Why does it seem that every s0-called energy bill actually is about restrictions and taxes, but barely about increase energy production and means? Witness
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will unveil as early as Monday a slimmed-down energy bill seeking to make offshore drilling safer and convert trucks to run on domestic natural gas.
The full Senate could begin consideration of Reid’s bill on Tuesday and Democrats would like to pass it by the early part of the following week.
Certainly, there are provisions for increasing energy production, right?
The narrowed-down bill would hold BP Plc accountable for the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and seek to prevent similar disasters, Reid said last week.
We need an energy bill for that?
It will very likely include provisions to force companies to dole out more money to cover the costs of oil spills. The liability cap, which is currently $75 million, will likely be raised to $10 billion or more. One Senate committee passed a bill last month to lift all caps on liabilities.
Provisions to increase nuclear, solar, wind, and water power, among others, certainly shows up somewhere, right?
Analyst Kevin Book of ClearView Energy Partners LLC, said he expects the energy efficiency measure known as Home Star to include $5 billion in incentives for plugging window leaks and insulating attics.
Not yet.
To pay for these measures, lawmakers may consider raising taxes on the oil and gas industry.
“One possibility would be to raise the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund tax from 8 cents per barrel to 49 cents per barrel, which would raise approximately $18 billion,” said analyst Whitney Stanco of the Washington Research Group.
And that is the ending. We may have to wait for the full bill to see the details, yet, one would think Reuters, or some other news story, would include something about increasing energy production. Now, the increase in taxes may just be conjecture, but, that is an interesting and specific bit of guesswork. Guess who would pay for that 6x increase?
Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU
Teach when the tax goes up 49 cents on a 44 gallon barrel of oil the at works out to what 1 cent per gallon ? If you can’t afford that than better think about buying a bicycle.
Our resident troll opines:
Teach when the tax goes up 49 cents on a 44 gallon barrel of oil the at works out to what 1 cent per gallon ? If you can’t afford that than better think about buying a bicycle.
Reid isn’t proposing this tax, some think tank guy says that is one way of raising the money.
That won’t happen because we all know that Obama won’t raise taxes. (sarcasm off)
Ryan again misses the mark. The fact of the matter is that once again Reid and the administration are trying to expand the Federal government. The Home Star program has a number attached to the cost of the incentives, but it has no number attached to the cost of administering the program and has no federal agency tapped to administer it. Reid has said that several agencies will be tasked to handle the program but won’t say which agencies or the cost of administration.
Reid wants to retroactively hit BP with more fines and liability, even though such actions are unConsitutional.
Tell ya what Ryan, if you eat the tax on fuel as you hypocritically drive your polluting machine, that will be fine. But we all know that when you pay more for fuel to deliver goods, that cost gets passed down to the consumer, who gets hit twice – once on the cost of the goods and once on fuel for their vehicle.
It is typical of you to demand that others do what you will not.
GC,
Has John Ryan ever told you not to drive a car?
Has John Ryan ever told you not to drive a car?
Directly, no. Indirectly, yes.
Okay, then I have a few more questions. For GC, what did he say that made you think you should not drive a car? And for John Ryan, have you ever intended to give the impression that GC, or anyone else, should not drive a car?
Also, have I ever told anyone here not to drive a car?
For GC, what did he say that made you think you should not drive a car?
You have once again skipped off the mark and onto something else.
Sorry. Not playing this time.
I think it is EXTREMELY relevant and important to determine whether you have any right to call John Ryan or myself a hypocrite for driving a car! Teach and others here also continue to peddle this sophomoric straw man, despite having been called out on it consistently. So I ask AGAIN:
What has ANYONE here said to you to make you believe that you shouldn’t be driving a car. Or, could it be that you’re making more %#@! up?!
A little oversimplification and generalization, anyone? How about a big fat straw man fallacy?
I think it is EXTREMELY relevant and important to determine whether you have any right to call John Ryan or myself a hypocrite for driving a car!
Nice shift of the goalposts.
A little oversimplification and generalization, anyone? How about a big fat straw man fallacy?
Well, at least you realize what you are doing. The question is are you going to correct it?
reasic / bunny, you are hypocrit just by the fact that you Exist.