E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSPresident Barack Obama, turning his political sights on snowy New Hampshire, demanded that Congress eliminate oil and gas company subsidies that he called an outrageous government "giveaway." Though politically a long shot, the White House believes the idea resonates at a time of high gasoline prices.
"Let's put every single member of Congress on record: you can stand with oil companies or you can stand up for the American people," Obama said.
Recommended: Like us on Facebook for the latest from our politics team
Obama has repeatedly called for an end to about $4 billion in annual tax breaks and subsidies for oil and gas companies, government support that Obama has said is unwarranted at a time of burgeoning profits and rising domestic production.
"It's outrageous. It's inexcusable. I'm asking Congress: eliminate this oil industry giveaway right away," he said.
It was Obama's latest and most direct appeal to Congress to act on the tax breaks, and an administration official said the White House expects Congress to soon take up a measure ending some subsidies. The official requested anonymity to avoid speaking publicly without authorization.
Republican presidential contenders and GOP leaders in Congress denounced the idea and called on Obama to take further steps to expand oil production in the United States.
Leave a Comment:
So prices shoot up due to speculation, gas and oil companies take the profits straight to their bottom line and conservatives are still protecting government handouts for these same companies?
The oil company's profit is in the ten percent range. The subsidies don't amount to spit, when our government spends four trillion yearly while taking in only 1.5 trillion. The bs about the subsidies is just election year semantics.
Waste is waste my friend.
Ed, this isn't about waste. It is about re-election talking points. You know the class warfare that is so important to the libs. What percent is two billion when compared with a four trillion deficit?
$2 billion could pay for some nice road projects. Wouldn't you agree?
About five miles, I would guess. We had one mile in our town that cost close to half a billion to build. My point being, whether we keep the subsidies or we dispense with them should not be an campaign tactic that only comes up when there is an election. The subsidies are, monetarily, trivial. The relatively small drilling companies are the main recipients of the subsidies and they are American companies, unlike the really big oil companies.
I can't believe the repubs on here. They take it up the az from the oils companies and say"Thank you sir can I have another", because they don't want to offend the oil companies. They suck at negotiating.
Wow, I read that headline and laughed out loud. What a bunch of grandstanding bull. I'm STILL laughing. Obama's got his wick so far dipped into corporate coffers, it's just freaking hilarous to read that he actually SAID that!
If he want's to do something about the high price of oil, he should let us DRILL OUR OWN. That has the other benefit of actually putting people to work doing something other than living off the government dole.
Our drilling has very little impact on the price of oil. Oil and gas companies don't need our subsidies. Would you care to refute either point PAUL?
Our drilling for oil has no impact because environmental nazis keep us from drilling enough wells to provide the oil we need. We have the reserves, but can't touch them for fear of making a moose walk under a pipe.
I didn't SAY the oil and gas companies didn't need the subsidies either, Ed. What I SAID was Obama's a freaking hypocrite for even saying something like that. He is only looking to get more votes. He doesn't actually mean it. If he did, he wouldn't have corporate tax dodgers working for him.
Paul, you really have no clue about the relative impact of our drilling versus speculation do you?
Your profound sense of the world economy is amazing. The oil you pump out of the new well joins all the other oil and gets priced by the market futures. net gain almost zero.
Yeah, you're right, Mike.
Barry's been screaming at Congress to regulate out of control speculation on oil futures...
Show me where...
That would be the ONE issue I would support him on.
But as usual, he doesn't lead.
He just campaigns, says what his supporters want to hear.
Seriously-
IF Obama has said ANYTHING about regulating the oil futures market, show me...
Perhaps leadership should emanate from the branch of government that actually generates legislation to regulate speculation?
Ed, you've got that right. We sure as hell can't depend upon our elected leader to lead. He's too full of himself and his campaign to do that.
Paul, which branch of government must author legislation to regulate speculation?
He has absolutely no idea, he only knows how to point his finger. Now if Obama did attempt to reighn in speculation he would scream that he is against capitalism and trying to make us a socialist country.
Ed, despite what you think, I'm well educated. You need not try to brow-beat me regarding the difference between the various branches of government. Obamaramadingdong is the elected leader of the country, whether he legislates or not.
You can't have it both ways. Blame all of Barry's failures on the legislature, and then say they are the leaders. If so, Obummer can just sit down and shut up.
But if he did, he wouldn't have any ability to make those hollow, grandiose sounding proclamations like "Syria must stop the killing now." Or what? "The legislature must cut subsidies now." Or WHAT? The guy's just a freaking bag of hot, stinky air.
the demand that the U.S expand domestic oil production should be totally unrelated to the end of oil and gas subsidies. if the subsidies are eliminated will we see oil companies balk at actually starting wells in new locations due to the costs that they will have to absorb
Are you serious? Didn't you read that the largest U.S. export is now petroleum? These oil companies are making BILLIONS and the taxpayers are giving them more money for the privalege of them ripping us off. BTW, that pipeline that the RepubliCAN'Ts are whining about would actually RAISE the cost of gasoline in our country.
How are they "unrelated"? Do you even know what this "subsidie" is? Did you know that every company in the US gets this? So do we stop it for every one or just the mean oil companies? Is just the oil companies, then what about the 14th amendment, you know the one that gives ALL of us "equal protection under the law".
So don't farms and do you think there would be no farms if not for subsidies? They would get more efficient and hemp would become the production crop for ethanol because Arthur Daniels midland would have to produce.
As the RepubliCAN'Ts busily try to blame high gasoline prices on Obama, let's put the blame where it should be - on the very RepubliCAN'Ts who are doing the finger pointing. The Wall Street Journal reported that over 65% of all speculation in oil futures is done by people or companies who have no way to use that oil. There are merely driving up the price to make money. 25% to 35% of the cost of gas is due to speculation. That all could be curbed by the Dodd - Frank Bill. But the RepubliCAN'Ts are fighting like mad to stop it from being implemented. So the next time you are paying sky high prices at the pump and want someone to blame, put the blame where it belongs - the GOP! And remember that when it comes election time.
lakabrain
Next time you run out of gas with your 72 volvo, try growing some algae on the side of the road to put in your tank.... better yet.... chow down on one of Moochelle's nutriutional school lunches and you'll be able to gas up the tank yourself by sitting on the gas cap. LOFLMAO
Lakerman, do you mean Bawny Fwank?
As for high prices, remember that your medical bills are going to be kicking your azz next year, thanks to the democraps.
bob: as a troll, do you get paid to put nonsensical comments on here to try to obfuscate the issue or are you just talking out your hindquarters? But thanks for replying to comments that, though I did not make, are obviously floating through your head. What, pray tell, else is in there???
Paul: what are you talking about?
so who gave Obummer this idea? the Red Chinese or the Russians?
Don't weigh the Pro's, con's or pitfalls, just end them all, today. If fuel prices raise as a result, the Teflon President can blame Bush or the House or the middle east or Disney or...............
Cause and result? Anyone who would blame President Obama for ANY of the countries troubles is obviously a .........
I know some people will never like Obama or anything he does. But how do you convince yourself that giving away money to oil companies is a good thing. Last time I checked the most valuable company was exxon I believe. Some people dont think poor people deserve handouts, I can agree, but how do you justify hand outs to multi million, if not billion, dollar companies. I dont think they need it. The price of oil is set so they cant pass on the cost. This is just free money for them that is not offsetting the cost. I am all for subsidies if they will lower the cost at the pump but that is not how it works. I think all the blame pointed at obama, republicans, or democrats is misdirected. The blame lies squarely with the speculators and the commodities futures market. Until these cowboys are kept in check it will be the wild west when it comes to oil prices and we will be taken for a ride on a bucking bronco. Hang on tight, were in for a wild ride for the long term.
Since Obama became President the Reuters CCI Index has soared +70% !!
http://tinyurl.com/7fehnxm
MOREOVER, CRUDE OIL COST IS UP A WHOPPING 139%, while under Obama's Administration. To be sure, the extention of this trend might see Crude Oil top 200% by Nov Elections.
http://tinyurl.com/7exzky6
And gasoline also up an astronomical 138%...going on 200%.
http://tinyurl.com/6qqlwxj
President Obama's full name is Barack H. Obama.
Does the middle initial H. stand for
Hyper-Inflation???!!!!
IMHO, the only way Washington can lower total inflation by Nov2012 (election time) is to raise the value of the US dollar.
BECAUSE A DOLLAR TOO CHEAP FOSTERS INFLATION.
http://tinyurl.com/6oaswl9
A rooster crows before dawn and you probably think the rooster causes the sun to rise?
Wow, Ed that was lame. LMAO
Correlation a versus causality Paul. Do you understand the difference?
In a word? NO. He is just playing mimic to the talking points at the Tea and whine meeting. It is amazing how the taste of defeat is causing them to thrash about and so much time to lament before the election even is official. I do have some pity.
Explorer, you should get your hand out of Ed's panties... LOL
Oil subsidies. The rich get richer!!!!!
Including the union bosses!
Volt subsidies. The poorer get poorer!!!!!!!!!
ed: you're hitting a nerve with the wing nuts!
If you think the GOP can magically reduce gas prices if elected, you should probably stop wearing your sphincter as a collar.
Did TR have control of all foreign companies?
I thought conservatives got woodies at the thought of free markets? Oil and gas subsidies are government handouts that are antithetical to the efficient operation of free markets.
Ed.... guess you never took any economics courses in school, did you?
I think the Demotards goal here is to make gas so high that they will go to the government and force the gas companies to give out FREE gas with thier FREE contraception. If Obama gets a second term, every thing will be free by the time he gets out of office.
FACT 1: Nothing is free. When the government gives it to you, it has to first take it from some one esle.
FACT 2: Nothing is free. You WILL give up your liberty to get it
Obama's demand couldn't be political modivated, could it...................Duh!
Of course it is, but it doesn't meant that he's not right, because he is.
Well..
March 27, 2011
Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings. (Source: Exxon Mobil's 2009 shareholder report filed with the SEC here.)
Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009. (Source: See 2009 Chevron annual report here. Note 15 on page FS-46 of this report shows a U.S. federal income tax liability of $128 million, but that it was able to defer $147 million for a U.S. federal income tax liability of $-19 million)
ConocoPhillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2006 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction. (Sources: Profits can be found here. The deduction can be found on the company's 2010 SEC 10-K report to shareholders on 2009 finances, pg. 127, here)
http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=67562604-8280-4d56-8af4-a27f59d70de5
Exxon Mobil CEO Received $29 Million Total Compensation In 2010
April 13, 2011
NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) Chief Executive Rex Tillerson received about $29 million in total compensation in 2010, a 6.6% increase from the previous year.
Tillerson, who became the head of the world's largest publicly-traded oil company in 2006, last year earned $2.2 million in salary, $3.4 million in bonuses, and $15.5 million in stock awards. A change in pension value and other compensation totaled an additional $7.9 million, according to a proxy document filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission Wednesday.
Tillerson's bonus was increased by 40% in 2010, in order to reflect a 58% increase in earnings. During 2010, Exxon's profits were greatly boosted by a robust recovery in oil prices as the global economy reawakened from the recession. Exxon, based in Irving, Texas, posted $30.5 billion in profits that year.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2011/04/13/exxon-mobil-ceo-received-2-million-total-compensation-2010/#ixzz1c0UMPwvw
Now go get the same info on GE. . .
How much did Solyndra receive tax free and how many homes are now powered by their product?
sonman
that info on GE will have to be sent from Red China because Jeffrey just outsourced the entire accounting department over there.
To..son""
It's in there....
HA HA HA HA HA HA. . .
To..bob """
Good luck with that Solyndra thing ...non issue ..like Halliburton over the last decade...
Amunaka,
Then post it with the others. Or is that because GE is a crony capitalist for the demotards.
good luck on that solyndra thing? Guess what A..dumbka? It was some of your tax dollars that would have been better used to wipe your ass with too!! Obumbles and his entire administration should be in jail and very may will be after they get voted out in November.
Amunaka, are you so dense that you don't consider how much was spent making that 19 billion? If sales were 190 billion, then 19 billion profit is NOT a huge margin. Companies stay in business only when they make a profit, in the long picture.
To..son.."""
It's in the link ....what are you talking about...
To..bob."""
Good luck with all that ...
To..dasvet."""
Oh so the cost wasn't factored in the profit ...
Exxon Profit Up 69 Percent as Gas and Oil Prices Boost Top Five Oil Companies
April 28, 2011
Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell today reported first-quarter profit increases of 69 percent and 30 percent, respectively, from the same period last year. With rising gas and oil prices, analysts expected the five biggest oil companies -- with Exxon as the largest -- to report that they are swimming in revenue.
Exxon earned $10.7 billion in the first quarter, up from $6.3 billion. Shell announced profit of $6.3 billion in the first quarter this year, up from $4.8 billion.
BP and ConocoPhillips announced their first quarter earnings Wednesday, in a week when the biggest oil companies have begun to release their 2011 profits. The "Big Five" oil companies include BP, Chevron, Conoco Phillips, Exxon Mobil and Shell.
ConocoPhillips said its first quarter earnings increased 43 percent to $3 billion from $2.1 billion in the same period last year. BP's first quarter earnings dipped this year -- $5.48 billion compared with $5.60 billion during the first quarter a year ago -- including a charge of $384 million related to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/exxon-shell-profits-bp-oil-companies-high-expectation/story?id=13472740#.T0_n1_WeOSo
Basic math, when you make one dollar profit in one year, and then make two dollars the next year, that is a 100 percent increase in profit. Sounds like a huge increase , but doesn't about to a hill of beans in real corporate life. The profit margin is the only figure that really matters for any viable business. Giving half the picture, such as you seem to be enamored with, doesn't give the actual picture.
To..Dasvet.."""
Well thank you for clearing that up for me...
You are welcome, you needed to know it.
To..Dasvet"""
Heh ..heh...
Republicans are a funny bunch. The price of oil is set by the market - not the President. From the content of some of these posts, it looks like Republicans want the President to regulate the oil industry and dictate gas prices. It's rather ironic considering they're always complaining about him being a socialist.
According to the New York Times, Exxon had a profit of 30 billion dollars in 2010. Reuters reported that Royal Dutch Shell made about 18 billion dollars in the same period. They really need those subsidies don't they? In light of this, how is the President wrong is asking for the subsidies to be eliminated?
As for production, take a look at what's going on in North Dakota and Montana. There's a huge boom in new oil drilling going on in that area. It's funny how Repbulicans try and convince everyone that the President isn't allowing more drilling when reality says it isn't the case.
REALLY? Then why did Demotards blame Bush in the summer of 2008?
Reality? Obummer cant stop the drilling in those states because it's on private land. Where he CAN prevent it - in the largest reserves we have in Alaska, and off the coast - public land - he IS preventing it.
Republicans are a funny bunch because they make comments and act upon facts, not some Hope Dope's bull sh1t jargon on "hope and change"
bob......I haven't seen a whole lot of facts being presented by Republicans on this string - just a lot of people twisting the facts to bash the President. The lousy political situation at the moment has more to do with the screw-ups in Congress and the Senate (that means both Democrats and Replublicans) than it does the President. I agree that most Democrats believe President Obama walks on water. I believe they don't put enough emphasis on fiscal management. That being said, most Republicans will never be happy. Unemployment could be at 0% and you'd still find something to complain about.
sonmanvb......you'd have to ask the Democrats why they blamed President Bush for the high gas prices. My guess is that their reason was the same as yours - you hate the President.
That's the problem. Both sides hate each so much they've stopped listening to one another. The result is political stalemate and zero compromise.
The oil companies need these subsidies for what reason? I'm just asking.
The pay for a CEO is determined by the Board of Directors, at lease this is what I have understood but perhaps is false information. But a company is not going to get a CEO to stick around if they don't provide an outrageous salary and bonuses, even if the company does badly under the CEO's leadership.
To keep prices low, silly.
Congress will not end the subsidies for the oil and gas companies as those companies line the pockets of the congress, both republican and democrats. Congress will not give one thought about what the average American thinks as their approval rating is so low, the lowest of any congress in history at 11% and they know it could not go much lower.
President Obummer's ahead in the polls in Red China and North Korea!
Grow up bob and get a job.
Hey bob, if they use voting machines again dubya wins!
Yep - they won't pass through that hit to the consumer and that will hit the economy hard. Unfortunately we are being held hostage by Oil but for now leave it Phucking alone Obama! Man those czars are idiots.
I have read from a variety of sources the U.S. currently has a surplus of oil. I have also read and heard from many sources the demand for oil and oil products in the U. S. is currently down. I believe both of these facts to be true. Then why is the price of oil and gas so high and going up? This seems to to be the direct opposite of what is supposed to happen in economics.
Prices are set by forward contracts, which are right now greatly affected by circumstances in the mid east and an improving economy. There is nothing that has changed otherwise that could explain the increase. Supplies certainly haven't changed.
So, does that mean the economic laws of supply and demand do not work when it comes to oil?
Jim - if demand is down the prices should go down as well but Oil has never followed the supply/demand rule. So there are other issues at play. Greed? Manipulation? Corruption?
Come on conservatives. Repeat after me. Oil and gas subsidies are GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS.
I heard the republican chairman for the congressional subcommittee on energy say that speculation on futures does not impact the price of crude (this morning on Washington Journal). That is how uneducated, ignorant and out-of-touch these republicans are. The chairman of the subcommittee on energy! To even have to listen to these morons is becoming an insult.
Did he offer an alternative explanation?
He lied of course. He said the leases were not available causing a lack of production.
C-span tapes Washington Journal and they are available to view at their web-site. Take a look, he is very amusing.