Kerry Introduces Bill to Repeal Wasteful Tax Giveaways for Oil Companies

[kerrygoddess]

Kerry Introduces Bill to Repeal Wasteful Tax Giveaways for Oil Companies at Time of Record, Windfall Profits
April 25th, 2006 @ 12:20 pm

In response to Bush’s speech today on rising gas prices and his plan which analysts are already saying will not help, John Kerry will introduce a bill to repeal wasteful tax giveaways for oil companies at time of record, as oil companies see windfall profits.

Below is a statement from Senator John Kerry:

“For a moment, President Bush finally stopped talking like an oil company executive. Farmers, commuters and American families struggling with record gas prices need help more than oil interests which are giving their CEOs $400 million golden parachutes. I will introduce legislation today to repeal the president’s earlier tax giveaways for oil companies. The top oil executives told Congress they don’t need these tax breaks, and I hope the president was sincere today and will work aggressively to get this passed.

MORE & LINKS - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=2763

RELATED: Bush Plan on Gas Prices Falls Short
April 25th, 2006 @ 11:42 am

Today, Bush ordered a temporary suspension of all environmental rules for gas, to make it easier for oil refiners to meet demand and possibly dampen soaring prices at the pumps. Bush also temporarily suspended the purchase of crude oil for the government’s emergency reserve, for the summer. In an effort to show concern over rising gas prices, Bush delivered a speech today at the Renewable Fuels Association, in which he talked about “our addiction to oil” which should be translated to his affection for the oil whores who fill his political coffers.

MORE & LINKS - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=2762

[ginnyinWI]

1. Yes--nice to see somebody doing something

He and the other Dem Senators are stepping up. Sen. Dorgan is re-introducing his energy bill proposals, which the Repubs threw out last year. Hopefully enough of them have "seen the light" and something can be done this time.

[L. Coyote]

19. Senator Dorgan was way out front on this issue.

Check out the Windfall Profits FLASH on Dorgan's WINDFALL PROFITS Page:

http://dorgan.senate.gov/issues/economy/windfall/

SENATORS DORGAN, DODD TO RENEW PUSH FOR WINDFALL PROFITS REBATE

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) --- U.S. Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) said Tuesday he and Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) will renew their effort to enact legislation that would rebate to consumers a portion of windfall profits now being reaped by the big oil companies, if the oil companies do not use those profits to invest in activities that increase domestic energy supplies and help tamp down energy prices.

The two federal lawmakers offered such a proposal in the Senate last November, but it was defeated 35-64. Dorgan said he believes circumstances have changed. If those who voted against the plan “haven’t seen the light, they may have at least felt the heat,” given recent developments, Dorgan said.

Among those developments, Dorgan said:

• Gasoline prices rising to “painful and intolerable” levels, with no relief in sight.

• ExxonMobil awarding a nearly $400 million retirement package to its retiring CEO, making the point that the company is both awash in cash and not using that cash to invest in developing new domestic energy supplies;

• Both of the above developments taking place when Congress was in recess, meaning many lawmakers were in their home states where they heard first hand from constituents about high prices and the greed evidenced by the ExxonMobil executive’s retirement package.

“These major oil companies have hooked their hose up to the pocketbooks of American citizens and are sucking money from ordinary Americans into the treasury of the giant oil companies,” Dorgan said.

“It has to stop. There can be no more compelling evidence that the price gouging and market manipulation which has produced record oil prices is out of control, and is working to serve the forces of individual greed and corporate gluttony at the painful expense of millions of American consumers,” Dorgan said.

He noted when oil prices were at the $40 per barrel level, oil companies were reporting then-all time record profits. Instead of investing those windfall profits in things that would increase domestic energy supplies and thereby tamp down prices, “they are simply choosing to take the money and run,” Dorgan said.

“I think a sensible public policy would insist that the big oil companies either invest those windfall profits in things that will increase our own domestic energy supplies, or we should return some of that money to consumers. Using them to drop $400 million dollars in the pocket of a big oil executive is simply unacceptable.”

In November of last year, Dorgan and Dodd forced a U.S. Senate vote on a windfall profits rebate plan. The plan applied only to the major integrated oil companies, and would have imposed a 50% windfall profits tax on oil company revenue derived from sales of oil at more than $40 per barrel. Windfall profits invested to boost domestic energy supplies would have been exempt from the tax. Revenues collected by the tax would have been rebated to consumers.

The measure was defeated. “I don’t think the Congress can continue to ignore what’s going on,” Dorgan said Tuesday.

--END--

[blm]

28. They need to KEEP piling on - Wyden is using this same angle, too, on the

senate floor today.

[Nimrod2005]

2. Now we're taking, way to go senator!!!

[kerrygoddess]

3. Bush is useless on this! n/t

[Kolesar]

4. Not sure of JK's details, but energy is *the* issue for Dems to win with

I am not sure which tax giveaways Senator Kerry is referring to.

[Pacifist Patriot]

5. No kidding. If Dems can't win with gas hitting $3/gal....

we KNOW the fix is in.

[Canuckistanian]

6. Royalties, for one

There are so many unpaid royalties that the oil companies owe that are not being collected.

[Kolesar]

8. thanks..eom

[ProSense]

7. Sign the Energy Emergency Consumer Protection Act

Sen Cantwell (co sponsored by Kerry and other Democrats)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1022709&mesg_id=1022709

[JudyM]

9. K&R. Finally something sensible.

[lostinacause]

10. This won't bring down gas prices but is is a good move.

[blm]

17. Puts BushInc on the spot politically with his biggest cronies.

.

[Radio_Guy]

29. No, but what will bring down gas prices is

electing a Democrat. With the exception of the OPEC embargo, historically gas prices have been cheaper under a Democrat than under a Rethug.

[Zenlitened]

11. Nice!

:kick:

[Clarkie1]

12. I like Harry Reid's proposal to elimate the gas tax for 60 days.

While it is not a long-term solution, and I believe in the value of the gas tax philosophically (it reduces gas consumption and encourages public transit, alternative fuels, etc.), at this time it is the right move to help the American consumer, and a smart move politically.

Sign the peition here:

http://www.giveemhellharry.com/page/petition/gasprice

[lostinacause]

13. He's wrong. The gas tax serves a purpose - to correct for pollution

congestion and wear and tear externalities. Just because gas prices are high doesn't mean these problems don't exist.

[Clarkie1]

14. It would only be for 60 days. I think it's a good idea for that time. nt

[lostinacause]

15. What reducing the gas tax amounts to is a subsitity,

in the form of an increased deficit, where in people who are willing to reduce their consumption pay those who are not willing to reduce their consumption. It also means that consumption will not decline and there would be the opportunity for the price before taxes to increase even further.

High gas prices, if they are going to only last for a short period of time, would have some positive spillover effects. It would increase the demand for fuel efficiency and would give people and companies an indication of what they would have to do if an oil crisis hit.

If the high prices are permanent then reducing the tax only delays the response to the high taxes. Further, reducing the taxes might lead to a movement to have them permanently reduced.

This plan is slightly better then Bush's eliminate the pollution law's "plan", but not much. The costs still lie individuals who do not benefit from the plan.

[blm]

16. Thanks for the solid read. Temporary fixes on anything usually

have no impact. And rarely the impact that was intended.

[L. Coyote]

20. Good idea for the Winnebago Republican summer vacation crowd !!

Just what we need most = better ways to get everyone to burn more gasoline.

This ranks among the best.

Oil profits will soar.
Stock prices will rise.
Oil executives will get millions.

And the poor people get all the exhaust fumes!!

Any ideas to reduce consumption?
Maybe taxing jet fuel $2.00 a gallon. :-)
And giving tax breaks on bicycle purchases!!

What is the worst use of fuel?

Tax luxury motor homes, private jets, Arnold's Hummers, 5,000 sq ft homes.

[blm]

27. That's a huge point that gets avoided by the corporate media.

.

[TayTay]

22. I don't like this. It is not a solution, but a quick fix

It doesn't solve anything and it sets a bad precedent of letting the main issue of price gouging by the oil companies become a tax issue.

I don't want to sign for this one.

[blm]

26. Why use bandaids when serious surgery is called for?

.

[Clarkie1]

18. Isn't this essentially the same thing Bush is proposing? n/t

[lostinacause]

23. No it isn't Kerry's plan includes removal of the tax break.

This is good as there is no economic justification for giving the oil companies a tax break when they prices are high.

Beyond that the "investigations" might be conducted in a different way.

[blm]

25. You think BUSH would raise taxes on his OIL COMPANY BUDDIES????

.

[L. Coyote]

21. Environmental Rules Impede Refinery Profits.

"Bush ordered a temporary suspension of all environmental rules for gas, to make it easier for oil refiners to meet demand and possibly dampen soaring prices..."

It should read:

"Bush, taking advantageous of soaring gas prices and public concerns, ordered a temporary suspension of all environmental rules for gas to make oil refineries more profitable. By bundling this long-sought favor for refineries (and the slam to the environment) with temporarily suspending government purchase of crude oil for the emergency reserve, no attention was given to how the refineries will profit and the placated public thought he was doing consumers a favor."

[lostinacause]

24. In the short run this does lead to higher profits. In the long run

reducing environmental regulations may lead to lower profits and a lower price because of increased competition. Even though this leads to a higher price it also leads to greater environmental damages and imposes other costs on citizens.

In claiming that temporarily reducing standards will reduce price, Bush is technically correct, though any price reduction will be small relative to the increased emissions.