Obama calls offshore drilling a 'scheme'

[DeepModem Mom]

Source: CNN

(CNN) — Sen. Barack Obama stood his ground Wednesday in opposing what he calls the "scheme" of offshore drilling, during a campaign event in Springfield, Missouri. "The oil companies are shoving this thing down the throats of Congress, because they know everybody wants to try to pretend they're doing something about the energy crisis,” Obama said. “This is not real. I know it's tempting. The polls say its one of the ways that a majority of Americans think we're going to solve this problem, but it's not real."

"I understand how desperate folks are. If I thought that I could provide you some immediate relief on gas by drilling off the shores of California and New Jersey… I'd do it.” But the Democratic presidential candidate added, "The soonest you would see any drop of oil from drilling off our shores would be 10 years from now….The most you would end up saving 10 years or 20 years from now would be a few cents on the gallon, although at that point, I figure oil might be $12 a gallon."

Citing the oil companies' record profits, Obama charged that they are, "making money hand-over fist, they're making out like bandits."

Obama then proposed his own answers: "First of all, let's make the oil companies drill where they're already got leases, let's increase supply by making them do what they're supposed to do." Obama also said he wants to make sure speculators aren't manipulating the oil markets. To a standing ovation, he said, "And let's get serious about alternative energy sources like solar and wind and bio-diesel. Let's raise fuel efficiency standards on cars. Let's get plug-in hybrids all across America. Let's finally free ourselves from dependence on foreign oil. That's the direction we need to go."

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/30/obama-calls-offshore-drilling-a-scheme/

[RayOfHope]

1. I was at that event today! It was freaking awesome. Many people around us

had zero idea that the oil companies aren't drilling on the land they have already leased, and that any offshore drilling benefits would be a long wait for a short amount of oil. Hope this gets lots of local coverage.

[DeepModem Mom]

2. Woot! Thanks for the report, dadsblacksheep! nt

[Hulk]

5. KO will be the ONLY network program telling his audience of this....the rest are pawns to the oil co

Americans are too ignorant to put their own two and two together. They let the "minipulative networks" do their adding for them.

They listen to sound bites from the old fart, and they think it makes sense, cause they're too ignorant and busy to add it up themselves.

We are such sheep. The networks are CONTROLLED by corporations, and the oil companies WANT to drill off shore for more profits, NO MATTER what the cost or how far off the potential for relief might be.

Give it up. America is brain dead. I am depressed just thinking about it. What an ignorant, f*cked up society we have. We truly are a nation run by morons FOR morons.

[RayOfHope]

7. Well, at least this point is already in the paper down here

and believe me, they CLAMOR for offshore drilling around here. They'll probably ignore the facts, but at least in this one instance they'll have them.

[twiceshy]

10. They are not drilling on the leases........

......because there is no fucking oil on those parcels. This is a stupid argument. The oil is literally seeping out of the earth into the ocean in CA and we can't drill for it?

[NMDemDist2]

18. I've heard that RW argument over and over. Show me the $$$$

Why would the oil companies keep paying for the leases if there was no oil?

Around here there's lots of gas and oil still underground and the leases are being held (often for decades).

What there ISN'T around here is enough men and machines to drill.

put up or shut up.

[FogerRox]

19. USGS has listed 20 billion barrels in reserve, 90bb of oil in place

That is not "no fucking oil on those parcels", I would offer to you sir the "United States Geologic Survey", they know something about oil reserves, way more that you do.


The north west corner of ANWR is said to be home to 2 to 11 billion barrels of oil, not a lot of oil in the larger scheme of things. Oil companies hold 68 million acres in leases, estimated to contain 100 billion barrels of oil, enough to nearly double domestic oil production, and increase natural gas production by 75%. Three quarters of those 68 million acres lie idle. The Interior Department has estimated 18 billion barrels of oil can be pulled from waters off the U.S. coast that are currently off limits.

But on existing leases there are 100 billion barrels.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iHcuoEcit0_kR272HwGKm6sL1K6gD921NR480
http://www.politickernj.com/senatormenendez/21680/senators-push-use-it-or-lose-it-amendments-energy-speculation-bill

While the Bakken Formation in North Dakota is home to 175 to 500BB.

http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news2.13s.html

[nc4bo]

27. Thanks for the links........

I just printed them out for a republican friend of mine who said how happy she was Shrub lifted the ban. :eyes:

[cliffordu]

41. Please don't confuse the fr**p*rs with the facts...Just makes 'em spin and

run into large objects.

On the other hand, Pizza delivery is always fun....

[Breeze54]

3. He's Right!! It is BS!!! --- Please sign Petition in my signature line!

:kick: & Recommended !!!

[deacon]

23. will do. n/t

[deacon]

24. will do. n/t

[Kweli4Real]

4. Besides not seeing a drop of oil for 10 - 20 years ...

What makes folks believe that that does make it out of the ground will be sold anywhere near these shores?

[RayOfHope]

12. He brought up that point as well n/t

[dysfunctional press]

33. one question i never really see answered about the current leases held by the oil companies...

how much oil is known/believed to be in the areas currently leased that haven't been drilled? :shrug:

and- where are the lease sites, and what obstacles are there currently to drilling on them? things like- very deep deposits, drilling through especially difficult layers of rock, environmetal concerns, aquifers, etc...

this could be a very thorny issue for us in november, as many many people don't even try to understand the issue- they just know that they're paying high prices, and lots of sources are telling them that drilling off the coast of florida is the answer, except the democratic-controlled congress won't let them.

[Virginia Dare]

6. As soon as McShame flipped on off-shore drilling..

big oil opened their pockets for him. BIG OIL IS THE ENEMY. ANYTHING THEY WANT IS BAD FOR THE AMERICAN CONSUMER.

[DeepModem Mom]

8. Yep, even the headline I read in MSM called the pocket-opening a "gusher." nt

[defendandprotect]

9. Wow . .. Obama is making my weekend --- love it -- !!!!

[BrightVictor]

11. Missing the point

This whole debate drives me insane. The oil belongs to whoever drills it out of the ground. Drilling for more oil will not make a noticeable difference on our domestic supply or the price of our gas since we do not have nationalized oil companies. Exxon or whoever does the work gets to sell the oil on the world market. Global supply would increase some, but not enough to make a noticeable shift in how much you or I pay for gas.

[RayOfHope]

13. He made that point today. It probably won't make it into the media

but he said that just because its drilled by these companies doesn't mean it belongs to us.

[BrightVictor]

14. Thanks!

Glad you pointed that out. I never hear that argument on the news. Is there a link to an article?

[RayOfHope]

20. I'm looking! I promise he said it.

There is a text of his prepared speech, but he put in lots of his own stuff.

Try http://www.news-leader.com and look for the political blog. The text of his speech and also some live blogging is in there.

[RayOfHope]

21. Try here:

Its a link to his speech. I think he might have said it during the question and answer session.

http://cbs3.com/video/?id=[e-mail]

[frylock]

15. not a scheme, but a SCAM..

big ups go to O for saying what he did.

[DeepModem Mom]

16. Good point! nt

[DirtyDawg]

17. It's a profit deal...

...clearly this whole sorry mess is geared to put more money in big-oils' pockets...and we're falling for it, or rather being brow-beaten into it by 'bought-and-paid-for' politicians. What Obama's saying is that if, in the words of the 'let the market deciders', the plan to drill for more oil in the future will have an immediate impact on the price of oil as reflected in the speculative run-up - the anticipation of more supply will drive the future price down...then clearly his plan to reduce the demand will have much the same effect. Only it can take place quicker and whatever it may cost will be invested here and the reduced prices will be enjoyed here...and big oil won't make a damn dime more in the process.

[deacon]

22. Drilling is a solution from a primative mind. It's not a solution. n/t

[donco6]

25. He's absolutely right . . . again.

This is our chance to make real changes - not just in our leadership and direction, but in the way we choose to live our lives.

I've completely re-thought my transporation situation. It's changed the way I think about automobiles. And almost all of my friends are in the same place. Wouldn't it be a shame to lose all that progress?

[pinniped]

26. Merkans are so desperate they'd support drilling up Yosemite NP....

if big oil said black gold were there.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/30/BAHL122B1T.DTL&tsp=1

51% of Californians back offshore drilling

(07-30) 22:28 PDT San Francisco -- A majority of Californians favor more oil drilling off the coast, according to a statewide survey released Wednesday, for the first time since oil prices spiked nearly three decades ago.

<--But according to a 2003 University of California Energy Institute paper comparing the cost of a gallon of gasoline against the California public's support for offshore oil and gas drilling, that mood shifted as gasoline prices fluctuated.-->
---------------------------------------
Well, I guess the 2003 paper was right.

[JMackT]

28. blah, blah, blah

"The soonest you would see any drop of oil from drilling off our shores would be 10 years from now….The most you would end up saving 10 years or 20 years from now would be a few cents on the gallon,"

The same broken record from the Clinton administration.
Its been almost 10 years and...well...

I just dont understand why there is such hostility to drilling for new oil here at home

[skipos]

29. Questions for you

Why aren't they drilling on the leases they already have?
Why do they need more?
Why did Exxon just report the most profitable quarter in the history of US business?
What effect will new drilling have on prices and when?

I'd like answers to all these questions please.

[JMackT]

30. Here we go

"Why aren't they drilling on the leases they already have?"
I dont konw. They should do this also.


"Why do they need more?"
See # 4


"Why did Exxon just report the most profitable quarter in the history of US business?"
Sheer volume of business.


"What effect will new drilling have on prices and when?"
New drilling will increase supply here at home. I do not work for an oil company. I do know that increased supply with the current demand will lower the price. I do not know how long the process takes. We should have done it 30 years ago.

[skipos]

31. Wow, you do not know much about this issue.

Most Americans wanted war with Iraq because they were not informed. Now most Americans want offshore drilling because they are not informed. Inform yourself please.

"I do know that increased supply with the current demand will lower the price."

This statement is laughably bad.

[JMackT]

32. Thanks for the informative post

Lets do nothing.

Thats way better

[magellan]

35. No one said "let's do nothing"

What's being said is "let's not waste our time and tax dollars on futile efforts when better options are available".

Using a garden hose on a raging forest fire might make you feel better in the short term, but sooner or later you're going to realize it ain't getting the job done.

[JMackT]

36. I see your point

BUT Nothing has been done

The price of oil has gone up and up (until the last few weeks) for years now

Even a crappy solution is still better than nothing

[magellan]

38. No, a crappy solution is not better than nothing

Crappy solutions have a way of creating more problems.

This country has the resources and initiative to overcome our oil dependency without grabbing at straws. What's needed is leadership that will finally stand up to the obstacles and distractions thrown in our way by the oil companies, who have shown time and again that they're only interested in one thing: their bottom line.

Decades of government protection and our tax dollars in subsidies has allowed oil companies to take us where we are now. Why in the world would anyone who understands the situation want to sink another 10 years and untold treasure into a proven dead-end con game?

[JMackT]

40. Oil is used in production of almost everything

It is not going anywhere as there is no alternative.

[cliffordu]

44. We bow to your acumen and insight and complete control of all the facts.

[magellan]

45. There are many places where alternatives can pick up the slack, however

Wind, solar, geothermal, biofuels (I'd add nuclear, but I'm really torn on that issue)....

For example, why shouldn't we enact regulations that require new buildings to be constructed using these technologies where practicable? Other countries do.

Solar hot water heaters. Geothermal heating/cooling. These technologies exist. The obstacle is one of cost of transition to the consumer (who can barely afford to eat these days, much less contemplate the price of a solar array). I'd rather see subsidies going to this than to oil companies, wouldn't you?

We obviously can't do without oil completely. But we most certainly CAN reduce our dependency -- significantly -- by exploiting the use of alternatives in many different areas.

[Alter Ego]

39. This is not a solution.

It is smoke and mirrors to fool the American people into THINKING it's a solution.

[cliffordu]

43. Not when it just feeds the greed, little one.

[skipos]

48. Who said "let's do nothing?"

You are the one who wants to drill even though it would do nothing to help us for for two decades.

"According to the federal government's own Department of Energy, drilling off America's coasts would not have a significant impact on domestic oil production or prices before 2030."

[cliffordu]

42. Uh, cause it's a band-aid on a bullet wound.

and promises to completely fuck up the coastlines for generations.

Go to Alaska and look around at what is STILL oozing out of the shores 19 YEARS after the Exxon Valdez.

Anyone who thinks more drilling is the answer REALLY needs to get informed. We need to get OFF OIL IMMEDIATELY.

Or keep sending Marines to die for it. You didn't REALLY think we were there for the 'terists, didja??

Fuck the oil companies.

Fuck your car.

[jmondine]

49. Fuck my car ?

Should I put a condom on the tailpipe first? (Sorry, couldn't resist)

[cliffordu]

50. Yep, Protection is paramount!!!

[Alter Ego]

46. If it is TRUE, then it should not be ignored

because it will not be a solution--it will be something McCain will use as a distraction to make voters think he wants to do something about oil prices.

[AngryAmish]

34. Is it a risky scheme?

[Alter Ego]

37. Laid it out in black-and-white.

Excellent rebuttal of the offshore drilling crap--and it proves he's not afraid to take unpopular stances if he believes they're right.

[YvonneCa]

47. Fantastic news...

...thanks for posting this. And thank you, Senator Obama! :) My thoughts posted here yesterday:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It would seem to me that by this time…after 7+ years of this Bush Administration…that the pattern they follow to get their way on policy is very clear. They create propaganda (a false intent) spin it and sell it…to the detriment of the American people. Their goal is ALWAYS the same: 1) Move responsibility off the shoulders of government and on to the backs of the American people, and 2) Make money for big business as former oilmen.

It would seem to me that the media…especially television news who has covered this administration (sort of) for 7+ years would not only SEE the pattern, but feel a duty to point it out to the American people. But I watched them ‘catapult the propaganda’ on energy policy again this morning. If you doubt the pattern this administration uses to get its way, here are a few examples:


Example # 1 Social Security. Their plan was privatization from the beginning. But they mislead everyone into thinking they were trying to ‘save’ it. Put all our money in stocks…that would have worked. Have you see the stock market lately?

Example # 2 Public Education. They try to sell us vouchers. As with Social Security, the plan has always been privatization…not making schools better.

Example # 3 Katrina. Bush never wanted government to help us during natural disasters, so he created Homeland Security (hey, Mr. Orwell) and put FEMA under that umbrella…stripping a once great agency down to nothing. No wonder it failed…but then it’s easier to get rid of a failing agency than a good one. Again, privatizing an agency meant to be a support for the public.

Example #4 The war in Iraq or the military in general. They knew the only way to make it happen was to mislead us on purpose. Bush balked at helping our veterans, and tried to privatize a war with KBR, Blackwater, etc. Lots of money made there.

Example #5 Our current economic crisis…notice who his actions have bailed out. Homeowners again are left holding the bag…many without their homes.

And there are really too many to list…the Justice Department, CIA, FBI, NSA…many of whom are supposed to keep us safe (Richard Clarke has a great book on this subject).



So now, before he leaves office, Bush wants an energy policy. He has always wanted to drill for oil everywhere…and now he is renewing his push to do so. His great intentions are not to help clean up the environment. Nor are his intentions to help average Americans struggling with the high cost of gas for their cars or energy to heat and cool their homes…he is holding out and DEMANDING that Congress drill in ANWR and off our coasts…period.

Anyone who does not see the pattern here hasn’t been paying attention. Anyone who sees it and BELIEVES Bush is doing this to help the country is blind. Anyone in the media…who HAS been paying attention to his methods…who spins this in his favor is irresponsible. This administration wants to drill off our coasts and in ANWR, because…they say…we need every last drop of oil to help us through this ‘transition’ to renewable energy. That argument misleads us, the American people, and insults our intelligence. There are already U.S. lands…yet undrilled…that we can and should explore. Any oil we drill out now, won’t help gas prices…indeed, it won’t get to market for YEARS...and then much of it would be sold to other countries. We should ‘transition’ to renewable energy, like solar and wind, etc…but we SHOULDN’T take the advice from former oilmen like Bush, Cheney, and T.Boone Pickens blindly.

This administration wants to drill off our coasts and in ANWR because it will make MONEY for oilmen. Period. Pickens promotes ‘his plan’ because if cars go to natural gas he will make money. Period.

The American people get to decide who to listen to about energy. I hope the media…CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC and others …will make sure they get ALL the facts. (I know that’s tough, when some are owned by energy companies.)

But look what happened when the case for going to war in Iraq was whitewashed.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


It's good to know Senator Obama has got this covered. :7

[callous taoboy]

51. And here's the kicker about ANWR:

North Slope oil companies could slant drill into ANWR without ever setting foot in ANWR proper. Why is this not common knowledge? The MEpublicans are desperate to paint us as unreasonable environmentalists / obstructionists / tundra worshipers. Even then ANWR holds about 10 months worth of oil at current demand levels. Obama is absolutely correct in what he is saying: It is a scheme.

I know it'd be political suicide for him to suggest that really the bottom line is that we had better start making living arrangements far different from the ones we all take for granted today because, from what I can gather, there is no other technology or resource out there that will be able to replace oil and allow us to live as we do now.