Internal memos: Big oil shuttered refineries to drive up prices...

[rawstory]

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Group_Internal_memos_show_oil_companies_limited_refineries_to_drive_up__0907.html

The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) today exposed internal oil company memos that show how the industry intentionally reduced domestic refining capacity to drive up profits, RAW STORY has learned.

The three internal memos from Mobil, Chevron and Texaco illustrate how the oil juggernauts reduced refining capacity and drove independent refiners out of business in an effort to increase prices. The highly confidential memos reveal a nationwide effort by American Petroleum Institute, the lobbying and research arm of the oil industry, to encourage major refiners to close their refineries in the mid-1990s.

"Large oil companies have for a decade artificially shorted the gasoline market to drive up prices," said FTCR president Jamie Court, who successfully fought to keep Shell Oil from needlessly closing its Bakersfield, California refinery this year. "Oil companies know they can make more money by making less gasoline. Katrina should be a wakeup call to America that the refiners profit widely when they keep the system running on empty."

"It's now obvious to most Americans that we have a refinery shortage," said petroleum consultant Tim Hamilton, who authored a recent report about oil company price gouging for FTCR. "To point to the environmental laws as the cause simply misses the fact that it was the major oil companies, not the environmental groups, that used the regulatory process to create artificial shortages and limit competition."

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Group_Internal_memos_show_oil_companies_limited_refineries_to_drive_up__0907.html

[Tace]

1. They Do The Same Thing In The Diamond Biz -- It's Called A "Cartel"

[Occulus]

2. Well, that only bolsters what I said a couple days ago.

The oil interests (and, I would argue, the pharmaceutical industry as well) SHOULD NOT BE PRIVATELY OWNED. We need to nationalize those industries, and we need to do so yesterday.

Both are far too important to the public to be held in ANY form of private hands.

edited to add: this tells me Pak Oil is, at the moment, nothing more nor less than a TOTAL SCAM. And I think a great many of thought as much.

"supply exceeds demand YEAR-ROUND". from their OWN internal memos, says a whole hell of a lot in support of that assertion.

We've been getting gouged and getting the wool pulled over our eyes for years. Shortages are apparently nonexistant and, in fact, there is (according to these memos) a fracking SURPLUS.

Nationalize the oil interests. Take them OUT of private hands. Dissolve these three corporations and seize all their assets, financial and material, fire the boards of directors, JAIL THE CEOs, and give it all to We The People.

[Raster]

12. Preach on, my brother/sister!!! The petroleum infrastructure is far too

important to national interests to leave it in the hands of the texas, white-boy, petroleum mafia. We've already seen what they can and will do. We cannot trust something so vital to national interests to a bunch of unscrupulous, greedy bastards. Nationalize the petroleum industry, which will send a warning shot across the bow of big pharma and then sack their puppet pResident. It is time.

[mccoyn]

17. Wouldn't anti-trust work just as well.

If there was some compition, then some people could make a lot of money by putting up a refinery and selling gas cheap.

I don't really trust the government to run things any better than the oil companies. It appears the same people are in charge.

[julianer]

19. Why not?

Depends how you set it up. If you decide to make it an unresponsive monolith then it won't work well.

Luckily though, it is not beyond the wit of humanity to come up with something apart from the status quo and some stereotype promulgated by the supporters of the status quo.

[KitSileya]

23. The Norwegian oil industry is nationalized.

As we speak, millions are rolling into a petroleum fund that'll be used to safeguard the Norwegian welfare state - health care, free education (including higher education,) 1 year paid maternal leave, cap on kindergarten prices, minimum pension for retirees, disability pay etc.
It is quickly becoming the largest fund in the world.

[420inTN]

49. Nationalization is not the answer.

We need to get away from our oil dependence and find alternative fuel sources.

Suppose we do nationalize the petroleum industry and reduce the cost of gas. Won't that spurn an increase in gas consumption and therefore accelerate Peak Oil as well as increasing Greenhouse Gases and accelerating Global Warming?

No, we need to kick our petroleum addiction.

[Raster]

51. Agreed. Most definitely we need a petroleum intervention and then

recovery. But until then and along with, NATIONALIZATION is the answer. The grossly obscene profits should not be going to the texas white-boy petroleum mafia. And who is to say that nationalizing would cause an increase in consumption? I say not. In fact, it would allow to better find alternatives. Take the pricks at exxon, the oil company that paid for the current pResident. They've done everything they can to obscure and cloud the global warming issue, simply to keep their profits coming. A nationalized petroleum infrastructure could do what is best for the populace, the country and the environment, something exxon would never do.

[420inTN]

56. I say that it would increase consumption

Would you more likely to take a road-trip or a leisurely, Sunday drive when gas is $1.50/gallon or when it is $3.50/gallon?

One of the things that we are seeing now, is that people are driving less, because of the rising costs. People are also looking at more fuel-efficient vehicles, including hybrids. Therefore consumption is decreasing.

If you make gas cheaper, people will be hopping back into their SUVs and their 8 mile per gallon V8 muscle cars. High gas prices leads to better fuel conservation.

Now, if you did nationalization, it would be best to keep prices high. You can drop prices somewhat, but you'd still want people to go for the fuel economic vehicles. With what used to be profit, the extra money can now be used to find alternative solutions and to change our infrastructure meet to the demands of the new solutions.

But, if you just nationalize and drop gas back down to $1 or $1.50 a gallon, you are shooting yourself in the foot. You are easing one problem (gas price) while exacerbating another (pollution, peak oil, global warming, etc.).

Another solution, would be to keep the companies private, but to regulate them and give them caps on what they can charge. That way, we are not charged outrageous amounts over the cost of crude oil, refining, and transporting the oil and gas. After doing that, you can also increse the fuel tax to fund the new research and infrastructure changes.

[Raster]

57. Dude, I'm not saying NATIONALIZE the petroleum infrastructure

to make it cheaper, FAR FROM IT! Absolutely no doubt about it, we need to move away from fossil fuels as much as possible. I would use the profits to fund alternative fuels research ASAP. I would also mandate that any fossil fuel vehicle on the road has to meet certain economy and emission standards. I would also use the obscene profits to retrofit or retire vehicles that could not make the standards.

NEVER, NEVER, NEVER would I just nationalize to brink back relatively cheap gas. It's cheap gas that got us into this mess. I want to nationalize because (1) the oil companies are about as parasitical as they come, it's time to get de-wormed; (2) the oil companies, at least in the U.S., are lousy citizens and neighbors. It's time to regulate the snot out of them. exxon has gone so far as to have emission information removed from policy papers because they demonstrate global warming is primarily caused by fossil fuels. I would make sure that no oil company EVER has that type of access again.

on edit: best of buds to ya

on second edit: Most of all, I would nationalize to make sure the oil companies never ever have the power again to install government in this country. Why are we in Iraq? To protect the oil companies interests. And that's possible because they own the pResident. Never again. Eisenhower was right, beware the military/industrial complex. And also beware the texas white-boy petroleum mafia.

[420inTN]

63. So, you don't mind $3.50 gas and soaking the public

You just want the funds going to the government.

[Raster]

64. No, I did not say I liked the $3.50 gas. The price of gas should be

representative of the cost of production. The profits should go to the people of the country. Not the greedy bastards at exxon.

[420inTN]

65. If the price is representative of the cost, there is not profit.

unless you do a fixed percentage profit. What would be a good percentage? 10% 50% 100% 200%?

[Raster]

66. I'd say a 25% markup is fair. All profits to fund alternative energy.

[Sub Atomic]

3. Well, it's a damn good thing we've got an energy president.

:puke:

[sam sarrha]

4. I worked for Shell Research Developement Corp, It's the same sine 1972

[Sivafae]

11. Could/would you expound on that just a little?

I know that it may not be widely received by some here, but I am interested in what you have to say.

[enough]

5. Hope this gets around.

snip>

An internal Chevron memo states; "A senior energy analyst at the recent API convention warned that if the US petroleum industry doesn't reduce its refining capacity it will never see any substantial increase in refinery margins."

snip>

[jsamuel]

6. I have been saying this here on DU and people were all like "supply demand

and peak oil" and all that crap!


THIS PISSES ME OFF THAT SOME CAN BE FOOLED MOST OF THE TIME BY THE SAME PEOPLE!

[JustSayNO 2 Sheeples]

9. AMEN!

"THIS PISSES ME OFF THAT SOME CAN BE FOOLED MOST OF THE TIME BY THE SAME PEOPLE!"

Even some who consider themselves somewhat intelligent. Dare I say even some right here on DU?

[burythehatchet]

28. there's really nothing I see that allows anyone to conclude

that peak oil is not an issue of concern.

[jsamuel]

54. it's a freaking ruse... they are fooling you

peak oil will come, but no where near yet... another 20 or 30 years

"peak oil"
"blame game"
"welfare check"

loaded words to sway you

[burythehatchet]

55. thanks

[BadGimp]

7. Shocked I tell you!

[FormerDittoHead]

8. A 9/11 commission should be started! ..and nothing happen again

The DLC is no better when it comes to corporate control.

Big money has to be taken out of politics if the people want to take back this country.

[Ernesto]

10. Kinda like how texas big energy screwed culeeforneeya

As a result we have a total buffoon as a state leader.

[young_at_heart]

13. These Republican Big Oil men are SO compassionate

I wonder if any of them contemplate how their actions are hurting the families struggling for the basic necessities. There is a story in our paper about a young couple (pregnant, with complications) who can't afford food because the high gas prices take up all his income. He only makes $8.50 an hour and they live out where the rent is cheaper.

[WCGreen]

14. Duh, I could have told you that....

Cheney wanted to build refineries for them as a way to ease the energy crisis.....

Right after the 2001 coronation....

That was his major idea, outside of drilling in the Arctic, build "our" refinery capacity, as if it was yours and mine.....


Here is something I wrote back in May of 2001

5/7/2001

Sometimes it gets a little tricky trying to figure out what it is our elected leaders are really saving. Take vice president and energy czar Dick Cheney as a for instance. Everyone who cares about such things knows that this guy is rock hard, almost zealous in his defense of the free market enterprise system. He is so confident that markets will handle all thing connected with the human condition that it is safe to say he has spent a large part of his political career on dismantling government. Let the market decide who will win and who will lose.

A life time of posturing may have caused a casual listener to miss the subtle clues that signal Chaney's 180 degree change in thinking. It all started to surface when he took on the task of articulating the Bush Administration's position on Energy. During a speech in Toronto, Cheney openly broke with the expressed vow his president made to look forward and not dwell on the past by taking former president Clinton to task over his administrations lackadaisical approach to energy. One of the Nation's greatest free market warriors was blaming Clinton, i.e. the government, for not formulating an effective national energy policy. The current energy "crisis" is due to a lack of action by the federal government.

If Clinton, according to Cheney, is responsible for the looming energy crisis for not having a national energy policy that must mean he believes, at least when dealing with energy, government is welcome, nay encouraged to interfere with the free market system. Could it be that Oil CEO Cheney spent the 1990's secretly hoping for a call from Washington? If Dick was open to federally guided plans and strategies, did the other energy and Oil CEO's he hangs with feel the same way? Boy that Clinton, what an opportunity he missed.

After getting the Clinton scapegoating all republicans are required to included when ever speaking in public, Dick had just a little blame left for us, the American consumer. Turns out the 1990's was nothing but a big economic boom Everyone was working and everyone was spending like drunken sailors on shore leave. The whole country went on a consumption binge that kept everything humming 24/7. We created a new economy dependent on energy. And so Cheney cited this new economy of ours as part of the problem. Psst, Old Economy was even more dependent on energy. Heavy industry's appetite for energy was insatiable. The New Economy uses energy far more productively. Why does the this New Economy need more energy? More workers, more production, more everything.

So let's review. Clinton didn't have a national energy policy, the American public was demanding more and more energy and our thriving new economy would continue to consume energy in ever increasing amounts. Pretty complete. A neat package of blame served up by an Administration dedicated to ridding Washington of petty bickering. If only Clinton had kept his eyes off interns and focused on important matters like energy instead of messing around with Health Care, maybe we wouldn't be in the fix we are in right now.

Cheney was just getting started. He waited until after the blaming game was over to publicly sever his ties to the free market system and embrace a more compassionate capitalism that had just the right touch of collectivism to blunt the harsh reality of free market economics. The VP continue his talk with a more supply oriented discussion. He old the audience how our nation's oil refineries were producing at 96% capacity and that just wasn't enough to satisfy demand. Even if more crude oil was put into the system, we simply could not make more gasoline. That's not all. Our system of natural gas pipelines are in bad shape. Large areas of the country are not connected to the our aging network of pipelines. Worse still, we have neglected our network for so long, large sections will have to be replaced. To top it off, it too is operating at maximum capacity.

With the subtle flair of a master orator, with an almost undetectable change in the possessive, Cheney shifted the responsibility of addressing these deep problem in energy production and distribution from the private sector to us. It was our problem now. And Cheney even offered a suggestion about how we all could pitch in. It was easy. Even though the supply crunch is right here right now and the master of the energy sector just got through explaining that our refining capabilities were incapable of producing even one gallon more, the answer lay in expanding the supply of crude oil. That's right. Let my pals do there thing in Alaska and all our problems will be solved.

How is crude oil that will come on line in five, ten or fifteen years from now increase supply today?

[redqueen]

15. Nothing shocking...

weren't internal memos leaked years ago showing that oil companies decided against building new refineries, and even closed existing ones, because prices would drop?

Coulda sworn I saw that a couple years ago...

[Lexingtonian]

21. I lived in California in the mid-Nineties

The state is via geography an energy-economic "island", 35 million consumers whose oil essentially runs through a mere two ports and two clusters of refineries, and with a relatively rich but highly politically disunited population. If you wanted to racketeer in a grand fashion, that was the time and place to do it.

Every summer there was another gasoline price run-up without a true market reason for it. The average people there bought the idea that it was all a matter of elevated demand...and refused to clue into the idea that if there was genuine competition, the companies could/would simply increase the supply and refining capacity and off-season production.

It was so transparently cartel behavior/gouging. You could literally watch the prices every day and know that two or three dozen MBA sorts were meeting daily in some cheesy suites somewhere in Monterey or El Segundo on a conference call, deciding what the maximum they could get away was.

I have yet to figure out exactly how/why the legislature's investigations didn't uncover the conspiracy, but the ones in 2000 and 2001 weren't able to figure out the electricity market gaming and its real players out either until the lawsuits got the out-of-state documents.

[ozymandius]

16. I wonder how nationalizing the petroleum industry would affect prices?

Our economy cannnot sustain high gasoline prices while our transportation system is gas powered. It makes me wonder if there could be the political will emanating from grass roots political backlash over these outrages to place this industry, essential to national security, in the hands of the public?

[gristy]

18. How about last week? My guess is a few refineries were taken off line

for "maintenance". Shades of Enron, which did the same with power plants out west.

[lateo]

20. Organized crime folks...

That is what we are dealing with.

[tabasco]

22. But...but...the right-wing says it's all the government red tape ...

that keeps these poor oil companies from building more refineries!! :shrug:

And the dumb shlep freepers believe them. :eyes:

[killbotfactory]

24. Don't worry, Bush will demand action and hold them accountable...

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Just Me]

25. Those manipulating the energy market should be jailed.

:mad:

[yppahemnkm]

26. I figured that much

no surprises here.

[PatsFan2004]

27. I am angry and disappointed at this conspiracy activity but to

consider nationalization, we should examine what has been "govermentized" in the past to analyze the ultimate effect on such an important industry.

I can think of two major systems that are government run that have private counterparts for comparison: mail/parcel delivery and education. Obviously, there are more. Who do you trust to do it right? Around the world, there have been "experiments" in collective farming, in "socialization" of medicine, and so on. If you were seriously ill, would you want the limited choices in Great Britain?

Though I am very unhappy with gas prices today, as a consumer, I have been more often disappointed by government run enterprises, than private run enterprises.

Maybe, if we limited the formulation of gasoline to the same kinds across the country, there would be a more competitive environment. As it stands right now, many states have their own formulations which results in fewer options among refineries and less competition. With the same formulations, we could more easily buy the cheapest product from across the country.

[gulfcoastliberal]

45. GB Health Care?!

A friend(M.D.) of my mom's who worked at the NIH in oncology married a British woman and he said the care over there is better. He lives in Wales 6-8 months a year. I'll take his word for it.

[anotherdrew]

29. nationalize the oil industry right now damn it

these pigs will bleed us all dry.

[THUNDER HANDS]

30. this should be sent to Elliot Spitzer

he's just about the only politician I know of who has the balls to take on an industry like this.

[HamiltonHabs32]

31. Internal Memos Show Oil Companies Intentionally Limited Refining Capacity

Santa Monica, CA -- The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) today exposed internal oil company memos that show how the industry intentionally reduced domestic refining capacity to drive up profits. The exposure comes in the wake of Hurricane Katrina as the oil industry blames environmental regulation for limiting number of U.S. refineries.

more

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/pr/?postId=5110&pageTitle=Internal+Memos+Show+Oil+Companies+Intentionally+Limited+Refining+Capacity+To+Drive+Up+Gasoline+Prices

[FormerRepublican]

32. I hope this was sent to the press. If not, we should get it out there.

[donheld]

34. I hope if it was sent to the press, they will do something with it

besides just sit on it. They tend to do that with these things. :nuke::spank::nuke::spank::nuke:

[Spinzonner]

33. Well call me Captain Renault

[stillcool]

35. Nice they have links to the memos...

more from the article...
<The three internal memos from Mobil, Chevron, and Texaco (Click here to read the memos.) show different ways the oil giants closed down refining capacity and drove independent refiners out of business. The confidential memos demonstrate a nationwide effort by American Petroleum Institute, the lobbying and research arm of the oil industry, to encourage the major refiners to close their refineries in the mid-1990s in order to raise the price at the pump.

"Large oil companies have for a decade artificially shorted the gasoline market to drive up prices," said FTCR president Jamie Court, who successfully fought" to keep Shell Oil from needlessly closing its Bakersfield, California refinery this year. Oil companies know they can make more money by making less gasoline. Katrina should be a wakeup call to America that the refiners profit widely when they keep the system running on empty." >

[leftylady]

36. It's been in the press

There have been whole stories on it. Nobody cares.

[progressoid]

37. Here's why the corporate media make a big deal out of this...

Sitting on the board of:

New York Times: Caryle Group, Eli Lilly, Ford, etc
Washington Post: Lockheed Martin, Dun & Bradstreet, Gillette, G.E. Investments, etc
The Tribune (Chicago & LA Times): Conoco, Phillips, 3M etc
News Corp (Fox): British Airways, Rothschild Investments
GE (NBC): Bechtel, Chevron/Texaco, Coca-Cola, Dell, GM, Motorola, etc
Disney (ABC): Boeing, Northwest Airlines, Halliburton, etc
Viacom (CBS): Consolidated Edison, Lafarge North America etc
Gannett: AP, Lockheed-Martin, Continental Airlines, Goldman Sachs, etc

[Burried News]

41. Great List. Printed it out. Thanks

[progressoid]

62. You should probably have the whole article...

Big Media Interlocks with Corporate America


By Peter Phillips

July 4, 2005


Mainstream media is the term often used to describe the collective group of big TV, radio and newspapers in the United States. Mainstream implies that the news being produced is for the benefit and enlightenment of the mainstream population-the majority of people living in the US. Mainstream media include a number of communication mediums that carry almost all the news and information on world affairs that most Americans receive. The word media is plural, implying a diversity of news sources.

However, mainstream media no longer produce news for the mainstream population-nor should we consider the media as plural. Instead it is more accurate to speak of big media in the US today as the corporate media and to use the term in the singular tense-as it refers to the singular monolithic top-down power structure of self-interested news giants.

A research team at Sonoma State University has recently finished conducting a network analysis of the boards of directors of the ten big media organizations in the US. The team determined that only 118 people comprise the membership on the boards of director of the ten big media giants. This is a small enough group to fit in a moderate size university classroom. These 118 individuals in turn sit on the corporate boards of 288 national and international corporations. In fact, eight out of ten big media giants share common memberships on boards of directors with each other. NBC and the Washington Post both have board members who sit on Coca Cola and J. P. Morgan, while the Tribune Company, The New York Times and Gannett all have members who share a seat on Pepsi. It is kind of like one big happy family of interlocks and shared interests. The following are but a few of the corporate board interlocks for the big ten media giants in the US:

New York Times: Caryle Group, Eli Lilly, Ford, Johnson and Johnson, Hallmark,Lehman Brothers, Staples, Pepsi
Washington Post: Lockheed Martin, Coca-Cola, Dun & Bradstreet, Gillette,G.E. Investments, J.P. Morgan, Moody's
Knight-Ridder: Adobe Systems, Echelon, H&R Block, Kimberly-Clark, Starwood Hotels
The Tribune (Chicago & LA Times): 3M, Allstate, Caterpillar, Conoco Phillips, Kraft,McDonalds, Pepsi, Quaker Oats, Shering Plough, Wells Fargo
News Corp (Fox): British Airways, Rothschild Investments
GE (NBC): Anheuser-Busch, Avon, Bechtel, Chevron/Texaco, Coca-Cola, Dell, GM,Home Depot, Kellogg, J.P. Morgan, Microsoft, Motorola, Procter & Gamble,
Disney (ABC): Boeing, Northwest Airlines, Clorox, Estee Lauder, FedEx, Gillette,Halliburton, Kmart, McKesson, Staples, Yahoo,
Viacom (CBS): American Express, Consolidated Edison, Oracle, Lafarge North America
Gannett: AP, Lockheed-Martin, Continental Airlines, Goldman Sachs, Prudential, Target,
Pepsi,AOL-Time Warner (CNN): Citigroup, Estee Lauder, Colgate-Palmolive, Hilton

Can we trust the news editors at the Washington Post to be fair and objective regarding news stories about Lockheed-Martin defense contract over-runs? Or can we assuredly believe that ABC will conduct critical investigative reporting on Halliburton's sole-source contracts in Iraq? If we believe the corporate media give us the full un-censored truth about key issues inside the special interests of American capitalism, then we might feel that they are meeting the democratic needs of mainstream America. However if we believe - as increasingly more Americans do- that corporate media serves its own self-interests instead of those of the people, than we can no longer call it mainstream or refer to it as plural. Instead we need to say that corporate media is corporate America, and that we the mainstream people need to be looking at alternative independent sources for our news and information.

[atommom]

38. My diehard Repub neighbor even mentioned this the other day.

The question is, will the public wake up enough to care?

[Must_B_Free]

39. Sounds exactly like their manipulation of Electricity producers

I haven't forgotten...

Same scam, different resource...

[jasmeel]

40. Rawstory has this article as well

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Group_Internal_memos_show_oil_companies_limited_refineries_to_drive_up__0907.html

[420inTN]

50. Yeah, that's the link in the original post. n/t

[moondust]

42. I knew it.

It's the California energy crisis writ large.

Of special mention is that Bushco has not so much as hinted at the possibility that the oil companies may bear some responsibility for sky-high gas prices and should therefore be investigated.

[KansDem]

43. I wonder if this is what the Democrats wanted to investigate?

When Jeffords switched from R to I, the Democrats, who then controlled the Senate, wanted to investigate high (and getting higher) gasoline prices. The price of gas literally dropped overnight...

[KittyWampus]

44. Isn't This What Enron Did, Sort Of?

[KansDem]

46. Yeah, Enron withheld energy from California...

...and got caught on tape. Then came the California recall of Gray Davis, who was pursuing a lawsuit of Enron and others:

In May 2001, fully two and a half years before he stepped up to the podium and announced in Hollywood sound bites that he would serve a state whose name he still can't pronounce properly, our fearless Governator met with Enron executive Ken Lay, stock swindler Michael Milken and former Los Angeles mayor Richard Riordan. In public? Hardly. Try a suite at the Peninsula Hotel.

As exposed by British journalist Greg Palast, 34 pages of internal Enron memos show that the man working without favor knowingly joined a hush-hush meeting with convicted felons to derail a plan by Davis and Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante to sue Enron through the California court system. Under the Unfair Business Practices Act, Davis and Bustamante are trying to recover $9 billion from the energy concerns that bilked the state with poor service and huge surcharges.
http://www.thesimon.com/magazine/articles/canon_fodder/0321_arnold_energy_crisis.html

...and then Gov. Arnold is "elected," who promptly puts the kibosh on Davis' lawsuit:

It looks like it's worked, too. With Arnold in power, he's in position to sanction a sweet deal cooked up by the Bush administration that forgives fully 98 percent of the money stolen from Californians. As an added bonus, Bustamante's lawsuit falls apart. Everybody wins except the millions of Americans saddled with rising energy costs and California, which could actually run its programs with that $9 billion. With an $8 billion deficit this year, we'd even be a little ahead.

Gotta hand it to the Bushistas: They may be sleazy crooks and liars, but they are damned-good sleazy crooks and liars! :crazy:

[Scout1071]

47. No wonder they've almost tripled since * stole office.

[jazzjunkysue]

48. Enron did this with electricity: Shut it off to sell at 10 or 50X the pric

If you saw the Enron film, "Smartest guy in the room" I think it was called, they sold electricity like pork bellies and shut off the power grid to temporarily drive the price up.

There's no limit to what they'll do. It's so christian of them to lie like this. When will we ever wake up and see these lies?

[norml]

52. Thanks!

I will use this information in my show.

[slay]

53. Help! Our government is run and held hostage by oil criminals!

We all know it's true. There will be no hemp for fuel while these bastards are running the show.

"Biodiesel can be made from domestically produced, renewable oilseed crops such as hemp. With over 30 million successful U.S. road miles hemp biodiesel could be the answer to our cry for cheaper fuel. We have spent the last century polluting our beautiful country with our petroleum based fuels that could have easily been replaced with fuels derived from hemp. It would only take 6% of our U.S. land to produce enough hemp, for hemp fuel, to make us energy independent from the rest of the world. Help us teach America the truth. Make yourself a human billboard that speaks only of the truth because the only thing standing between hemp being illegally and legal is ignorance."

http://www.artistictreasure.com/learnmorecleanair.html

(Make ya think twice about the so called "drug war" too doesn't it? :(

[rucky]

58. I'm sure Roberto Gonzales will get right on that one. n/t

[Lost4words]

59. I remember when Sun closed Marcus Hook refinery south of Philly!

They had just updated their infrustructure and the plant was effiecnt and profitable according to my counter parts there. When the ax came down they explained that the issue isnt how much crude you have its how much refinining capability you have that directly effects costs as relates to supply and demand. And that was in the mid 90's, so big oil was implementing the plan even then. I would like to see an open hunting season for CEOs in this country as they seem to be at the root of the problem. just my opinion.

[Joanne98]

60. CALLING ELIOT SPITZER... This could make you PRESIDENT!

[Viking12]

61. Not Breaking News....

Senator Wyden released a report in 2001

http://wyden.senate.gov/leg_issues/reports/wyden_oil_report.pdf (PDF