How politicians get mileage from gas prices

If there is one constant in American politics it is this: the price of gasoline is one of the most potent of all political issues.

When we fill 'er up, the price stares us in the face right there on the gas gauge.

Gas prices hinge on many factors, some of which Presidents can influence, some of which they can't - China's gigantic need for more and more oil, turmoil in the Middle East, even the weather to name three the president can't control.

Never the less, every candidate running for president blames the previous president if gas prices have gone up. Candidate Obama blamed George Bush, just as Republicans are now blaming President Obama.

Which is why I found a story in yesterday's New York Times so interesting. Russia is a different place, but the story reminded us just how different.

To get elected, Russia's newly-installed President Vladimir Putin made a lot of expensive campaign promises - big raises and fatter pensions for doctors, lawyers and the military, even bonuses for having more children.

We know about campaign promises. But here's what's different: Russia gets half its revenue from taxes on oil and gas.

What Putin didn't tell the people is that to pay for all his promises, he has to drive the price of oil UP, to $150 dollars a barrel - that's thirty dollars more than the current price.

Which made me wonder: If energy prices go DOWN in Russia, will the next Russian candidate blame President Putin?

Now there's a bumper sticker to think about.

[magnumdr]

They all lie. Thats how this Country seems to work today. Lies and broken promises!

[occupy_cbs]

nottblu: "To believe that a few pie in the sky green alternatives could easily and quickly replace the primary fuel of the globe is simply idiotic"



NOBODY ever stated that it would be either EASY or QUICK to replace our huge dependence on fossil fuels, but that certainly doesn't mean we haven't and shouldn't start moving in that direction in a needed transition away from dirty and finite fossil fuels.

As a matter of FACT, our consumption of OIL has decreased by 2 million barrels per day since 2006 -- more than we have ever gotten from the Gulf of Mexico per day in any year -- due to higher vehicle efficiency, hybrids and EV's, and RECORD PRODUCTION of biofuels.

Also, since our peak consumption in 2006, the U.S. has decreased its foreign OIL imports from 60% to 40% through less consumption and increased domestic OIL production as well as record biofuel production. The transition is already happening.

[occupy_cbs]

As far as your ridiculous climate change diatribe goes "nuttblu," I'll just let one of the biggest skeptics show you how silly you sound:

Climate Deniers Are Giving Us Skeptics a Bad Name
February 29, 2012
S. Fred Singer
American Thinker

Now let me turn to the deniers. One of their favorite arguments is that the greenhouse effect does not exist at all because it violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics -- one cannot transfer energy from a cold atmosphere to a warmer surface. It is surprising that this simplistic argument is used by physicists, and even by professors who teach thermodynamics. One can show them data of downwelling infrared radiation from CO2, water vapor, and clouds, which clearly impinge on the surface. But their minds are closed to any such evidence.

Then there is another group of deniers who accept the existence of the greenhouse effect but argue about the cause and effect of the observed increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide. One subgroup holds that CO2 levels were much higher in the 19th century, so there really hasn't been a long-term increase from human activities. They even believe in a conspiracy to suppress these facts. Another subgroup accepts that CO2 levels are increasing in the 20th century but claims that the source is release of dissolved CO2 from the warming ocean. In other words, they argue that oceans warm first, which then causes the CO2 increase. In fact, such a phenomenon is observed in the ice-core record, where sudden temperature increases precede increases in CO2. While this fact is a good argument against the story put forth by Al Gore, it does not apply to the 20th century: isotopic and other evidence destroys their case.

Another subgroup simply says that the concentration of atmospheric CO2 is so small that they can't see how it could possibly change global temperature. But laboratory data show that CO2 absorbs IR radiation very strongly. Another subgroup says that natural annual additions to atmospheric CO2 are many times greater than any human source; they ignore the natural sinks that have kept CO2 reasonably constant before humans started burning fossil fuels. Finally, there are the claims that major volcanic eruptions produce the equivalent of many years of human emission from fossil-fuel burning. To which I reply: OK, but show me a step increase in measured atmospheric CO2 related to a volcanic eruption.

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=3263

[occupy_cbs]

bmallen3: "His policies overall have driven our dependence on Middle East oil up"



Talk about clueless partisanship!

Our domestic oil production has steadily increased over the past 3 years while imported OIL has declined from 60% down to 40% -- which simply means our dependence on foreign oil has decreased just like our consumption.

You fox/rush parrots continue to spew LIES and DECEPTIONS!

[skyowner]

This sounds really good. What is the source of your information?

[skyowner]

Never mind, found it http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/foreign_oil_dependence.cfm

[bakkenironhorse]

retiredgustav you or so right and the oil being pumped from the bakken has been reduced, why because supply far exceeds demand.

[notyrants]

What Putin didn't tell the people is that to pay for all his promises, he has to drive the price of oil UP, to $150 dollars a barrel - that's thirty dollars more than the current price.
-------------------

What isn't pointed out is that in order for 38 year old russian billionaires to own 300 million dollar yachts, the people must sacrifice.

[nottblu]

Of course climate change is happening it has changed from warming to cooling for over 200,000 years based on ice core samples studied by scientists and climatologists. However one country as in the USA in a WORLD of emmission non-compliance does not equate to climate control. One of the primary EPA targeted greenhouse gases is carbon dioxide, billions of humans and mammals exhale tons per day, natural occurances like forest fires and volcanic erruptions produce more toxins than all vehilces driven in the US for a year. Every aspect of our economy including transpertation of all forms whether it is from land sea or air use fossil fuel, energy generation in multiple forms use fossil fuel, manufacturing as in the computer people use need fossil fuel for the process, all lubricants, all plastics require fossil fuel. The refueling infrastructure of america is gasoline and diesel, oil companies use fossil fuel to produce gasoline and diesel even the push for natural gas and propane are fossil fuels. To believe that a few pie in the sky green alternatives could easily and quickly replace the primary fuel of the globe is simply idiotic, it will require many decades if not centuries to make such a transition. Unfortunately Obama is using this issue as a smokescreen to cover his complete and utter failure in regards to his energy policy, fortunately for Obama based on some of the posts from his brainwashed followers there are truly blind believers who will continue to vote for him.

[nottblu]

dennis, typical response from someone who cannot refute the facts in my post, if all you have are assertions without supporting facts and insults based on my spelling then apparently you have no logical rebuttle.

[MaryWaterton]

Usually politicians have no control over the free market price of oil, although they are blamed for it. But in this case they are guilty. The dramatic rise in gas prices is a direct result of central bank money printing. Investors are trying to buy inflation-proof hard assets ... which includes oil.

[Martha12345]

I thought Bob was in a rest home. Guess he escaped again.

[IAMallone]

We import approximately 20% of our oil from Middle East. What will Obama's plan be when this supply gets disrupted threatening our national security? Throw another war and drain the country another notch?

We have the oil and gas resources to head off this potential disaster but they will take at least seven years to develop. Heading off disasters before they materialize is what leadership is all about.

Drilling may not lower the price of oil today but it could certainly keep prices from skyrocketing in the future when we could have the infrastructure already in place to take up the shortfall...if we had real leadership, that is!

[retiredgustav]

The refineries are not even running at full capacity, we are exporting refined oil products and we are drilling more now than we have in the last 30 years. Whether you like it or not the days of cheap oil are gone, regardless of who is president. We need to start weaning our selves away from petroleum . As long as oil is traded on the world market the speculator will be in control of our destiny.

[Molly-Pchr]

Oil companies think gauge is spelled with an "o" as in gouge.