??? You remember that last week the Congress once again passed an energy bill giving tax incentives for wind, solar and other renewable fuels. Well right on cue the big oil lackeys in the Senate are howling bloody murder over the loss of tax incentives to the big oil companies. Last year they passed a almost identical bill that was threatened by veto and the Senate caved right in. Of course it doesn’t take much caving in when big oil has donated so much to some Senators. Plus we have their [big oil] best buddy in the White House. It’s not like he really cares about what is good for the country or its citizens. I knew right away how deeply he felt for the citizens in the country when he was so fast in getting to the gulf coast after Katrina. It’s not like he didn’t fly over it after he finished his vacation at the ranch. Probably even had the pilot tip the wingtip over a little in Air Force One so he could see the destruction a little better.

??? Anyhow about the energy bill. It is funded the same way – pay as you go – and that payment is the dropping of 17 billion dollars in tax credits for big oil. New investments in clean, non-fossil-fuel energy sources – need help until they become competitive with older, dirtier energy sources. It’s not like the oil companies need these tax breaks. They are rolling in money, posting the largest corporate earnings ever. The five biggest producers only made 145 billion in profits last year. If those arguments are not enough, we offer the Senate some words from the decider himself [President Bush]. In a 2005 address to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, Mr. Bush spoke forcefully of the need for an energy strategy that looked to the long term and emphasized conservation and renewable fuels. Of the oil and gas industry, he said pointedly: ?I will tell you with $55 oil we don?t need incentives to the oil and gas companies to explore. There are plenty of incentives. What we need is to put a strategy in place that will help this country over time become less dependent.? Even the most dim witted Senator should be able to see that a country that uses 20% of the worlds oil but only has 3% of its reserves can not drill its way to energy independence.

My question would be – If that was true at $55 a barrel, why is not it even more valid and urgent at $100 a barrel?

Leave a Reply