Why is Bush not using the emergency oil reserves to help gas prices?

[MinnesotaMike31]

This sure isnt my area of expertice but...

Didnt Clinton use the oil reserves to temp relieve oil prices until they settled down?

Should/could Bush do this?

I don't hear any talk at all about this in the media.

Your thoughts?

[liberal N proud]

1. Because it would cut into the profits of his buddies?

The media whores sure as hell dare not bring up the subject, else they would be banished from the kingdom.

[CatWoman]

2. remember when Clinton did that?

http://www.evote.com/index.asp?Page=/news_section/2000-09/09212000Oil2.asp

[tanyev]

3. High prices at the pump are not an emergency.

But the rich, the powerful, and the military will still need to be able to drive vehicles after society collapses.

[MinnesotaMike31]

5. For some peoples jobs it is. Also some school & city budgets.

Taxi companies, all the delivery businesses & any business that has vehicles out in the field all day long.

[tanyev]

15. Sorry, I meant not an emergency to Our Glorious Leader.

You are, of course, correct.

[jmaier]

4. High prices at the pump are not the emergency ...

The impending crisis is the absolutely critical dependence upon oil --period. Higher prices are with us probably for good and they will ultimately get worse. Leadership here isn't about artificially driving gas prices down but working seriously to drive consumption (dependence) down.

[woodsprite]

6. They intend to keep it for their own personal use when all

the rest of our oil runs out.

[mike_c]

7. oil companies are making RECORD profits....

Releasing those reserves would decrease oil company income. What, did you think Bush gives a rat's buttocks about American consumers? Next question?

[Imagevision]

8. So Exxon-Mobil can keep up the supply & demand defacto enabling

higher prices at the pump. Don't forget first and foremost Bush and Cheney are Oil-men, with Cheney still receiving checks from Halliburton to the tune of $187,000 per month and I read that over 2 years ago.

[European Socialist]

9. There saving it for the Iran invasion economic meltdown coming soon.

[eallen]

10. That's a short-term solution to a long-term problem.

The strategic reserves are intended as a short-term solution to some sort of crisis that interrupts normal oil supply. Current prices aren't a result of any kind of disruption to supply. They are simply the result of demand growing faster than supply. That situation looks likely to continue for the foreseeable future. Do you really think it wise to use an emergency reserve to lower prices for a few months, when those price trends are likely to continue the year after, and the year after, and the year after?

[Malingerer]

12. there's no free lunch

Ditto on that. Using our reserves for a temporary price relief would not be wise. We'd be without supply in the event of emergency, and we'd have to build up that reserve at some point... reducing national supply and driving prices even higher.

[RaleighNCDUer]

11. He's saving them for when we get cut off

after we attack Iran.

[Roland99]

13. Because it wouldn't amount to squat

The Strategic reserves are there for stragetic purposes.

Getting the dollar to stop falling and go back up against the Euro will help bring the price of oil down. Also, if we could get more refineries or move more quickly to nuclear power.

[Igel]

14. It would also be seen as a political solution.

I think Clinton's solution was a short-term solution for an inermediate-term problem, and was as much political as economic. For security purposes, the oil reserves should be kept at a certain minimum (think embargo or war-created scarcity), and Clinton lowered them well below that minimum. He never decided to build up the reserves again when oil supplies weren't strapped.

* decided to replenish the stockpile, which simply increased the pressure on the oil market at a bad time, helping to drive up prices.

There was talk about this, but it was a year or so ago.