Anyone see the guy on NBC predict 6 dollar gas by end of summer? Another guy thinks it will be double digits within 2-4 years. At 2 dollars govt didnt care, at 3 dollars, the govt said it will come down to 2 again soon or close to it, at 4 dollars the govt is starting to get concerned. At 5-6 dollars the govt is going to have a serious problem with the American people backlashing. Once we get to 5 and edge past it I could see mass rioting and break out.

 

I agree 100%.

Anyone see the guy on NBC predict 6 dollar gas by end of summer? Another guy thinks it will be double digits within 2-4 years. At 2 dollars govt didnt care, at 3 dollars, the govt said it will come down to 2 again soon or close to it, at 4 dollars the govt is starting to get concerned. At 5-6 dollars the govt is going to have a serious problem with the American people backlashing. Once we get to 5 and edge past it I could see mass rioting break out.

 

Totally agree. It won't be a pretty sight. Something better be done soon. What are people going to due when cold weather hits us? They are going to freeze to death because they can't afford gas/oil to heat. So I guess since we won't be able to afford to drive our vehicles, we stay at home and freeze to death. Pretty depressing and unfortunate for those that it will effect. The future doesn't look good at this point.

Who makes more off a gallon of gasoline, big oil or the government?

According to New York Senator Charles Schumer, an increase of 1 million barrels a day on the market would drop the price of gasoline by more than 62 cents. Ironically, if Bill Clinton had signed an energy bill to allow drilling in ANWR, which Sen. Schumer opposes, ANWR would be producing 1 million barrels of oil per day.

 

In other words, if Schumer is correct, we are paying more than 62 cents extra per gallon because Democrats have been successful in blocking ANWR drilling.

Dem and Rep both are the problem if one thinks it is all of one party who is to blame then they got you right where they want you.

Dem and Rep both are the problem if one thinks it is all of one party who is to blame then they got you right where they want you.

Republicans sent a bill to Clinton's desk to open ANWR for drilling. Clinton vetoed it. Democrats now cry that it would take ten years to develop the reserves in ANWR, so it is not a solution to our current problem. We are seeing the results of Democrats' long term obstruction of increasing domestic production.

 

Of course, Democrats have had a handful of Republican allies in their war on big oil, including John McCain. But the fight against ANWR drilling has been waged almost exclusively by one party - the Democratic Party.

Republicans sent a bill to Clinton's desk to open ANWR for drilling. Clinton vetoed it. Democrats now cry that it would take ten years to develop the reserves in ANWR, so it is not a solution to our current problem. We are seeing the results of Democrats' long term obstruction of increasing domestic production.

 

Of course, Democrats have had a handful of Republican allies in their war on big oil, including John McCain. But the fight against ANWR drilling has been waged almost exclusively by one party - the Democratic Party.

 

 

True. And if the Republicans were that committed and far sighted they would have brought the same bill to Bush's desk in 2001 and it would have been signed. The GOP had their chance to do the job and chose not to as well.

True. And if the Republicans were that committed and far sighted they would have brought the same bill to Bush's desk in 2001 and it would have been signed. The GOP had their chance to do the job and chose not to as well.

Republicans' margins in the Senate shrunk and they were unable to get a bill to the floor for a vote. I do fault the GOP for not eliminating the 60 vote cloture rule for all votes. If a bill or a nomination has the support of the majority of US Senators, then it should be voted upon regardless of which party holds the majority.

Republicans' margins in the Senate shrunk and they were unable to get a bill to the floor for a vote. I do fault the GOP for not eliminating the 60 vote cloture rule for all votes. If a bill or a nomination has the support of the majority of US Senators, then it should be voted upon regardless of which party holds the majority.

 

I thought the proposal came up again in 2005 but was blocked by Moderate Republicans, not Democrats.

Moderate Republicans are not really Republicans are they Ace?

I thought the proposal came up again in 2005 but was blocked by Moderate Republicans, not Democrats.

Did any Democrats support the proposal? Did nearly all Republicans support it?

 

My point is a valid one. Both parties may share the blame for not developing ANWR, but the lion's share of the blame belongs to Democrats. With both McCain and Obama opposed to drilling, nothing is likely to happen for at least four years, regardless of how high gasoline prices rise.

Who makes more off a gallon of gasoline, big oil or the government?

The Energy Information Administration breaks your cost down this way:

 

	Apr-08	Apr-07	Apr-06
Retail Price	$3.46	$2.85	$1.80
Refining	10%	28.10%	22.00%
Dist & Mkt	5.80%	7.60%	9.90%
Taxes	11.50%	14.00%	23.40%
Crude oil	72.70%	50.30%	44.60%

I was mistaken, in part, about why drilling in ANWR has not been sent to President Bush for approval. The Senate actually passed the bill in 2005. From Wikipedia, you can draw your own conclusions about which party deserves most of the blame:

 

In December 2000, a Coast Guard report charged Alyeska with repeated safety violations at a Valdez terminal, causing prices to jump again. The administration of U.S. President George W. Bush pushed to perform exploratory drilling for oil and gas in and around the refuge. The House of Representatives voted in mid-2000 to allow drilling. In April 2002, the Senate rejected it.

 

Arctic Refuge drilling was again approved by the House of Representatives as part of the Energy Bill on April 21, 2005,[7] but the Arctic Refuge provision was later removed by the House-Senate conference committee. The Senate passed Arctic Refuge drilling on March 16, 2005 as part of the federal budget resolution for fiscal year 2006.[8] That Arctic Refuge provision was removed during the reconciliation process, due to Democrats in the House of Representatives who signed a letter stating they would oppose any version of the budget that had Arctic Refuge drilling in it.[9]

 

On December 15, 2005, Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) attached an Arctic Refuge drilling amendment to the annual defense appropriations bill. A group of Democratic Senators led a successful filibustering of the bill on December 21, 2005, and the language was subsequently removed from the bill.[10] - more

The Energy Information Administration breaks your cost down this way:

 

	Apr-08	Apr-07	Apr-06
Retail Price	$3.46	$2.85	$1.80
Refining	10%	28.10%	22.00%
Dist & Mkt	5.80%	7.60%	9.90%
Taxes	11.50%	14.00%	23.40%
Crude oil	72.70%	50.30%	44.60%

 

 

Where does the percentage of profit come from?

Republicans sent a bill to Clinton's desk to open ANWR for drilling. Clinton vetoed it. Democrats now cry that it would take ten years to develop the reserves in ANWR, so it is not a solution to our current problem. We are seeing the results of Democrats' long term obstruction of increasing domestic production.

 

Of course, Democrats have had a handful of Republican allies in their war on big oil, including John McCain. But the fight against ANWR drilling has been waged almost exclusively by one party - the Democratic Party.

 

While you are right on all topics about the dems and blocking ANWR... McCains big strategy is to stop tapping the reserve year round, you gotta admit that won't get us anywhere.