used in transportation.

Let’s load the “true” cost of imported oil into the price at the pump and let the market make the appropriate adjustments. Alternative energy might be competitve without “subsidies” if imported oil was not subsidized. As it is, we are “subsidizing” personal tastes and preferences (high performance luxury cars and SUV’s) with our country’s blood and treasure.

Let’s bring some integrity to the debate.

Justin

By El Gato

June 21, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

If you think the government is your friend when the politicians are telling your everything they are going “to do for you”, you are one dumb sap! The politicians have no idea how to do things in an efficient manner that improves the problem at a reasonable cost. All they care about is getting reelected and as long as the people are so stupid (we are) and keep reelecting the same scoundrels, then we deserve to be screwed by them over and over.

By TPB

June 21, 2007 2:40 PM | Link to this

How about this for solutions? Drill in the lower 48, ANWAR, and offshore. Also build more refineries and cut our umbilical from the damn Arabs NOW! We are funding our own demise by not utlizing the fossil resources we have here and funneling money to them. In the mean time we could create incentives for the continued development of alternative fuel sources, since none exist now in a reliable, easy to produce form. We are making great strides in the research of alternative fuel options but until they reach production quality why don’t we use what we have HERE to buy the time to let American ingenuity do what it does best… produce the best, most inovative products the world has ever known.

As for continued use of fossil fuels and global warming… get a grip. If we are causing it then, according to all the “EXPERTS” we can’t reverse it now. We’re past the point of no return they say. So why not continue until we can find a viable alternative if we’re doomed anyway? It sounds stupid, I know, and that’s why I don’t swallow the whole man made global warming theory. However, I am a firm believer that Earth is simply doing what she does best… changing. Gee, last time I checked the only thing that really can be garaunteed is that things will change. This planet is simply moving with the ebb and flow that existed long before we were ever here and that will continue long after we are gone. Are we so arrogant to think that we are so powerful that we can really destroy this planet? God designed her to defend herself if that is happening and, like nature does, will she’ll purge herself if it’s needed. If we are the problem she’ll get rid of us. Even if we aren’t she still may. It’s simply the cycle of the planet. Remember the “ice ages” and tropical eras we’ve had all throughout history? What’s to say that all of that will stop just because we are here or not.

The bottom line is, yes we should try to be the best stewards we can but we’ve created some delimas for ourselves in all of our “great wisdom” and technological advances. We’re sort of painted into the proverbial corner. Either we’ll learn to live in harmony with this planet and ALL of her changes or we’ll be wiped off the slate and God will start over.

By El Gato

June 21, 2007 2:40 PM | Link to this

If you think the government is your friend when the politicians are telling your everything they are going “to do for you”, you are one dumb sap! The politicians have no idea how to do things in an efficient manner that improves the problem at a reasonable cost. All they care about is getting reelected and as long as the people are so stupid (we are) and keep reelecting the same scoundrels, then we deserve to be screwed by them over and over.

By turkeystone

June 21, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this

Do you suppose Mr. Wooten would like some cheese with his whine?

Seems to me that what’s missing in the editorial are his suggestions for fixing the energy problems we have in this country.

By Dennis Rick

June 21, 2007 2:43 PM | Link to this

Remember and Remember well, You all voted those idiots from the left in!!!

You ask for it, now you get it!

By LDF

June 21, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this

THE ONLY GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL for 2008!!

By Eddie Thomas

June 21, 2007 2:47 PM | Link to this

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 2:47 PM | Link to this

So, Dennis, what have the idiots from the right done for us lately? Hmmmmm……..let’s see…….

By Lew Rodgers

June 21, 2007 2:50 PM | Link to this

Oh yes, and after the learned ones in DC accomplish this act, and our use of oil tumbles as they have it planned, the oil producing nations will take note and Voila!! — raise their barrel prices to compensate, and so they can continue their terrorist activities. and, can we say $12 per gallon??

By Lew Rodgers

June 21, 2007 2:51 PM | Link to this

Oh yes, and after the learned ones in DC accomplish this act, and our use of oil tumbles as they have it planned, the oil producing nations will take note and Voila!! — raise their barrel prices to compensate, and so they can continue their terrorist activities. and, can we say $12 per gallon??

By Lew Rodgers

June 21, 2007 2:51 PM | Link to this

Oh yes, and after the learned ones in DC accomplish this act, and our use of oil tumbles as they have it planned, the oil producing nations will take note and Voila!! — raise their barrel prices to compensate, and so they can continue their terrorist activities. and, can we say $12 per gallon??

By Lew Rodgers

June 21, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this

Oh yes, and after the learned ones in DC accomplish this act, and our use of oil tumbles as they have it planned, the oil producing nations will take note and Voila!! — raise their barrel prices to compensate, and so they can continue their terrorist activities. and, can we say $12 per gallon??

By Cornstoves

June 21, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this

Tax the rich, not the poor! Congress finally got it right. Tax rich workers that are forced to drive. Poor congressman never drive. Congress knows the rich best. The poor Washington PAC man & corp CEO never drive. The rich workers must drive to work but not to vote. Congress, Reps, gov guys, and illegal Aliens get the Fed ID and trip to vote free. Now you can explain why the game warden must approve every small windmill generator, the coast guard approves small local hydros, and the local sheriff confiscates small ethanol moonshiners. The local Utility is liable for squeeling. Will Homeland Security approve all local solars?

By Steve

June 21, 2007 2:53 PM | Link to this

Bottom line we should be drilling for oil everywhere, Alaska, offshore and off California/Florida. Oil is the lifeblood of a thriving economy. Liberals only want to punish our prosperity with feel good legislation!

http://netradionetwork.com

By Lew Rodgers

June 21, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this

Oh yes, and after the learned ones in DC accomplish this act, and our use of oil tumbles as they have it planned, the oil producing nations will take note and Voila!! — raise their barrel prices to compensate, so they can continue their terrorist activities. and, can we say $12 per gallon??

By Jason Burroughs

June 21, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this

you need to educate yourself about the argument of “it takes more energy to produce that it generates”. this oversimplies the issue. The energy that is used is not all in the same usable form that it produces. So if it takes 1000 people 100 hours to produce 1 million gallons of fuel, you can argue that 100,000 man hours is more energy than 1 million gallons of fuel, but you can’t put 1000 people in your gas tank (or a lump of coal, or electricity, etc). PLEASE consider this argument carefully because it is overused and unfair.

By Dennis Rick

June 21, 2007 2:55 PM | Link to this

Here comes a convoy made up of Kerry Kennedy and Pepsi-Cola (the one from CA) riding in their Humvee that gets two miles per gal followed by a fuel truck. And Kerry saids to the now naked streets and endless lines at the food store and the dying in the streets. Now were cooking, This is my America!!!! There are three class’s of people, the poor as you see, the rich (middle class gone) and US!!! He laughs and High Fives everyone!!!

By DB

June 21, 2007 2:59 PM | Link to this

The old “ethanol takes more energy to produce than it produces” is so inaccurate with the new technologies we have. That was true 15 years ago, but it is no longer true. It’s only an inaccurate perpetuation of lies created by those that stand to lose money. And that’s assuming all the farm equipment uses 100% fossil fuel, which will not be the case if we let alternative fuels grow. Many farmers already use biodiesel in a lot of rural areas including the Midwest and South Georgia. That’s why they put forward the money to have it tested and passed as a Federally approved fuel. Also, if we take the half-dollar per gallon tariff off of Brazilian ethanol, we could even buy some to supplement our market. Also, don’t forget about the new plant in South Georgia that makes ethanol from pine trees, which is much cheaper and energy efficient than corn ethanol. Corn ethanol will be surpassed by cellulosic ethanol. You’re basing everything on the antiquated corn ethanol technology. Also, $6 gallon of gas would be great. It’s just the market Wooten! For too long we have had cheap oil creating a huge demand while the rest of the world’s demand is rising. $6 gasoline is just a major correction of the market that cannot be avoided(and has been selectively downplayed by the oil companies for years). What will happen is perfect. People will start to drive more efficient vehicles, and alternative energy and new technology will be spurred by all this. It’s hard for us to change our driving distances, but we all will be forced to buy more efficient cars, period. Quit blowing steam and realize it is not such a bad thing that people start to conserve. The economy will not suffer at all.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 3:01 PM | Link to this

RCH,

I see the real world everyday.

This bill is stalled and probably dead.

The gop will never vote against corporate interests. Period. It was all talk.

Next up, your favorite, amnesty for illegal immigrants.

This one will have a few gop dissenters like the energy bill .

By ihatefreeloaders

June 21, 2007 3:01 PM | Link to this

this cornball fruitcake has obviously never bothered to learn a lick of economics, or he’d know of the huge negative externalities of gasoline production and use. Stop being a conservahippie freeloader, jackoff jim. this bill lets the true cost of gas shine through. no more welfare, not for crackheads, not for oil companies, not for the fruitcakes in the 10mpg cars. damn monkey business.

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 3:01 PM | Link to this

I’m waiting Dennis Rick, what has the idiots from the right done for us lately?

I think your very poor literary attempt to demonstrate the shrinking middle class would have been better exemplified if you had used members of your own neo-con party. After all, they’ve been in control for six years and Congress for twelve.

Try again.

By John the Fierce

June 21, 2007 3:03 PM | Link to this

Gas taxes are among the most regressive of all taxes, gobsmacking working and poor people with thier impact. With most American cities having marginally effective public transportation the result of simply boosting fees and taxes on gasoline to force conservation or reallocate resources will be increased struggle for the people who still have to drive to survive while subsidized companies and the wealthy will still coast above it all.

By DB

June 21, 2007 3:03 PM | Link to this

Dave: And I suppose you agree to store all the nuclear waste in your back yard?

By GLR

June 21, 2007 3:03 PM | Link to this

All part of the plan to make what’s left of the US a third world dirt hole. Merge it with Mexico and Canada as the ignorant, uneducated low brow hordes continue to swarm in per the wishes of the people actually running the show. In time the elites have driven the middle class into the ground, to the same level as the third world creatures they have elected as the new population of N. America. Couple that with what’s going on with Europe and their immigration woes and you can see it’s all on purpose. Make the entire West a third world dump, with easily controlled natives satisfied with lowbrow jobs and govt handouts. That way you can rule forever. Wake up. Educate yourselves. Democrats. Republicans. Hah. The same things happen no matter who is in office. You’d have to be stupid to believe that either party is a real choice. Heck, go and look at the history of the Immigration Act of 1965. Oh yeah, Ted Kennedy was a sponsor, but look at who actually wrote it, and WHY. You are seeing the end game played out right in front of you with legal and illegal immigration, impossible fuel prices, a runaway Fed and a foreign policy dictated by ‘neocons’ whose allegiance is not to the United States. Wake up before you find yourself broke, being attacked by illegals or in chains. To believe in what the MSM says is to be nothing more than a psuedo-intellectual fraud or stupid.

By Adam

June 21, 2007 3:04 PM | Link to this

Only one question after reading this…What was the point in putting democrats in power in Congress? I thought it was to lower gas prices and get out of Iraq! Interesting that nothing has happened as they promised. And my friends wonder why I vote conservative!!! This is very much a political issue as Democrats campaigned for the middle and lower class man to lower gas prices, remove the USA from Iraq, and help relations with other countries. Seems hypocritical to me since now Congress is at an all-time low for approval ratings!!!

By rob

June 21, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this

of course with oil potential in Alaska that we ignore and refuse to drill for to make us more independent, as well as off the coast potential, the world looks at us as a big stupid country.As always the big losers are the middle class and poor. If this passes I suspect every congressman and woman in power will be voted out at the next election.

By MaverickCoast

June 21, 2007 3:11 PM | Link to this

For too long we have had cheap oil creating a huge demand while the rest of the world’s demand is rising. $6 gasoline is just a major correction…..The economy will not suffer at all.

I hope you are kidding, DB, or obviously you flunked Economics 101. Our economy will go down the toilet if gas rises that much, let alone more than what it is now.

I’m in the food delivery business and do I need to educate you on the meaning of “inflation” as a result of higher fuel prices?

Geezzzzzzzz

MaverickCoast

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 3:12 PM | Link to this

Um, Adam, if you’ll remember, the Congress tried to pass a bill to start the ball rolling to get us out of Iraq, the President vetoed it.

Also, how many of your “conservative” politicians are in bed with big oil companies?

By Mike

June 21, 2007 3:12 PM | Link to this

The more the price of gas goes up, regardless of the reasons, the more that alternative fuels will become economically appealing. I believe the sleeping giant in this area is hydrogen. Honda, which we all knows makes cars right, is already in production with a Hydrogen-fueled car. They also produce a hydrogen-producing unit that can easily fit in your garage. California is already starting to place hydrogen “gas” stations at strategic locations along their Interstate Highways. The other States, and the Feds, need to get on this bandwagon.

By Proud Republican!!!

June 21, 2007 3:12 PM | Link to this

Global warming, evolution, and supposed benefits of embryonic stem cell research are frauds upon those educated in government schools where they were indoctrinated to believe in the validity of science and scientists. Scientists are communists, and I thought we kicked their a*******es all the way to Siberia back in the 80’s.

What the hell?

By SolutionGiver

June 21, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this

Here’s the simplest solution no one has thought of yet:

Ban all “greenies” from using any device or conveyance that creates pollution. Greenies shouldn’t be using automobiles, lawnmower, BBQ grills, etc. anyway since it is against their moral fiber to do so.

When all the “greenies” stop polluting and using energy, energy supply will increase, prices decrease, and global warming will be solved.

But then again, when was the last time you saw a “greenie” (or lib for that mater) practice what he / she / it preaches.

By Luke Miorelli

June 21, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this

I found your artiucle on Drudge right next to the article that showed only 14% of America approves of and trust congress. This is not coincidental.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 3:15 PM | Link to this

Adam,

It takes 60 votes in the Senate and half of Congress is your party.

Geez.

By Redneck Convert

June 21, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this

Well, I see some good and true Americans in the Senate blocked that bill that would make a big booze shortage and put all that alcohol in gas tanks instead of our tanks. We can all be proud of these patriotic Republicans. And I bet the oil companys didn’t pay a penny to their campaign fund for it.

We need to get cracking on electing another Republican president. If we don’t then pretty soon the libruls will be using live babys to get cures from and hiking taxes on everybody. I say lets put old Newt in there. Anybody that can figure out how to serve his wife with divorce papers when she was in the hospital with cancer and couldn’t do nothing about it is smart enough to outdo the libruls in Congress.

By Jan R. Smith

June 21, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this

i have reccomended to my Senators and my representative that we have a moveable tax rate on imported oil. Establish a base rate for imported oil at say $70 per barrel. If imported crude was at $60/barrel, then the tax would be $10/barrel. The idea would be to encourage home oil discoveries. On all my trips to England I saw no (zero) Suburban-type vehicles. Apparently, $6/gal is the tipping point. The law of diminshing returns still works!

By Brian

June 21, 2007 3:19 PM | Link to this

If you think gas won’t be $6 a gallon by 2016 WITHOUT this bill, then you are either ignorant of reality, or insane. Did the “study” say how much more $6 a gallon in 2016 would be as compared to what it would be if this bill is blocked? That would be a much more relevant number. Not to mention that it’s incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to predict the price of a commodity in 10 years. If you could, then everyone would make millions by using these magical formulas to predict how well a stock is going to do based on prices and whatnot.

Fear mongering. And you all fall for it.

By Douglas Westerman

June 21, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this

The problem with biofuel is that it takes land which we need for food production. For five out of the last six years, world food demand has exceeded supply. The grain reserves are down from about 120 days in 1999 to about 57 days, the lowest in 40 yrs. Australia has gone from the 4th largest grain exporter a few years ago to an importer, due to drought.

By John

June 21, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this

How about we bring the troups home and station some of them on the borders. Then we take all the money left over and develop a new energy source that would allow the United States to be energy independent. This loss of oil revenue to Arab countries would set them back financially to the 10th century and starve out terrorist governments.

By Brandon

June 21, 2007 3:24 PM | Link to this

Less dependence on oil, more dependence on big government.

Did you know that today government makes 6 times what the oil companies make on a gallon of gas, and government doesn’t have the risk associated with finding the product, refining the product, and getting the product to market. I think we need a windfall profits tax on big government and put the money back where it comes from…

It’s the people stupid!

By aj

June 21, 2007 3:24 PM | Link to this

You guys call yourselves conservatives when you are really interested in conserving no natural resources and wasting away our precious earth.

By ixtahdoom

June 21, 2007 3:25 PM | Link to this

Hey, at least a 104% increase by 2014 is a slower rate of increase than the 100% increase under Bush’s first four years.

104% of 7 years versus, 100% increase from 2000 to 2004 ($1.50 to $3.00).

By DB

June 21, 2007 3:25 PM | Link to this

TBP: I agree that we don’t need to tax in that we just need to get rid of oil subsidies.

FACT: ANWAR is a drop in a bucket. It will in no way help our oil situation long term. It will only make a select few very rich. If you are talking Green River Basin, you may have something, but it’s more expensive to extract right now than it will sell for. Shell is working on it, but they won’t kick into higher gear until oil prices rise even further and make it profitable. Refinery increases will boost demand even further by lowering prices, which will hurt us in the long run.

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY(electric, hydrogen, and biofuels) makes us less dependent on ARABS and other foreign countries. Get your head out of the sand! And so does conservation. People need to quit this knee-jerk stupidity.

Dave: The infrastructure for electric and hydrogen is simply not there, so it’s not going to happen at this point until car companies disband with oil companies and start making electric cars more practical. It is still much easier to go to the gas pump than charge your car for hours each day. As for nuclear power, since we don’t know what to do with nuclear waste we’ve already created(which is in many ways much more dangerous than improbable meltdowns), we shouldn’t continue our creation of it. It wouldn’t make much difference until the infrastructure has changed, which will take at leat 20-30 years. However, for the electric side of it, we should promote wind, solar, hydropower, and clean coal technologies.

The first step is expensive fuel, which promotes conservation and research. All these bills are just political, and this is not a reason to start honking your political horns. Regardless of taxes, the gas prices will most likely end up at $6 anyway simply due to world demand and excessive American dependence on oil.

Both Democrats and Republicans are idiots. Both sides are knee-jerking our country into oblivion.

As for ethanol and biodiesel. I don’t know why people are so against it. I’m willing to sacrifice for energy independence and spurred economy. The farmers are doing much better. For every gallon of ethanol we use, that is .85 gallons of gasoline we don’t have to use. And for every gallon of biodiesel, that is about 1.13 gallons of gasoline we don’t have to use. The ball is already rolling. Ethanol and biodiesel will not replace fossil fuels, but they will make us use less.

By Bob Whitman

June 21, 2007 3:25 PM | Link to this

Looking forward to paying the higher gas price to create alternative energy resources, we should have started the at the first oil crisis in 1971 and we would not today be addicted to oil and in the hands of the radical Arab states. How much energy would the cost of Iraq and Afganistan wars pay for. We needed to get Al Qaeda, but they bleed us dry and are killing us economically with a war where we retaliate to the tune of 100s of billions in response to a dozen terrorists and their investment of perhaps a couple hundredk.

Free from oil.. Free from Middle East..

Invest in real homeland security at borders and immigration issues, let the Arabs keep their oil and fight with each other.

Energy independance will cost up front while we fight abroad and someone has to foot the bill, I’m ready to start and get it over with.

By John

June 21, 2007 3:26 PM | Link to this

How about we bring the troups home and station some of them on the borders. Then we take all the money left over and develop a new energy source that would allow the United States to be energy independent. This loss of oil revenue to Arab countries would set them back financially to the 10th century and starve out terrorist governments.

By RCH

June 21, 2007 3:29 PM | Link to this

Adam This was nothing but proposed feel good legislation. Congress can’t lower gas prices. They will only go up higher since it is a finite recourse. When will we all finally admit this. Earlier today I gave an example of a long term solution. Wave generators. This subject ways not even explored. All we did is sit around and try to blame each other. Sort of like Congress isn’t it.

By BS3

June 21, 2007 3:30 PM | Link to this

I don’t disagree that public transportation can be part of the solution. However, it too, adds its own negative aspect - personal health. For 14 years, I rode Marta busses and trains, and not a year went by that I didn’t miss one week or more with the flu. But in the last 16 years since I’ve been driving to work (where Marta doesn’t go), the only time I missed work because of illness was when I got food poisoning at a company outing — evidence that public transportation is a great breeding ground for germs!

By DB

June 21, 2007 3:31 PM | Link to this

Douglas Westerman: Our country EATS enough food to feed the world 2 times over and produces enough to feed the world 4 times over. I don’t think anyone will be starving anytime soon.

By Frank

June 21, 2007 3:31 PM | Link to this

Raising taxes never work and only fund worthless government pork projects like this stupid plan. Besides, we need action now, not in 2020. By 2020 we should be off OIL and on something else, and between now and then we need to find ways to stop funding the terrorists. Come on America we can do this. We can design and engineer new vehicles and come up with something better than corn as a biofuel. We need to tell Congress no-new-taxes…period!

By Nathan

June 21, 2007 3:33 PM | Link to this

Geeze, people are only discovering now that these new fuels are going to be significantly more expensive? Global Warming is only a means of getting people to accept huge new taxes without firing Congress.

Gas mileage for autos could be significantly increased just by allowing more diesels. Europe has been doing this for quite sometime. No one has discussed the environmental/economic problems of the spent batteries in hybrids (they have to be replaced every few year$). Batteries are very dirty.

Hydrogen will have huge infrastructure problems (it is very tough to pump or store it). Typically it is extracted from natural gas. The other economic means is with electricity via hydro or nuclear power plants.

Worse still is what message is being sent to the exporters and producers of oil? America is more than willing to pay more? Thanks a bunch Congress…

By chemist

June 21, 2007 3:34 PM | Link to this

Here’s an idea: Live in town and bike everywhere. I do it, it’s cheaper than a car and more healthy. If we all did it, and reserved auto traffic (fueled in whatever way) for relatively long-distance trips (more than 15 mi), the “obesity epidemic” would surely be a thing of the past.

By Hojo

June 21, 2007 3:34 PM | Link to this

Oh well, we will all get into better shape with all the walking we will do. The bad thing is everything will end up costing more because things need to be shipped and with higher gas prices, higher shipping costs.

By Bosch

June 21, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this

RCH, I asked you in an earlier post about the wave generators and you didn’t respond. I don’t know about these, I’m interested in what they do. Do you have a link where I can read more about them, or can you just tell me the basics of how they work?

Thanks.

By Chris

June 21, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this

I haven’t heard one of you mention the fact that there is a finite amount of oil in the ground. Once we reach the peak of oil production, we’re on a downward slope of supply while demand continues to rise. Read up on reality at TheOilDrum.com

By Jeff

June 21, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this

At $4 per gallon it is cheaper to use hydrogen! Why don’t those bozos in Congress have a real energy policy. No new car will be sold in this country that is not powered by hydrogen. They did with leaded gas in 3 years. All the car companies have hydrogen power cars. Are these guys so in the Oil Company’s pocket that they can’t see the future! While I’m here secure the border before you give any one any amnesty.

By Anti CriminalGovt

June 21, 2007 3:39 PM | Link to this

The French Revolution started on just this - the numbers are growing - of those who cannot wait for the day when every one of those those fat greedy corporate-political pigs - and their dimwits-in-tow concocting crazed logic to support their pigs - get slaughtered by the people, one way or the other.

By DB

June 21, 2007 3:39 PM | Link to this

Proud Republican!!!: I love it when people like you act as if ignorance is a virtue. If it weren’t for scientists, at least one third of us would be dead due to disease and other medical problems caused by environmental damage or inadequate safety procedures/designs. And every aspect of technology, things like airplanes, cars, and buildings, would not be nearly as safe.

By Shredder

June 21, 2007 3:40 PM | Link to this

This article is pure crap. It does not require more energy to produce ethanol than it is worth. Of course you could do that.

Brazil runs 90% of its personal transportation (personal cars) on ethanol. They do it with sugar. They are the largest sugar producer in the world. We are the #2 sugar producer and thats only because we pay farmers to NOT grow sugar.

All you naysayers explain to me how a third world country beat us to energy independance.

Stop believing the hit pieces that are paid for by big oil.

By Sam

June 21, 2007 3:43 PM | Link to this

Let’s see, windmills that generate electricity at best 25 to 30% of the time and require government subsidies along with higher electric bills, solar panels that only generate electricity when the sun is shining and if you are fortunate enough to have enough space on your roof to place them in the proper direction, and that even with tax credits take you over 25 years to break even, ethanol that gives you worse fuel mileage, increases ozone pollution, increases food costs and requires lots of taxpayer dollars to subsidize. What a great bunch of leaders this country has. within 10 years we’ll be moving to Mexico to look for jobs.

By Tony DDT

June 21, 2007 3:43 PM | Link to this

Whoever voted for these F’ing a***** should be shot. This is exactly what we get for not voting these MF’rs out. Wake up Amerika, do you want more of this or less of this. If you want more, vote for anyone else besides Ron Paul. If you are so sick of this crap, get off your a* and send money to keep Ron Paul in the race and VOTE FOR RON PAUL!

By DB

June 21, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this

TBP: I love it when people like you act as if ignorance is a virtue!

Nathan: Actually, biofuels are right now equal to or cheaper than fossil fuels. That’s exactly why oil companies are investing in and pushing for mixing them with fuels, because they make more profit when they can sell gas for the price it fetches and has cheaper fuel mixed in it.

By anti-Shredder

June 21, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this

Shredder, after decades of failed efforts, Brazil cut off the subsidies to the sugar cane growers and ethanol producers. Only when forced off of the gov’t teat, did they have an incentive to increase efficiencies in their production processes.

As long as subsidies exist, the production of alternative fuels will never be as efficient as cost-effective as it could otherwise.

By DB

June 21, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this

Nathan: Actually, biofuels are right now equal to or cheaper than fossil fuels. That’s exactly why oil companies are investing in and pushing for mixing them with fuels, because they make more profit when they can sell gas for the price it fetches and has cheaper fuel mixed in it.

By Ken

June 21, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this

50,000 1 acre algae farms spread out over the entire united states each one located on a dairy farm. When the truck comes for the milk, a 2nd truck comes for the OIL that comes from the algae. The milk gets processed at the local daily co-op, the oil gets processed at the local fuel co-op who then delivers the oil to the local gas stations.

problem solved.

next? Illegal immigrants? Ship them all to detention facilities, process them in the time it takes to process my passport (about a year) and then if they can pass the test at the end of their internment, they can become citizens. The test? Reading, writing and speaking English, basic US history including how Mexico has been an enemy of the US for 200+ years. If they fail, ship them back to the 3rd world from whence they came.

By MyPFBlog

June 21, 2007 3:48 PM | Link to this

Eh, so what? Doubling in price over ten years is actually a slower price increase than we’ve seen recently. The average price in early 2005 was around $1.80, now it is not far from double that, and in only two years.

If rising energy costs concern you do what you can to conserve fuel. Move to a location closer to work, buy a more fuel efficient vehicle etc.

By J. Mark English

June 21, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this

Why stop there? Why not make it 80 dollars a gallon? That would solve pollution, and our oil dependency. It could knock us back to the stone age. We can take horses and bikes to work instead of cars….

http://www.americanlegends.blogspot.com

By Jeff

June 21, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this

Shredder, That is easy only 1/3 of their population owns cars and they have less miles of road in the enitire country of Brazil than New York State!! That is how they are energy independent.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this

How about that.

Finally, someone posts about Brazil and sugar cane ethanol.

I did see a switch grass post too.

Right now, our Senate is trying to compromise for fuel mileage standards barely increasing and bet the auto lobbyists are shelling out the hush money.

By no

June 21, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this

*“Gas consumers can expect to pay between $3.16 and $3.79 a gallon for gas in 2008 *

That’s all?!

It was around $3.35 in 2006! So essentially, gas prices will be the same in 2008 as they were last year? Sounds good to me. And really, who cares? Which would you rather do, spend $3.50 to get 30 miles to work in 45 minutes or spend 8 hours walking to work on foot and then another 8 hours walking back?

By Bill

June 21, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this

We are now about to solve the “energy” problem as we did the immigration problem, and as we do ALL problems. More government lunacy, control, centralization, and taxes. As the left justifies all this literally insane behavior, we sit and take it. I think it is time to transcend the particular issues and follow the advice of Thomas Jefferson. It is time for revolution. Not figuratively…. but literally. If those of us with enough sense left to understand how close to disappearance America really is don’t simply take over this country by ignoring political correctness and all the social pressures that keep us in line like good little sheep, it will not be long before America is on the ash heap of history. If we can’t do it through the ballot box and convincing our friends and relatives of the dire state of affairs in this country, it may be time for more drastic measures. After all, we have been getting lessons in this during all the civil rights marches and other civilian demonstrations over the last 50 years.

By villagedr

June 21, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this

Even if we had an oil supply as big as Saudi Arabia, Iraq & Iran combined, Our governments meddling in and tweaking foreign countries policies, etc has produced countless millions who hate us just for that - trying to mind THEIR business and trying to run THEIR country. Do I blame them? - Nope - not one iota.

We can’t even protect our border from southern invaders - let alone run our country. We can’t fix the levees, medical facilities for our soldiers, let alone the civilians.

They want to fix everything that is unfixable or not broken and it’s going to cost us immensely - more than it’s worth in the long run.

By RCH

June 21, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this

Bosch They are very much like wind turbines. However, they are placed in the ocean and use the natural tides to move the blades. (About 7 -9 revolutions per minute) Since they are under the water they are not seen( Not even by Ted Kennedy). They are not dependent on sunshine or wind or drought. Like wind turbines there is no waste byproduct. It is safe for fish’s they can swim through the moving blades. Since there is plenty of ocean off our coast this would be an excellent long term strategy to produce energy.

By Anti CriminalGovt

June 21, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this

Words are useless, let’s use a picture and move to the next step - it’s time to put the bipartisan greedy pigs into their own rendering vat $6.00 a gallon makes old man Bush and his new wife, BillClinton, even richer: http://www.artofmarkbryan.com/

By villagedr

June 21, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this

Even if we had an oil supply as big as Saudi Arabia, Iraq & Iran combined, Our governments meddling in and tweaking foreign countries policies, etc has produced countless millions who hate us just for that - trying to mind THEIR business and trying to run THEIR country. Do I blame them? - Nope - not one iota.

We can’t even protect our border from southern invaders - let alone run our country. We can’t fix the levees, medical facilities for our soldiers, let alone the civilians.

They want to fix everything that is unfixable or not broken and it’s going to cost us immensely - more than it’s worth in the long run.

By thom

June 21, 2007 3:54 PM | Link to this

Perhaps it is good that the price of gas will increase. There are a lot of external costs associated with consuming gasoline that the current price does not take into account—such as supporting foreign oil regimes and emitting carbon dioxide. As the price of gasoline increases people will prioritize more, perhaps by taking public transportation, riding a bike, or buying a more fuel efficient vehicle. Also, A higher price of gasoline could also have a more positive effect on our culture. We have such a materialistic, consumer driven culture that thrives off of the automobile and cheap gas. Our driving culture pits everyone against each other on the road. It makes everyone grumpy and selfish. This is certainly true where I live in LA. Anyways, I think people should quite gripping about gasoline prices and look at the benefits that expensive gasoline could bring.

By villagedr

June 21, 2007 3:55 PM | Link to this

Even if we had an oil supply as big as Saudi Arabia, Iraq & Iran combined, Our governments meddling in and tweaking foreign countries policies, etc has produced countless millions who hate us just for that - trying to mind THEIR business and trying to run THEIR country. Do I blame them? - Nope - not one iota.

We can’t even protect our border from southern invaders - let alone run our country. We can’t fix the levees, medical facilities for our soldiers, let alone the civilians.

They want to fix everything that is unfixable or not broken and it’s going to cost us immensely - more than it’s worth in the long run.

By thom

June 21, 2007 3:56 PM | Link to this

Perhaps it is good that the price of gas will increase. There are a lot of external costs associated with consuming gasoline that the current price does not take into account—such as supporting foreign oil regimes and emitting carbon dioxide. As the price of gasoline increases people will prioritize more, perhaps by taking public transportation, riding a bike, or buying a more fuel efficient vehicle. Also, A higher price of gasoline could also have a more positive effect on our culture. We have such a materialistic, consumer driven culture that thrives off of the automobile and cheap gas. Our driving culture pits everyone against each other on the road. It makes everyone grumpy and selfish. This is certainly true where I live in LA. Anyways, I think people should quit gripping about gasoline prices and look at the benefits that expensive gasoline could bring.

By thom

June 21, 2007 3:56 PM | Link to this

Perhaps it is good that the price of gas will increase. There are a lot of external costs associated with consuming gasoline that the current price does not take into account—such as supporting foreign oil regimes and emitting carbon dioxide. As the price of gasoline increases people will prioritize more, perhaps by taking public transportation, riding a bike, or buying a more fuel efficient vehicle. Also, A higher price of gasoline could also have a more positive effect on our culture. We have such a materialistic, consumer driven culture that thrives off of the automobile and cheap gas. Our driving culture pits everyone against each other on the road. It makes everyone grumpy and selfish. This is certainly true where I live in LA. Anyways, I think people should quit gripping about gasoline prices and look at the benefits that expensive gasoline could bring.

By Jim

June 21, 2007 3:57 PM | Link to this

Let’s force the evil oil companies to pay for their own replacement. Thats a wonderful idea. They make sooooo much profit off of the oil and are gouging the American people like horrible capitalistic pigs. Everyone knows that the best way to get something done fast and right is to have the federal government do it for us with our tax dollars. Lets forget about the fact that nearly every great development in technology in the past 200 years has been made in the private sector. I hate people who think that the market should work out solutions on its own, I mean what else is government supposed to do if it cant run our lives. And remember as soon as “alternative energy” sources replace hydrocarbons we have to insist that these dirty oil bastards quit profiting off of the technology they subsidized and lost money on for years.

By DB

June 21, 2007 3:57 PM | Link to this

I’m done with this. Here are my final words.

By thom

June 21, 2007 3:58 PM | Link to this

Perhaps it is good that the price of gas will increase. There are a lot of external costs associated with consuming gasoline that the current price does not take into account—such as supporting foreign oil regimes and emitting carbon dioxide. As the price of gasoline increases people will prioritize more, perhaps by taking public transportation, riding a bike, or buying a more fuel efficient vehicle. Also, A higher price of gasoline could also have a more positive effect on our culture. We have such a materialistic, consumer driven culture that thrives off of the automobile and cheap gas. Our driving culture pits everyone against each other on the road. It makes everyone grumpy and selfish. This is certainly true where I live in LA. Anyways, I think people should quit gripping about gasoline prices and look at the benefits that expensive gasoline could bring.

By morons

June 21, 2007 3:58 PM | Link to this

Everyone saying you should walk is a total moron. Really, you think everyone should just walk or bicycle the 60 to 100 miles round trip each day for work? Are you retarded?!

By Ed

June 21, 2007 4:03 PM | Link to this

To those who foolishly argue that what happens in the middle east is irrelevant since the U.S. purchases only a small percentage of our oil from that region — surely you’re aware that, regardless of who we buy our oil from, the supply in the middle east (and worldwide) affects the prices we pay (you are familiar with the laws of supply and demand). As a result, although one can’t tell by the results we’re seeing, our foreign policy is tilted toward protecting the stability of the oil supply in the middle east. Did you notice how we invaded a country without any nuclear capability whatsoever while dismissing the very real nuclear threat from North Korea?

By Bill

June 21, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this

The gouging is occuring at the refineries. In 2004 the profit margin on the “Crack Spread” was $2.00 per barrel. It’s now over $38.00. This was revealed in testimony before congress. This fact is not revealed on our nightly news because YOU just might get p** off and do something about it. What your nightly news doesnt reveal to you is that less than 2 per cent of our oil is imported from the middle east. The majority of our oil comes First from Venezuela, THEN Mexico, THEN Canada, Period. Five million gallons of gasoline in imported daily “BECAUSE” we dont have the refining capacity. Thank the EPA AND the Oil companies for that. It’s just too costly due to regulations to just throw up a refinery, yes, thank you EPA. Then, there is no justifiable reason for the exhistance of a “mid-grade” or “premium” grade of gasoline. Only the “pathetic” ego’s who think they need it. Oh yes, then thank the president who stated in a speach a few years ago that “HE” would see to it that “CHEAP” import cars would be kept out of the country. So I guess Opel will never sell their minivan here that get’s 49 MPG. LAREMO, a new start up company that will be in production in 2009 a car that gets 157 MPG, the Cooper mini deisel that gets 61 mpg. The new Smart car that sells for $12,000 in Canada looks to be having a price tag in the U.S. of $36,000. Doesnt sound like a smart idea at all there. There is an abundance of oil, just the lack of will to refine it. MAYBE, there should be a tax on California and Florida of say $5.00 per gallon of gasoline sold until they allow drilling off-shore. The Florida blockheads who wont allow drilling off their coast are fixing to have it done anyway by CHINA in a joint venture with CUBA. That’s right, HEY, dont believe me? Check it out. Oh, and they dont have to follow EPA regulations either.

By truth

June 21, 2007 4:06 PM | Link to this

Is anyone reading this? Of course not. Liberals are too dumb to read and conservatives are too busy working and raising families to read. No one is reading. Everyone is just yelling.

By Reagan Conservative

June 21, 2007 4:08 PM | Link to this

Everybody, wait till all this “sheet” hits the fan. You all had better think about buying property with water/fish, seed, timber, and grassland for your livestock! Wait and just wait and you will be SOL. Don;t come on to my WOODED 124 acres trying to steal FOOD from me ‘cause you will be “interupted”. I am 45 years old and I can tell you this coutNry is not what I thought it would be at this stage of my life. I can’t believe effen Congress is screwing it up so badly. SO NOW, GO FIND YOUR PROPERTY-YOU’RE GOING TO NEED IT.

By Truths Sister

June 21, 2007 4:12 PM | Link to this

Watching the hate America leftist filth on here puke up their irrational hate yet again is in one very limited sense kind of reassuring for normal patriotic Americans

That’ll do Donkey. That’ll do.

By SplendidOne

June 21, 2007 4:13 PM | Link to this

Gasoline will be more than $6/gallon by 2016 no matter what Congress does, d’oh!

By Greg

June 21, 2007 4:13 PM | Link to this

That bill reads like something out of Atlas Shrugged. John Galt, please call.

By BS Aplenty (Energy Entrepeneur)

June 21, 2007 4:15 PM | Link to this

Right on target, Frank. It is truly inspiring to see Americans begin to solve their energy problems (apologies to you foreign bloggers).

Personally, I’m waiting to invest in the next Bill Gates (of the energy world). Just let the price of gas rise and watch who gets “jiggy” with their inner inventor.

In the capitalist system, here’s our chance win the lottery.

By Truths Sister

June 21, 2007 4:17 PM | Link to this

Did you notice how we invaded a country without any nuclear capability whatsoever while dismissing the very real nuclear threat from North Korea?

They can’t see that; they’re too blind. And besides, Hannity didn’t tell them to look for it.

By getalife

June 21, 2007 4:29 PM | Link to this

“Lott Compares Illegal Immigrants To Goats:

“One Of The Ways I Keep [My] Goats In The Fence Is I Electrified Them”

Is that how Mexico enforces their southern border?

Geez.

By Mike

June 21, 2007 4:32 PM | Link to this

It’s a good the Dems are only taxing the rich!

By JohnM

June 21, 2007 4:39 PM | Link to this

Companies are looking for ways to cut down on greenhouse gases and save money on increasingly expensive gasoline.

This is a good start.

By Rational Thinker

June 21, 2007 4:43 PM | Link to this

There is so much absurdity in this “commentary,” I don’t know where to start.

So, we can dramatically increase our use of renewable, alternative energy sources, and it will only cost us about an 8% annual increase in the price of gas (that’s what $3.14 to $6.40 over nine years comes out to), and new taxes equivalent to approximately one month of fighting (and losing) in Iraq?

Sounds like a no-brainer to me. Is this what passes for an educated opinion in the state of Georgia?

By greenacres

June 21, 2007 4:47 PM | Link to this

I love the comments by Redneck Convert explaining trickle down economics. Thanks Redneck!

By greenacres

June 21, 2007 4:47 PM | Link to this

I love the comments by Redneck Convert explaining trickle down economics. Thanks Redneck!

By Rusty

June 21, 2007 4:57 PM | Link to this

Of course, liberals will blame Bush & Cheney.

By RCH

June 21, 2007 4:59 PM | Link to this

getalife Not really. They just shoot you or take your property and throw you in jail.

By Chris

June 21, 2007 5:00 PM | Link to this

I’m afraid it’s not stupid “leftist” thought we have to worry about—a lot of this is coming straight from the Republican Party, whose members lately have been working their hardest to alienate conservative Americans through poor public policy. Grassley, Roberts, Snowe, and Smith are behind this bill. No surprise!—look where many of our “Republican” legislators (and the president) are on immigration.

What happened to our Republican president and our representatives in Congress who conservatives elected to office? They have done everything they can to gum up the works of our government—poor (or no) strategy in Iraq, sheer incompetence on the domestic agenda, a treacherous immigration bill which they’ve called conservatives bigoted for opposing, and now renewable energy reform. Ethanol is a sure-fire loser that probably does more damage to the environment (and to our cars’ engines!) than just burning more oil! Don’t be surprised—it’s just more of the same from our diseased Republican leadership. And I say this as a registered Republican who voted for Bush twice!

It’s these kind of policies that have caused the Democratic gains in Congress, and that will lead to Republican failure in 2008. And we have President Bush’s leadership to thank for it.

By Chris

June 21, 2007 5:02 PM | Link to this

I’m afraid it’s not stupid “leftist” thought we have to worry about—a lot of this is coming straight from the Republican Party, whose members lately have been working their hardest to alienate conservative Americans through poor public policy. Grassley, Roberts, Snowe, and Smith are behind this bill. No surprise!—look where many of our “Republican” legislators (and the president) are on immigration.

What happened to our Republican president and our representatives in Congress who conservatives elected to office? They have done everything they can to gum up the works of our government—poor (or no) strategy in Iraq, sheer incompetence on the domestic agenda, a treacherous immigration bill which they’ve called conservatives bigoted for opposing, and now renewable energy reform. Ethanol is a sure-fire loser that probably does more damage to the environment (and to our cars’ engines!) than just burning more oil! Don’t be surprised—it’s just more of the same from our diseased Republican leadership. And I say this as a registered Republican who voted for Bush twice!

It’s these kind of policies that have caused the Democratic gains in Congress, and that will lead to Republican failure in 2008. And we have President Bush’s leadership to thank for it.

By Randy

June 21, 2007 5:04 PM | Link to this

Great,

Sign me up, we’ll actually slow the rate of increases we’ve seen over the last 9 years, and we’ll increase our use of non-arab energy.

Where do I sign up?

By hk

June 21, 2007 5:10 PM | Link to this

… just put the words ‘global warming myth’ in a google search box … in 0.14 seconds got 1,260,000 responses … just look at the titles on the first results page, they tell the story …

… this is the most criminal hoax ever achieved in our society …

By Lucille Willoughby

June 21, 2007 5:18 PM | Link to this

Change in the energy business is inevitable. I wonder if there as many people wringing their hands and forecating doom like posters on this blog when the swtich was made from whale oil to petroleum.

The fact the gas companies (and not just because the government told them to) are now promoting bio-diesel and ethyl is a sign that things are Changing Forever and that the oil supply is probably A Lot Worse Than THey’re Letting On.

As someone who owns a farm in a seriously economical depressed rural area for the last 35 years, I look forward to being guarenteed a firm market for my fuel-grade corn & soy. This might even save the small family farmer.

By JohnE

June 21, 2007 5:19 PM | Link to this

Well, I have read a goodly portion of this bog (blog?)…I hasten to remind you that A. Roads are NOT built by the states, roads are built by taxes paid for gasoline in most places…B. Increased gas prices?…I saw somewhere in this that the average cost of gas was something like $1.11 a gal in 1960…Well, I ran my handy INFLATION calculator…That Very same $1.11’s worth of gas in 1960, accounting for INFLATION should cost somewhere close to $7.62 a gallon…Seems to me we are getting a good deal on the stuff…Heck of a lot better than the prices I have noted for Starbucks coffee…Enjoy!

By getalife

June 21, 2007 5:22 PM | Link to this

… this is the most criminal hoax ever achieved in our society …

That would be the Iraq occupation.

By mpd

June 21, 2007 5:25 PM | Link to this

The fact of the matter still remains that there is money and security to be made from renewables. If we keep using more we have to create more and anything with oil can go up in price. Ethanol is artifically high because we don’t import it…yet.

By john

June 21, 2007 5:25 PM | Link to this

Mr. ‘Bring it on’ Bush will have us paying $100 a gallon before he is out of office.

Let’s go for it…$100/gal. will cause everyone to change everything they do.

Remember the great words of all our political friends “It’s time for a change.”

By Enough is too much!

June 21, 2007 5:26 PM | Link to this

It really is time for people to go on strike — not for a day, but for a five-day week. We are not being represented. We might as well have the Kremlin running (ruining) things over here, between the easy amnesty and gasoline prices, for starters.

Vote them all out! Even the “good” ones. Get rid of them at the ballot box!

By Geeaye

June 21, 2007 5:28 PM | Link to this

Wow Jimbo, congrats on getting your opinion piece linked on Drudge. No wonder this place is shredded today with plenty of new conservatives to rip up the tin hat libs.

3:57 - Let alternative fuel research flourish. And let oil companies make money at the same time. They’re into alternative fuels because it’s profitable

Yeah, like ethanol and corn based oil. They love that idea because of how much oil it takes to manufacture and transport it to where it needs to go. The producers of those alter fuels sure can’t use current pipelines. Great idea!

By AZ K

June 21, 2007 5:30 PM | Link to this

In response to Joe’s comment. Go re-learn basic economics. As prices rise, demand doesn’t fall, consumption does. There is the same demand as before, but fewer people can afford the product. As a result, there is an economic contraction. Causes less revenue generation, and in the case of a product like fuel, higher prices for everything else.

By BS Aplenty (Ponders the New World Order)

June 21, 2007 5:34 PM | Link to this

Re: JohnE

The economies of China and India are going to continually create increasing demand for energy products - they are the two most populous nations on the planet and China’s economy, until recently, was growing at a double-digit rate. Ergo, the inflation rates of the past will likely not be the inflation rates of the future (or present).

Time will tell.

By Eric

June 21, 2007 5:52 PM | Link to this

$6/gallon in 2016 will actually be quite cheap when you consider that the price of gasoline has almost tripled in the last 9 years from only $1.30 9 years ago to the $3.00+ today.

If gasoline only went to $6 a gallon 9 years from now, it could be a deal!

[http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/gasprice.html]

By zamiel

June 21, 2007 5:54 PM | Link to this

It’s unfortunate the supposed depletion of fossil fuels has been a boon to capitalist exploiters like Exxon who rack up billions in superprofits while enjoying political patronage from the idiots in Washington.

No one seems to notice that it’s only the working masses that get trampled on here in the land of the free and the brave.

Both Dems and GOP’ers are enablers of obscene corporate profiteering in the face of such domestic economic problems. If only the U.S. had a proper socialist agenda, nationalised industries, price controls and equitable product distribution would solve most of our problems.

On another note, why is this blog continually crapped on by that English fascist who doesn’t seem to have a day job?

By Clay

June 21, 2007 5:55 PM | Link to this

If we don’t switch to renewables, the price of gas will be even higher than mentioned. Supply of oil will drop (soon), since it is finite. This will cause the price of gasoline to sky rocket as demand out strips supply. Google “peak oil” and you will understand the big picture.

By Tony

June 21, 2007 6:06 PM | Link to this

The use of ethanol as a fuel is less efficient and more costly giving us a double whammy, so to speak. Regarding gasoline prices going to $6.00 by 2016 based on the Heritage Foundation’s research, well there’s your answer right there. The Heritage Foundation as a research institution is not credible as they only consult sources that support their views. Anyone can do that!

Under current energy policies, and I presume the proposed policies, the oil companies benefit from huge government subsidies that we pay for with our tax dollars. If we really had “free market” gas prices, they would already be at about $6.00 per gallon.

Finally, greed is one of the seven deadly sins and it’s effects are slowly choking our country in many ways. Our nation has adopted the attitude that consumption is good and this country’s use of energy exemplifies this attitude. One day we will wake up and there will be nothing left!

By Jon

June 22, 2007 8:08 AM | Link to this

I reckon we pay $8 a gallon already here in UK…

Welcome to the hell we have created!

By Craig also

June 22, 2007 8:11 AM | Link to this

Jim’s column is a perfect example of why intelligent people are increasingly tuning out conservative talking heads. His statment, that’s supposed to cause fear and loathing, is that gas prices will double in the next six years!!! Oh no!!! The sky is falling!!! A quick check of the internet reveals, however, that gas prices have doubled in the last six years also - under the do nothing Republican leadership.

The Democrats are trying to implement a plan to wean us from our fatal dependence on mideast oil, so we don’t have to keep sending our best young soldiers to die in God-forsaken desert countries.

Several commenters noticed the same thing - fortunately, the right wing noise machine is losing its punch.

By m mann

June 22, 2007 8:22 AM | Link to this

Do not let your goverment start taxing your fuel, it will never end. In the Uk we are paying paying over four pounds a UK gallon, and we know it will go up every year. The country side is slowly being filled with wind turbines or farms as they call them. There is one near us that has a observation deck on it, 200 foot in the air

M

By Common Sense

June 22, 2007 9:04 AM | Link to this

LOL…From where are you screwed up conservatives getting your stats from? Try to back up your claims or list your sources.

It’s simple, Oil Cos are public companies and they have to keep stockholders happy. They worried about their bottom line and they have to meet and exceed profit goals every year (basic economics). Is that too hard for you to see?

By reducing refining capacity they keep gas prices high, thus they have enjoyed RECORD profits under Republican leadership (Research news media and Congress hearings).

Now the Democrats (I must admit they are not doing much) are doing at least doing something, not much but it’s a start…What are the Republicans doing about Energy costs?

Dick Chenney met with Energy industry and drafted policies behind closed doors - Gee is there something wrong with this?

Old Republican adage - freer market economy creates more competition thus consumers benefit - Well, true but not always. This is why we have antitrust and fraud laws, price gouging is illegal. If this always true, then what happened to natural gas prices since we de-regulated this industry in GA - we had the lowest prices and now we have one of the highest. So what happened to how prices will go down because of competition. And don’t get me started with Cable TV.

When an industry is out of control and abusing its position of economic power it is the goverment’s duty to step in and protect consumers.

Now, had this law been enacted by a Republican Congress most of this insane blogger had applauded Congress and said LOOK what the Republicans DID, blah blan,…BUT Wait it was a Democrat Congress doing something while the Republicans sat on their asses doing NOTHING.

I say tax the oil Co.s but not 29 billion but at least half the cost of the Iraq War, we went there after all to protect their interests….

By Fed Up

June 22, 2007 9:29 AM | Link to this

Uncommon Stupidity -

If this always true, then what happened to natural gas prices since we de-regulated this industry in GA - we had the lowest prices and now we have one of the highest.

WRONG. It’s because Georgia/Atlanta failed to meet lower federal emissions standards and the state had to have new formulations of gasoline with additives similar to what LA and the north midwest have to have. This was to keep the federal highway funding alive for Georgia (not just Atlanta) and do good things like reduce our smog. We didn’t have smog alerts in the 1990s, did we? No, that was before everyone from around the nation and world discovered Atlanta was a great city to work and live in - two million people have been added to the greater Atlanta area in the last decade. In case you don’t know, more formulations and additives for gasoline cause more backlogs in production refinery. This is because we have not added any new refineries since Jimmy Carter was president. Just 15 years ago we had less than 25 different gasoline formulas for the entire nation. Now we have well over 50. Consumer demand for gasoline has gone up as well. Do you honestly believe that those facts you were just presented with should not cause an increase in the price of a gallon of gas? For the record, oil companies today do not make any more profit per dollar sold than they did 15 years ago; it’s still less than $.10 on the dollar. Compare that to $.20-$.30 on the dollar for a profit margin when dealing with banks and ultra specialty retailers. You need to sit down and read more my friend.

By bill

June 22, 2007 9:36 AM | Link to this

When is the United States going to wake up? Why can’t the US do what Brazil has done? We don’t need corn, we need sugar. Brazil has “O” percent dependency on foreign oil because of Ethenol made from sugar. Why can’t the US do this? POLITICS Politicans are in bed with the oil companies!!!!

By Sherman

June 22, 2007 9:44 AM | Link to this

Why is there always a dumb@$$ to point their finger at another party when something like this is said. Don’t yall understand, they all get together and decide these idiotic assumptions. If gas gets that high, you can promise more people will be robbing banks, and more crime left and right cause as we all know, when times get hard, people panic and start doing ANYTHING to survive.

By asd

June 22, 2007 9:45 AM | Link to this

In europe, we already pay 1 dollar something per Liter. That would equal what? 3 bucks a gallon?

Since the US burns through twice as much fuel as the rest of the world, this sounds reasonable…

By Actually Do Research

June 22, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this

Ok people, actually do some research here before you spout out nonsense!!!!

Look it up for yourself!

24% of our oil imports come from Canada. 20% of our oil imports come from Mexico. 18% from Saudi Arabia 14% from Venezuala 14% from Nigeria 6% from Iraq 6% from Angolia 6% from Algeria 2% from Ecuador 2% from Kuwait 2% from Brazil 1% from Gabon 1% from the UK 1% from the Congo

That means that 26% of our oil imports are from the middle east. Remember though, before we invaded Iraq, we had an embargo with them we recieved 0 oil from Iraq. So it was 20% of our imports from the middle east, nearly all of it from Saudi Arabia.

Now, we do not import all of our oil, we produce about 35% of it.

So that means that 13% of our oil comes from the middle east.

Is 13% enough to spend trillions on for a war on oil? I don’t think so, maybe they had other reasons for attacking like everyone agree they had WMDs? We found none, doesn’t mean we didn’t believe they had them. Just because there weren’t any doesn’t mean that he lied about it, just that he was mistaken.

Data from http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oilgas/petroleum/datapublications/companylevelimports/current/import.html

By Chris Campbell

June 22, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this

Bye-Bye Economy, plan going along well for NWO

By Chris Campbell

June 22, 2007 9:52 AM | Link to this

Bye-Bye Economy, plan going along well for NWO

By cb57

June 22, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

Actually if the lib green necks would allow us to drill in ANWAR and the rich Florida republican hypocrites allow us to drill in the gulf, we could produce half or more of our own oil for the next 30 years. That would pacify us while researching realistic alternative fuels and consumption savings instead of immediate unrealistic stupidity like growing more corn, driving enclosed golf carts that get 100mpg, using one sheet of toilet paper, and riding bikes to work and grocery stores.

By dave z

June 22, 2007 10:53 AM | Link to this

Drill in ANWR, build more refineries, grow some gonads Republicans. End of story!

By Dustin

June 22, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this

To the comment that this is a “looney leftist” way of thinking. Did you read the article? really? This is a Republican iniative. Still a lose-lose unless you’re part of the big business that will profit from the increase in pricing. Great call on the leftist comment tho, NOT!

By gas

June 22, 2007 11:57 AM | Link to this

I actually feel sorry for these corrupt scumbags in congress. There is no way that I would ever wish to spend eternity in HELL. But, since there is NO corruption in the Kingdom of God, the only alternative is HELL. They may have their way now, but they will pay for eternity.

By chemist

June 22, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

The main reason ethanol is currently not particularly cheap is transportation. You can’t put it into an existing oil pipeline (due to corrosion issues, among other things) so it has to be transported by truck/train using expensive gas and diesel oil. Biodiesel has had these problems too, but researchers recently managed to make a biodiesel that is chemically equivalent to petroleum diesel—meaning that it can go in existing pipelines.

As far as greenhouse gases go, biofuels do not make the problem better, but they don’t make the problem worse either—they use carbon that’s already in the carbon cycle. Crude oil (and natural gas, and coal!) is effectively outside of the carbon cycle, which is the primary reason why burning it (probably, apparently) is related to global warming. The only way coal can be eco-friendly is if power plant exhaust is piped into permanent storage underground, which is very expensive to set up.

By DB

June 22, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

Maverick Coast: It’s more like you flunked Economics 101. Please tell me how our economy choked in the last 4 years with a 20% average annual growth in gas prices from $1.43 to $2.97 from June 2003 to 2007? At one point, after Katrina, it spiked about 90% in prices. Actually, you can’t because the economy continued to grow in the last four years while the gas prices increased far beyond what this article mentions. Besides, this is all conjecture anyway. Now tell me how an 8% annual increase over 9 years(which this predicts and will due only slightly to increased taxes if at all) will choke the economy when the last 3 or 4 of crazy growth hasn’t. So, in essence, the economic alarmists need to realize the economy is a lot more resilient than we all think, and an 8% increase in fuel(that could be terribly inaccurate) is a quite a break from the past 4 years. And people like Jim need to quit sensationalizing taxes. In fact, with inflation $6 per gallon may actually be cheaper to us than $3 is now. The prices will probably be far beyond $6 anyway, and it will have little to do with these proposed taxes. People need to realize the reason for the high gas prices is because of our insatiable and growing demand for gas combined with monopolistic practices between oil companies(like limiting refining capacity and alteration of the futures market on a global scale), not taxes or any government bill. Keep in mind that I’m not for this plan of windfall taxes. I think it’s stupid because I know high gas prices are our own fault and we have plenty of tax revenue as it is. So quit blaming Bush, Clinton, and or any other president and start blaming our trips to the gas pump. Our gas prices are finally catching up with the rest of the developed world because oil companies can’t compete and they spoiled us for too long. It’s simple supply and demand, and the supply side is manipulated.

By DB

June 22, 2007 12:58 PM | Link to this

Just an update on earlier quotes of our biggest suppliers of oil that were inaccurate:

Data in Millions of Barrels per Month:

The Canadian Tar Sands are our best bet in the short term if we can compete with the Chinese buying from Canada. But the trends look good.

Source:

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/petmoveimpcusa2nusep00im0mbblm.htm

By DB

June 22, 2007 1:07 PM | Link to this

Oops. Actually, Algeria is just above Nigeria.

By JD

June 22, 2007 1:23 PM | Link to this

Fantastic News for the Rich

This is great news and I am just beside myself with excitement!

I can’t tell you how long I have been dealing with too much traffic - crowded freeways, busy intersections, clogged toll bridges and more.

Now, finally, my elected officials are doing something - I mean really doing something - for those of us who are wealthy.

This wonderful program, with fuel costs that most will be unable to afford, is going to get a whole lot of traffic off of the roadways and give me and my big turbo-SUV lots of room to stretch our legs!

I can see it now - endless miles of open roadways set aside just for the pleasure of us rich folks.

Thank you Congress, thank you very much!

By Steve

June 22, 2007 1:24 PM | Link to this

I’ve been to Iraq and back. I can tell from reading the comments to this article that 99% of Americans have no idea what is coming and absolutely no plan to get through the future hard times.

Here’s a clue: start driving less, learn to garden (yes, YOU will have to get YOUR hands dirty!), and expect to have a lifestyle/energy consumption similar to what your great grandparents had in 1910.

I’m sad to say $6 gasoline will be the least of the problems for most of you.

By Steve

June 22, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this

I’ve been to Iraq and back. I can tell from reading the comments to this article that 99% of Americans have no idea what is coming and absolutely no plan to get through the future hard times.

Here’s a clue: start driving less, learn to garden (yes, YOU will have to get YOUR hands dirty!), and expect to have a lifestyle/energy consumption similar to what your great grandparents had in 1910.

I’m sad to say $6 gasoline will be the least of the problems for most of you.

By JD

June 22, 2007 1:36 PM | Link to this

Fantastic News for the Rich

This is great news and I am just beside myself with excitement!

I can’t tell you how long I have been dealing with too much traffic - crowded freeways, busy intersections, clogged toll bridges and more.

Now, finally, my elected officials are doing something - I mean really doing something - for those of us who are wealthy.

This wonderful program, with fuel costs that most will be unable to afford, is going to get a whole lot of traffic off of the roadways and give me and my big turbo-SUV lots of room to stretch our legs!

I can see it now - endless miles of open roadways set aside just for the pleasure of us rich folks.

Thank you Congress, thank you very much!

By Slambusher

June 22, 2007 1:51 PM | Link to this

Gas will hit 6 dollars a gallon long before 2016. By then gas will prob be roughly 12 dollars a gallon. Our youngest refinery will be over 40. No new ones in the pipeline. The biggest secret the oil companies don’t want you to know is that there are not just 3 types of gas in this country. Oh no there are 58 different types of gas that our limited refineries have to produce in this country. Wait there’s more. That doesn’t include the fact that there is a winter and summer variant to all 58 types of gas. Want prices to drop? Get a law established that picks the best type for the enviroment and that be the only type of gas produced with the summer and winter variants. With refineries having to produce only 1 type of gas I forsee the “shortages” becoming a thing of the past.

By Jamie

June 22, 2007 2:46 PM | Link to this

This will ultimately be good for coal companies, when cars start tapping into the grid. Come on, Jim, it won’t be that bad!

And switchgrass or tailings from processed vegetables which go into a bioreactor ultimately will produce renewable natural gas and biodiesel. We can do this. Where’s your belief in American ingenuity?

By Dick

June 22, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this

$4-$6 / gallon means THE END OF THE SUBBURBS! BRING IT ON…we are SICK of all the people who drive to and work in Atlanta buying / building houses out where I live in a rural farm area. We’ve been asking folks to stop and move to the city if that’s where they work…$4-$6 / gallon will finally force them to. Yay!

By Dave

June 22, 2007 4:21 PM | Link to this

Dick, it will not cause people to move to the cities…it will cause the companies to move to the suburbs. Are well off people really going to move into downtown Atlanta? Please…

By Jim Chaput

June 22, 2007 4:53 PM | Link to this

In the name of cheap gas we have polluted our cities, mortgaged our foreign policy to some of the most repressive and unstable governments on earth, fought three wars and sent billions of dollars to people who hate us and use our money to make war on us. Higher gas prices just might convince a few people that they don’t need to drive a 6,000 pound car with a 350 HP engine.

By Gordon

June 22, 2007 5:16 PM | Link to this

Typical selfish, whining nonsense. Gas ‘could’ go to $6/gal.? Puh-leez. And if it does, will people drive as much as they do now? Only if they’re driving something that gets… hmmm… 35 miles per gallon!!! And just imagine, we’ll be importing less oil from that bastion of stability, the Middle East.

But Jimbo still thinks there’s a free lunch, as if Exxon or Shell ever gave us anything for free. 25 years ago, we had ‘supply side’ economics, which said cut taxes enough and the deficit will disappear because we’ll grow our way out of them. Several trillion dollars later, the Democrats finally regained the White House and gave us the biggest budget surpluses in history.

But apparently old ideas die hard — it looks like Jim W. and the conservatives think we can drive our way to energy independence. Don’t raise miles-per-gallon standards, don’t invest a dime in alternative energy, just leave it up to the oil companies, and we’ll all be fine.

I thought that smug stupidity left the AJC with Dick Williams, but he was a regular Einstein compared to Jim. Good grief.

By Dick

June 22, 2007 5:18 PM | Link to this

Dave, the only way a company moving to the suburbs makes sense is if the particular suburb it moves to happens to be where ALL of its employees live. Aint’ gonna happen, chief! But, if it did, the end result would still be everyone not driving and living at their own company’s “compound” and not out here in our farmland…yay!

By Mary Beeman

June 22, 2007 5:38 PM | Link to this

Gas here in Durango Colorado has been up to as high as $3.59/gal regular. Right now the highest in town is $3.28. The government needs to stay out of the fuel business. They’ve already done wonders for Social Security and Medicare. Everything they touch turns to crap. They have way too much power and way too much of “our” money to spend. The Yankees won the “un-Civil War” but all that changed was the fact that the Southern plantations were shut down and the Federal planation was opened up and now we’re all working for the man. Every businesses’ income is going to go down with all the increased cost of goods and fuel,so the Feds won’t get as much taxes from these businesses so they are going to come after the little guy to make up the difference. I say “Think secession!!!!!!!!!!!!”

By Heath

June 22, 2007 5:41 PM | Link to this

We are screwed no matter which way you look at. The lower class won’t be able to afford a way to work if they must buy more expensive fuel efficient cars and $6.00 gas and will lose jobs, (they may go hungry too). The rich will be happier because they can boast about how much money they spend, and the middle class gets to work, eat, sleep, and then do it all over again; very little fun time. Tourist tax revenue falls. Ethanol consumption soars and we use more energy making it than wwe get out of it. Since we headed off global warming, our soils will be stripped of the nutrients or we apply fertilizer and pesticide until no water source on Earth is healthy enough to use. I sure hope we keep getting rain here in the south to irrigate all of that corn for ethanol prod. Oh yeah, and the millionaire pol;iticians get even richer!

By Mary Beeman

June 22, 2007 6:51 PM | Link to this

The highest gas prices we’ve seen here in Durango Colorado is $3.58 and that wasn’t too many weeks ago. About spring break time. Right now the highest price in town is $3.28. I don’t think the Feds need to be in the fuel business. They’ve done such a wonder job with Social Security and Medicare!! The Yankees won the “un-Civil War” and all that has changed is that the Southern plantations were shut down and the Northern plantation opened up and we’re all working for the man. The increase in fuel prices will drive up the price of everything else. The little business guy will make less profit so in turn will pay less taxes to the Feds. That means the Feds will be coming at us with more new and different taxes to keep up the revenues. I say “Think secession!!!!!!!!!!!”

By jl

June 23, 2007 10:02 AM | Link to this

hahahah this world is not going past dec 21st 2012 n e way, and if it does gas will not be an issue as it will be replaced.

By Darel

June 24, 2007 2:58 PM | Link to this

Well, this is the first time I have ever heard of Jim Wooten. A great article which points out important topics regardless of party.

I must confirm I’m very concerned with a few point:

1) I’m sick and tired of everything becoming a left/right topic. As pointed out it’s supported by members of both parties. Of course somone always want to qualify a topic and refer to “left leaning republican or if a democrat presented a topic may refer “right leaning democrats

2) When are people going to start to realize that both parties have not listened to the will of the people?

I think the above shoudl be considered by all American’s.

As a republian qualify a topic and refer to “left leaning republican or if a democrat presented a topic may refer “right leaning democrats

republican I can confirm I’m ashamed with my own party. I’m ashamed our party held both the senate and congress and essentially accomplished very little. Just the other day I actually read the US Patriot act. Have you taken the time to the US Patriot Act? After reading the details it’s the most unpatriotic act I have ever read.

This act alone has eroded our own freedoms. Yet, many party members still support the Iraq war and feel it’s OK to pursue the future with the same old plans.

Of course the far leaning democrats would prefer to fix everyone’s life and care for you from cradle to grave.

As I see it I don’t see much difference between either party. In fact we have Mr. Fred Thomspon who will announce rather soon his bid for election yet he will restrict your gun rights, he is a member of the CFR, supports the same old plans as Bush and to scare me even further he now has the blessings of the Bush family for this reason alone I will never vote for Fred Thomspon.

I like Tom Tancredo’s stand against Amnesty but it’s rather odd anyone would support pro-life but also support torture and the use of nuclear weapons. What an odd drink of life. Then we have Mr. 9-11 who cannot complete a single speech without 9-11. Does everyone really support the official story? I sure hope your not a bunch of sheep grazing on their food of deception.

Duncan Hunter? I don’t know in my view if Duncan or Tom Tancredo can’t get the border agents removed from prison then how will they ever be able to run our nation?

I like one guy who is a strict constitutionalist but I don’t want to share his name because then someone will think I have an agenda. But I hope you will find out who opposes, Nafta, Cafta, Real Id Act, NAU, has a firm stand ageist Amnesty and just introduced a bill to eliminate the federal reserve… Yes, to improve our future. No one else running has the voting record nor the ablity to restore our nation as it once was.

In closing lets take action monday morning by calling our own senate members and say no to S. 1419. I will! Will you do the same?

In closing restore our republic…..

By Darel

June 24, 2007 2:58 PM | Link to this

Well, this is the first time I have ever heard of Jim Wooten. A great article which points out important topics regardless of party.

I must confirm I’m very concerned with a few point:

1) I’m sick and tired of everything becoming a left/right topic. As pointed out it’s supported by members of both parties. Of course somone always want to qualify a topic and refer to “left leaning republican or if a democrat presented a topic may refer “right leaning democrats

2) When are people going to start to realize that both parties have not listened to the will of the people?

I think the above shoudl be considered by all American’s.

As a republian qualify a topic and refer to “left leaning republican or if a democrat presented a topic may refer “right leaning democrats

republican I can confirm I’m ashamed with my own party. I’m ashamed our party held both the senate and congress and essentially accomplished very little. Just the other day I actually read the US Patriot act. Have you taken the time to the US Patriot Act? After reading the details it’s the most unpatriotic act I have ever read.

This act alone has eroded our own freedoms. Yet, many party members still support the Iraq war and feel it’s OK to pursue the future with the same old plans.

Of course the far leaning democrats would prefer to fix everyone’s life and care for you from cradle to grave.

As I see it I don’t see much difference between either party. In fact we have Mr. Fred Thomspon who will announce rather soon his bid for election yet he will restrict your gun rights, he is a member of the CFR, supports the same old plans as Bush and to scare me even further he now has the blessings of the Bush family for this reason alone I will never vote for Fred Thomspon.

I like Tom Tancredo’s stand against Amnesty but it’s rather odd anyone would support pro-life but also support torture and the use of nuclear weapons. What an odd drink of life. Then we have Mr. 9-11 who cannot complete a single speech without 9-11. Does everyone really support the official story? I sure hope your not a bunch of sheep grazing on their food of deception.

Duncan Hunter? I don’t know in my view if Duncan or Tom Tancredo can’t get the border agents removed from prison then how will they ever be able to run our nation?

I like one guy who is a strict constitutionalist but I don’t want to share his name because then someone will think I have an agenda. But I hope you will find out who opposes, Nafta, Cafta, Real Id Act, NAU, has a firm stand ageist Amnesty and just introduced a bill to eliminate the federal reserve… Yes, to improve our future. No one else running has the voting record nor the ablity to restore our nation as it once was.

In closing lets take action monday morning by calling our own senate members and say no to S. 1419. I will! Will you do the same?

In closing restore our republic…..

By Darel

June 24, 2007 2:59 PM | Link to this

Well, this is the first time I have ever heard of Jim Wooten. A great article which points out important topics regardless of party.

I must confirm I’m very concerned with a few point:

1) I’m sick and tired of everything becoming a left/right topic. As pointed out it’s supported by members of both parties. Of course somone always want to qualify a topic and refer to “left leaning republican or if a democrat presented a topic may refer “right leaning democrats

2) When are people going to start to realize that both parties have not listened to the will of the people?

I think the above shoudl be considered by all American’s.

As a republian qualify a topic and refer to “left leaning republican or if a democrat presented a topic may refer “right leaning democrats

republican I can confirm I’m ashamed with my own party. I’m ashamed our party held both the senate and congress and essentially accomplished very little. Just the other day I actually read the US Patriot act. Have you taken the time to the US Patriot Act? After reading the details it’s the most unpatriotic act I have ever read.

This act alone has eroded our own freedoms. Yet, many party members still support the Iraq war and feel it’s OK to pursue the future with the same old plans.

Of course the far leaning democrats would prefer to fix everyone’s life and care for you from cradle to grave.

As I see it I don’t see much difference between either party. In fact we have Mr. Fred Thomspon who will announce rather soon his bid for election yet he will restrict your gun rights, he is a member of the CFR, supports the same old plans as Bush and to scare me even further he now has the blessings of the Bush family for this reason alone I will never vote for Fred Thomspon.

I like Tom Tancredo’s stand against Amnesty but it’s rather odd anyone would support pro-life but also support torture and the use of nuclear weapons. What an odd drink of life. Then we have Mr. 9-11 who cannot complete a single speech without 9-11. Does everyone really support the official story? I sure hope your not a bunch of sheep grazing on their food of deception.

Duncan Hunter? I don’t know in my view if Duncan or Tom Tancredo can’t get the border agents removed from prison then how will they ever be able to run our nation?

I like one guy who is a strict constitutionalist but I don’t want to share his name because then someone will think I have an agenda. But I hope you will find out who opposes, Nafta, Cafta, Real Id Act, NAU, has a firm stand ageist Amnesty and just introduced a bill to eliminate the federal reserve… Yes, to improve our future. No one else running has the voting record nor the ablity to restore our nation as it once was.

In closing lets take action monday morning by calling our own senate members and say no to S. 1419. I will! Will you do the same?

In closing restore our republic…..

By Darel

June 24, 2007 3:02 PM | Link to this

Well, this is the first time I have ever heard of Jim Wooten. A great article which points out important topics regardless of party.

I must confirm I’m very concerned with a few point:

1) I’m sick and tired of everything becoming a left/right topic. As pointed out it’s supported by members of both parties. Of course somone always want to qualify a topic and refer to “left leaning republican or if a democrat presented a topic may refer “right leaning democrats

2) When are people going to start to realize that both parties have not listened to the will of the people?

I think the above shoudl be considered by all American’s.

As a republian qualify a topic and refer to “left leaning republican or if a democrat presented a topic may refer “right leaning democrats

republican I can confirm I’m ashamed with my own party. I’m ashamed our party held both the senate and congress and essentially accomplished very little. Just the other day I actually read the US Patriot act. Have you taken the time to the US Patriot Act? After reading the details it’s the most unpatriotic act I have ever read.

This act alone has eroded our own freedoms. Yet, many party members still support the Iraq war and feel it’s OK to pursue the future with the same old plans.

Of course the far leaning democrats would prefer to fix everyone’s life and care for you from cradle to grave.

As I see it I don’t see much difference between either party. In fact we have Mr. Fred Thomspon who will announce rather soon his bid for election yet he will restrict your gun rights, he is a member of the CFR, supports the same old plans as Bush and to scare me even further he now has the blessings of the Bush family for this reason alone I will never vote for Fred Thomspon.

I like Tom Tancredo’s stand against Amnesty but it’s rather odd anyone would support pro-life but also support torture and the use of nuclear weapons. What an odd drink of life. Then we have Mr. 9-11 who cannot complete a single speech without 9-11. Does everyone really support the official story? I sure hope your not a bunch of sheep grazing on their food of deception.

Duncan Hunter? I don’t know in my view if Duncan or Tom Tancredo can’t get the border agents removed from prison then how will they ever be able to run our nation?

I like one guy who is a strict constitutionalist but I don’t want to share his name because then someone will think I have an agenda. But I hope you will find out who opposes, Nafta, Cafta, Real Id Act, NAU, has a firm stand ageist Amnesty and just introduced a bill to eliminate the federal reserve… Yes, to improve our future. No one else running has the voting record nor the ablity to restore our nation as it once was.

In closing lets take action monday morning by calling our own senate members and say no to S. 1419. I will! Will you do the same?

In closing restore our republic…..

By Darel

June 24, 2007 3:02 PM | Link to this

Well, this is the first time I have ever heard of Jim Wooten. A great article which points out important topics regardless of party.

I must confirm I’m very concerned with a few point:

1) I’m sick and tired of everything becoming a left/right topic. As pointed out it’s supported by members of both parties. Of course somone always want to qualify a topic and refer to “left leaning republican or if a democrat presented a topic may refer “right leaning democrats

2) When are people going to start to realize that both parties have not listened to the will of the people?

I think the above shoudl be considered by all American’s.

As a republian qualify a topic and refer to “left leaning republican or if a democrat presented a topic may refer “right leaning democrats

republican I can confirm I’m ashamed with my own party. I’m ashamed our party held both the senate and congress and essentially accomplished very little. Just the other day I actually read the US Patriot act. Have you taken the time to the US Patriot Act? After reading the details it’s the most unpatriotic act I have ever read.

This act alone has eroded our own freedoms. Yet, many party members still support the Iraq war and feel it’s OK to pursue the future with the same old plans.

Of course the far leaning democrats would prefer to fix everyone’s life and care for you from cradle to grave.

As I see it I don’t see much difference between either party. In fact we have Mr. Fred Thomspon who will announce rather soon his bid for election yet he will restrict your gun rights, he is a member of the CFR, supports the same old plans as Bush and to scare me even further he now has the blessings of the Bush family for this reason alone I will never vote for Fred Thomspon.

I like Tom Tancredo’s stand against Amnesty but it’s rather odd anyone would support pro-life but also support torture and the use of nuclear weapons. What an odd drink of life. Then we have Mr. 9-11 who cannot complete a single speech without 9-11. Does everyone really support the official story? I sure hope your not a bunch of sheep grazing on their food of deception.

Duncan Hunter? I don’t know in my view if Duncan or Tom Tancredo can’t get the border agents removed from prison then how will they ever be able to run our nation?

I like one guy who is a strict constitutionalist but I don’t want to share his name because then someone will think I have an agenda. But I hope you will find out who opposes, Nafta, Cafta, Real Id Act, NAU, has a firm stand ageist Amnesty and just introduced a bill to eliminate the federal reserve… Yes, to improve our future. No one else running has the voting record nor the ablity to restore our nation as it once was.

In closing lets take action monday morning by calling our own senate members and say no to S. 1419. I will! Will you do the same?

In closing restore our republic…..

By jtollison78

June 25, 2007 8:58 AM | Link to this

I like one guy who is a strict >constitutionalist but I don’t want >to share his name because then >someone will think I have an agenda.

His name is Ron Paul

By dale wagner

June 26, 2007 10:13 AM | Link to this

My Question is why wait till 2016 for gas to hit $ 6 a gallon .If we hit IRAN now (Which i dont want)Gas will be 6 dollars a gallon this summer If this crazy Bush Adm decides to do this. Americans dont want Iran to be nuked put my God folks we are so stupidly depented on some ones else gas and this administrion controls the oil.