The GOP Payroll Tax Cut/UI Extension Proposal

“will they finally hold the line on their own promises this time, or will they pass all the extensions without the reforms, riders, and spending offsets? This package must be the final offer.”

Earlier today, House Republican leaders unveiled their package deal to extend the payroll tax and unemployment benefits for another year and to continue Medicare ‘doc fix’ for another two years.

While bipartisan passage of the payroll tax cut and doc fix were a forgone conclusion, the real issues for conservatives were the UI extension and the spending cuts.  Unfortunately, they are acquiescing to another extension, albeit with some reforms.
The major reforms include mandatory drug testing and participation in reemployment services as a condition for receiving benefits.  Those receiving the 99 weeks of UI will gradually be reduced to 79, and then finally 59 weeks.  Also, states would be authorized to use some of the funds for job training programs.  The UI component of the bill falls short of transformational reform, but at least it precludes 99 weeks from becoming the standard duration of payments.

In order to ameliorate yet another welfare extension for conservative members, two more sweeteners were added: 1) A law to force Obama’s hand on the Keystone Pipeline 2) A provision that would keep illegal immigrants from receiving the refundable portion of the Child Tax Credit, by requiring that recipients provide a valid SSN.  This would save $10 billion over 10 years, according the GOP sources [more background on that issue here].  The bill also has a provision to reduce Clean Air Act regulations for industrial boilers.

The proposal, which includes the aforementioned three extensions, will cost about $200 billion.  Republicans say they will pay for it with the following reforms, many of which were adopted from the Senate Republican proposal:

Anti-Pipeline Dave Heineman Should Not Run for Senate in Nebraska

One of the biggest political and policy winners for Republicans is their strong support for expeditious approval of the Keystone Pipeline.  Their unified support for this propitious project has provided voters with a sharp contrast to Obama’s casual disregard for private-sector job creation and cheap energy for consumers.  Hence, it is a no-brainer that the pipeline issue should be used as a rallying cry for all Republicans running for elected office in 2012.

In that vein, Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman would be wise to remain in Lincoln, and discard any aspirations to run for Senate.

Toward the end of the summer, amidst pressure from members of his own administration, Obama was on the verge of signing off on the deal.  The State Department had published yet another favorable environmental impact study, and even Energy Secretary Steven Chu seemed to concede that opposition to the pipeline was indefensible.  But then came the vociferous protestations from Obama’s base; greenies, hippies, Hollywood bimbos, and….Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman.

Late in August, the Nebraska Republican penned a letter to the President and Secretary of State requesting that they deny the permit for the pipeline.  Heineman stated that he objected to the route of the pipeline for fear that an oil spill would affect that Ogallala Aquifer – an underground water table in western Nebraska.

Never mind that unlike oil tankers, pipelines are much safer, and in the rare event of a spill, the affected area is measured in tens of feet, not thousands.  Never mind that the EPA and the State Department saw no concern with the proposed route of the pipeline.  Disregard the fact that the only legitimate threat to the water supply comes from the ethanol production that is so blithely promoted by Nebraska’s Republicans, without any concern for the Ogallala Aquifer.  Dave Heineman felt that he must convene a special session of the legislature and block the pipeline, granting Obama the vital bipartisan cover he needed to scuttle the project.

Two months later, buoyed by Republican Heineman’s moral support, Obama suspended the pipeline until after the 2012 elections.  As they say, the rest is history.

Now, Senators Cornyn and McConnell are imploring the governor to seek the Republican nomination in the Senate race against Ben Nelson.

Let’s not muddle our unified message on energy policy by electing the Keystone Pipeline slayer to the Senate?

The RSC Jobs Plan: Jobs Through Growth

One of the more positive ancillary benefits of this presidential primary season is the newfound focus on taxation, regulation, and energy production.  The prominence of the presidential election has helped jumpstart a vital discourse on long-term reforms for those three policies.

The RSC, which is the most respected conservative group within Congress, has proposed a jobs growth plan today, which seeks to achieve those reforms, albeit in a more inclusive way than some of the proposals from presidential candidates, like Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, and Herman Cain.  It appears that they are seeking changes to the tax and regulatory system that have already received broad support within the Republican party (and some lip service from Democrats, in regard to certain provisions), and are bundling them into one package, “The Jobs Through Growth Act.”

Here are some of the major provisions of the proposal:

The Myth that Oil Companies Pay No Taxes

The media has widely disseminated a fallacious notion that oil companies use so many loopholes that they barely pay any taxes.  Well, Investor's Business Daily has a nice graphic showing the effective tax rates of some major companies in the U.S.  It turns out that it is Obama's cronies at General Electric that get away with all of the loopholes.

As you can see, ExxonMobile pays an effective rate of 45%, while GE enjoys a paltry 7.4% rate.  This is why we must flatten out the corporate tax rate to one low and fair number.

Oil Will be the Future of Our Energy Production

While our government is pouring billions of dollars into impotent energy sources of corrupt Solar venture socialists, there are real enturopaners that are working on making American the Saudi Arabia of both oil and natural gas.  They are developing and revolutionizing fracking on the vast Bakken fields in North Dakota.  Stephen Moore put out a great article in the Weekend edition of the WSJ, detailing the success of Harald Hamm in developing the Bakken fields.

In the article, he references a conversation Mr. Hamm had with the president.  Here is how it went:

When it was Mr. Hamm's turn to talk briefly with President Obama, "I told him of the revolution in the oil and gas industry and how we have the capacity to produce enough oil to enable America to replace OPEC. I wanted to make sure he knew about this."
The president's reaction? "He turned to me and said, 'Oil and gas will be important for the next few years. But we need to go on to green and alternative energy. [Energy] Secretary [Steven] Chu has assured me that within five years, we can have a battery developed that will make a car with the equivalent of 130 miles per gallon.'" Mr. Hamm holds his head in his hands and says, "Even if you believed that, why would you want to stop oil and gas development? It was pretty disappointing."
Washington keeps "sticking a regulatory boot at our necks and then turns around and asks: 'Why aren't you creating more jobs,'" he says. He roils at the Interior Department delays of months and sometimes years to get permits for drilling. "These delays kill projects," he says. Even the Securities and Exchange Commission is now tightening the screws on the oil industry, requiring companies like Continental to report their production and federal royalties on thousands of individual leases under the Sarbanes-Oxley accounting rules. "I could go to jail because a local operator misreported the production in the field," he says.

It is men like Harold Hamm who truly embody the American spirit.  They don't receive any venture socialism monies from the government, yet the produce more than any of the corporate cronies could ever wish to accomplish.  Imagine how much more they could do if government would stop obstructing oil production.

Nebraska Gov. Heineman to the Left of Obama Administration on Keystone Pipeline

Nebraska Republicans repeating talking points from Al Gore and Hollywood airheads

After three years of cumbersome red tape, environmental impact studies, and endless litigation, the Canadian Keystone KL Pipeline extension project is close to obtaining final approval from the State Department.  This $7 billion pipeline project, when completed, would transport over 700,000 barrels of oil per day from the Canadian tar sands in northeast Alberta to the hungry oil refineries on the Texas Gulf coast.  This project, along with current imports, would deliver 10% of our energy needs from our most friendly ally, by using the safest, most efficient means of transportation; a pipeline.

Due to the international scope of this project, the State Department was required to sign off on its final approval.  Despite the issuance of two favorable impact studies from the State Department, the EPA had refused to issue the requisite permits for this 1,800-mile pipeline – an endeavor that would create close to 120,000 primary and secondary jobs and generate $5.2 billion in property tax revenue for Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas.

Finally, amidst growing pressure from House Republicans, and the threat from TransCanada Corp. to take their business to – you guessed it – China, the administration appeared to be backing down.  Last Friday, the State Department published their revised environmental impact study to satisfy the EPA’s new demands for even more scrutiny.  The report concluded once again that the pipeline would have “no significant impact” on local environmental resources.  They also astutely observed that “if the proposed Project is not implemented, Canadian producers would seek alternative transportation systems to move oil to markets other than the U.S.”  Even ultra-greenie Energy Secretary Steven Chu appeared to support the project, noting that “it’s certainly true that having Canada as a supplier of our oil is much more comforting than to have other countries supply our oil,”  and that the technology for oil sand extraction is “improving dramatically.” [video here]

Now, as the public ways in during the final 90 days prior to the project’s approval, environmental groups and Hollywood figures are having a meltdown.  Sadly, it appears that Republican Governor Dave Heineman and several other Nebraska GOPers are throwing in with them.

Let's Replace EPA With Employment Protection Agency

We must link the budget crisis with job creation and the cost of living.

When members of Congress return to Washington in September, they must confront the next budget challenge; a Continuing Resolution for FY 2012.  While the top line discretionary spending level has already been agreed upon through the debt ceiling agreement, the specific levels of funding for each department and agency are still up for debate (or closed-door negotiations, in this case).  Unfortunately, instead of prudently analyzing each line item of the budget through individual appropriations bills, as prescribed by the 1974 budget act, Congress will be forced to impetuously consider the entire federal budget in one bill.  There is one line item that should not be disregarded throughout the process; cutting down the EPA.

Obama and his socialist minions at the EPA intuitively understand that energy production in general, and fossil fuels, in particular, serve as the lifeblood of a free and prosperous economy.  This is why they have launched an inexorable war against our energy producers.  By disrupting our energy productivity, and replacing it with no-growth, impotent green energy sources, Obama plans not only to destroy thousands of jobs within the energy sector, but millions of jobs throughout every facet of the economy – jobs that are so reliant on reliable and cheap energy. The only jobs that will be sparred are the ones of his green corporate cronies, such as Johnson Controls, the electric car battery manufacturer in Michigan that was paid a visit by Obama on Thursday.

Let's review some of the most recent sinister attempts by the EPA to discomfit our energy producers, kill jobs, and raise the cost of living on the very objects of their reprehensible class warfare.

The EPA has considerably diminished the volume of oil production in Alaska over the past view years.  They are refusing to issue permits for drilling on and offshore, while encumbering the process with unrealistic regulations.  These actions have triggered an alarming decrease in the flow of oil through the Alaska pipeline, threatening its future sustainability.  Additionally, the EPA has delayed the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline for years, costing us thousands of jobs, cheap imports of oil-sands oil from our Canadian friends, and much-needed revenue to some heartland states.

What about natural gas?  Even though shale fracking for natural gas has produced an unprecedented amount of jobs in North Dakota and Texas, while producing cheap energy for our hungry markets, EPA Director Lisa Jackson is seeking to destroy it.  She is now collaborating with environmental extremists to terminate this revolutionary means of energy exploration indefinitely.

It’s Time for a Balanced Approach to Deficits and Green Energy

We should raise revenue from green energy - to the extent that it exists.

The Democrats think the American people are stupid.  Throughout the debt ceiling imbroglio, Obama and every single elected Democrat have regurgitated their talking points about a balanced solution to the debt crisis.  They have insulted the intelligence of every voter by intimating that the budget can be balanced by eliminating a few tax credits.  No, they don’t want to talk about the tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities to Medicare and Social Security.  They refuse to confront the ballooning cost of all the welfare programs.  The only thing they want to discuss is eliminating a few tax credits for oil companies and corporate jets.

In May, the Senate took up a bill to eliminate $2 billion worth of tax credits for the gas and oil industry.  Let’s overlook their fallacious charges that these are unique handouts to the industry – and treat them as if they are expenditures.  We are slated to spend over $3.7 trillion this year, yet the Democrats are obsessing over $2 billion in tax credits.  Here are some of the major expenditures for this fiscal year, including the so-called handouts to big oil (in billions):


Yes, these tax credits barely register among our major expenses.

During the debate over the oil tax credits, Democrats tossed around the $21 billion figure that we will supposedly gain from increased revenues, if these credits are eliminated.  Again, let’s assume they are correct.  Using a 10-year budget frame, we are expected to spend another $46 trillion.  Democrats claim that their bill would have saved us $21 billion over 10 years.  That amounts to .00045% of our estimated outlays.

What about the much beleaguered corporate jet tax deduction?  That would save $3 billion over ten years!
So in the spirit of bipartisanship, let’s forge a deficit reduction deal that will truly achieve balance.  Since the Democrats hold these tax loopholes on the same level as the largest expenditures, let’s agree to terminate them.  In return for our acquiescence to “revenue increases,” they must accede to our demands for free market healthcare reform, private Social Security accounts, and welfare reform.

Nothing Evinces Hypocrisy More than Obama's Oil Policy

President Obama has asserted ad nauseam that expanding oil drilling would not affect the price of oil and generate price relief at the gas pump.  He has scoffed at the 'drill, baby, drill' plan, denouncing it as insufficient in dealing with our "long-term" energy needs.  Now that his reelection prospects are beginning to wither, Obama is undergoing a foxhole conversion and easing his aversion to that "addictive" black substance.  Or, so it seems.

Last Thursday, after several weeks of steady decline in the price of oil, and following secret meetings with the Saudis, Obama had an epiphany.  Did he suddenly accede to calls for expediting drilling in the Gulf and in Alaska?  Did he agree to lift the permitorium on drilling in 97% of the Outer Continental Shelf?  Not a chance.  Instead, his Energy Secretary announced the release of 30 million barrels of oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR), in conjunction with a 30-million-barrel release from other countries within the International Energy Agency (IEA).  The total release will be 60 million barrels, proceeding at a rate of 2 million barrels per day (bpd) for a month.

The administration cited the loss of 1.5 million bpd from cessation of production in Libya as rationale for this unprecedented move.  The problem is that the Libyan disruption occurred four months ago, inducing a sharp spike in the price of oil at the time.  Obama categorically rejected the idea of tapping the SPR to mitigate the upward trajectory in oil prices, even as the price of gasoline soared over the dreaded $4 mark.  Now that gas prices have declined over 40 cents and are trending down, due in part to the end of QE2, Obama decided that we are in an energy crisis to the degree that it warrants a release of the SPR!

While the steady drop in oil prices should clearly preclude any justification for the release, Obama felt that the precipitous drop in his approval ratings is tantamount to a national emergency.  What he lacks in perspicacity of judgment regarding economics, he compensates with cognizance of polling reports.

Obama Administration Continues its Anti-Drilling Chicanery in Alaska

A case of good cop/bad cop between unaccountable bureaucrats.

Last month, during his weekly radio address, Barack Obama announced his plans to drill in NPR-A.  No-he wasn't planning to eviscerate his genuflecting media outlet; he was promising to issue more land leases in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska.

Like most of his capricious gestures to conservative policy initiatives, this promise was vapid of substance and lacking accountability.  He knew all along that his unelected bureaucrats at the DOI and EPA would filibuster every step of the leasing process indefinitely.  It was essentially an administrative pocket veto to preempt any drilling proposals in Alaska.  As such, it is not surprising to hear that his cohorts in these departments are bailing him out of his duplicitous promise. 

This 23-million-acre reserve lies to the west of the smaller Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) on the Alaska North Slope.  Although this wilderness, owned by the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management, was designated in 1976 for the expressed purpose of exploring for oil and gas, it was ostensibly closed to drilling until 1998.  Moreover, environmental lawsuits and bureaucratic obduracy have prevented a single oil well from being developed for the past 13 years.

Accordingly, there was no reason to believe that Obama, the most anti-energy president of all time, would turn NPR-A into a catalyst for drill, baby, drill.  When Obama announced his new leasing policies, I noted that Obama's promise to drill in Alaska was yet "another attempt at subterfuge for the purpose of tamping down the outrage toward his job-killing, anti-growth policies", and that he would rely on his minions at the EPA to "encumber any meaningful drilling policies with endless environmental impact studies."

Well, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that this is exactly what is now occurring in the NPR-A.  The EPA and the Army Corp of Engineers are denying ConocoPhilips a permit to build a bridge, a gravel road, and a pipeline from their proposed drilling sight in the NPR.  To make matters worse, any drilling project in the Arctic requires approval by the EPA.  This has created bureaucratic friction, impelling multiple agencies to impose competing mandates on the drilling applicants:

Shale Boom in Texas Providing Thousands of Jobs

Everything is bigger in Texas, including job growth and energy production.  Unlike in Maryland, where the liberal politicians capriciously impound our natural resources, Texans embrace their shale reserves.  Over the past year, oil exploration has discovered gargantuan reserves of oil shale in the south Texas formation known as Eagle Ford.  Drilling experts believe that hydraulic fracturing will allow the oil companies to drill up to 3,000 wells this year, unleashing enough oil flow to raise our national output in a meaningful way.  Additionally, the Houston Chronicle reports that last year, the Eagle Ford shale generated 6,800 jobs and paid $311 million in jobs and salaries.  That's real job creation; Texas style.

Unfortunately, we must be vigilante of the ever intrusive eco-marxists at the EPA.  They already have a vendetta against Texas and would certainly jump at the opportunity to find fault in the drilling technology.  The New York Times is already peddling the unfounded allegations that shale fracking causes water pollution:

"As evidence mounts that fracking poses risks to water supplies, the federal government and regulators in various states are considering tighter regulations on it." 

There is only one problem with this supposition; evidence of water pollution simply doesn't exist.  The writers at the NYT ought to watch this video of the EPA Director admitting at a congressional hearing that there is no evidence that hydraulic fracking is inimical to our water supplies:

Pollution Claims About Fracking False, Says ...EPA!

One of the most effective and revolutionary ways of meeting our energy needs is the extraction of oil from shale rocks through a process called hydraulic fracking.  A massive landmass cutting through western Pennsylvania, Maryland, and West Virginia, called the Marcellus Formation, is home to one of the riches reserves of oil shale in the country.  Unfortunately, the Maryland Democrat politicians have done everything in their power to scuttle attempts to extract oil through shale fracturing in western Maryland.

To make matters worse, Attorney General Doug Gansler filed a lawsuit against a shale company in Pennsylvania, accusing the oil exploration company of polluting Maryland's waterways through the use of chemicals during the fracking procedure.  The allegation of water pollution has been used throughout the country in order to preclude any chance that shale will succeed as a viable energy source.

Well, it turns out that even the consummate eco-fascist, EPA Director Lisa Jackson, agrees that the environmental perils of shale fracking are completely contrived.  At a Government Oversight Committee hearing, Jackson said, “I’m not aware of any proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water, although there are investigations ongoing.” (Hat Tip: Hot Air)

Keep destroying our energy, prosperity, and liberty-liberals!

Let's Nail Democrats on Their Duplicity with Energy Subsidies

Close down the DOE and eliminate all energy 'tax cuts' for the (green) rich in one great big compromise.

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."~ President Ronald Reagan

Democrats (and the Maine Republicans ladies) are agog to demonize oil companies and punish them with punitive tax increases.  Their effort was defeat yesterday 52-48, but they plan to continue wasting time on it today.  Aside for the fact that a punitive tax is unconstitutional, and a tax originating in the Senate is...also unconstitutional, the Democrats are providing Republicans with the ammo to eradicate their green empire of corporate cronyism once and for all.

Harry Reid and Bob Menendez are claiming that profitable oil companies don't need subsidies, and the repeal of those tax credits, which they call subsidies, will save us $20 billion over 10 years.  Let's ignore the fact that the $4 billion annual tax credits are near universal deductions which are afforded to almost every other industry.  We'll agree to use the spurious "oil subsidies" label for the purpose of comparing similar terms.  But if they want to discuss the repeal of energy subsidies, that is a dialogue we should embrace. 

If logic dictates that we should cut subsidies to a profitable industry which delivers a product that is the lifeblood of our prosperity, shouldn't we cut the billions in subsidies to industries that produce ineffectual energy that barely registers on our energy consumption map?  If it is condign to eliminate $4 billion in tax credits for an industry that brings in hundreds of billions in taxes and royalties, shouldn't we eliminate the subsidies for wind, solar, and ethanol, which are a net loss for the treasury and consumer alike?

Instead of Senate Republicans introducing harmful amendments which accept the Democrats' premise and mandate onerous drilling regulations and liabilities, they should utilize Democrats' hypocrisy and offer real consequential amendments.  In that spirit,  I propose a quintessential Washington style compromise and call for the Bipartisan Comprehensive Energy Reform Act of 2011.  It would end all tax credits for the oil and gas industry.  But, you know what?  It would eliminate all subsidies, mandates, and (or) tariffs for wind, solar, and ethanol (incorporating the goals of Mike Pompeo's H.Res. 267).  In addition, it would completely abolish the Department of Energy (DOE), along with the ethanol programs at the USDA.  How's that for a compromise?

Obama's Oil Drilling Subterfuge

We've been here before.

Many liberals in the media are expressing shock over Obama's apparent willingness to increase oil production.  We all know that he is full of ..., I mean ethanol, and they do too.

Those of you who were befuddled at the news that Obama will 'expand drilling' in Alaska are not missing anything.  Obama has pulled this political chicanery a number of times.  Whenever a specific proposal that he so adamantly opposes becomes too popular to ignore, he announces his support for it by promising to implement inconsequential reforms.  To that end, he declared during his Saturday radio address that he is "directing the Department of Interior to conduct annual lease sales in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve, while respecting sensitive areas, and to speed up the evaluation of oil and gas resources in the mid and south Atlantic".

So we are to believe that the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas and ANWR, all of which are impounded from drilling leases by the administration, are more sensitive than Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve?  Caribou, baby, Caribou in ANWR; drill, baby, drill in ANPR?  Think again.

Here is the report from The Hill:

More Residual Effects of Obama's Anti-Oil Policies

The depletion of our oil production is corroding the Alaska pipeline and widening the trade deficit.

Obama's oil free utopia is precipitating yet more mayhem on our economy.  Today, two major news stories concerning our lack of oil production highlight just how profoundly oil affects our economy.

The first story concerns the Trans Alaska Pipeline.  The pipeline employs 2,000 workers and delivers 11% of our domestically produced oil to the other states.  During its early years, when we weren't impounding the oil in Alaska, the pipeline transported 2 million barrels of oil per day.  Now, less than a third of that volume flows through the pipeline, with the trajectory spiraling sharply downward.  The Wall Street Journal reported today that there is growing concern about the adverse effects of decreasing oil flow on the pipeline itself:

Now, dwindling oil production along Alaska's northern edge means the pipeline carries less than one-third the volume it once did—and the crude takes five times as long to get to its destination.
That leisurely flow means the oil is above ground longer and more exposed to Alaska's frigid weather; the crude sometimes arrives chilled to 40 degrees. As the flow and temperature continue to drop, experts say the risks of a clog or corrosion increase, as do the odds of ruptures and spills.

Unless a technological solution can be found, the arcane physics of crude flow may force the multibillion dollar, 48-inch-wide steel pipeline to shut down—and determine the fate of the largest oil field ever found in the U.S.
There's one other, seemingly simple fix: Add more oil.

Support Bob Latta's Comprehensive Energy Production Bill

The Republican Study Committee has struck again.  While Republican House leaders are tepidly tiptoeing around energy policy with an incremental approach, RSC Energy Task Force Chairman Bob Latta (R-OH) is pushing a comprehensive energy production bill.  The Consumer Relief for Pain at the Pump Act, H.R. 1777, would open up thousands of acres worth of drilling fields, extirpate onerous regulations from the backs of our energy producers, strike out at the heart of the domestic environmental legal defense fiscal terrorist community, expedite the oil refinery application process, and streamline the land leasing process.

This bill directly addresses all of the obstacles to oil, gas, and shale exploration; it would create thousands of real jobs, and reduce the cost of energy to consumers.  Being that oil is the lifeblood of the economy and is used for so many vital products and services, this bill would help reduce production and delivery costs of virtually every durable good, spawning unprecedented economic growth.  As an added bonus, it would eliminate many jobs of Democrat environmental agitators and oil rig-chasing attorneys.

Most importantly, this legislation would open up 2,000 acres of ANWR for development of its estimated 10 billion barrels of oil and 35 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.  This is something that other Republican leaders have abdicated in the face of visceral opposition from the left.  In light of record gas prices and other residual inflationary pains to consumers, this is not a time to go wobbly on ANWR.

Here are some of the key proposals in H.R. 1777 from Congressman Latta's press release:

CRS Report: U.S. is Leader in Fossil Fuel Resources

Oil, gas, and coal are the energy sources of the past, present, and future
While Obama continues his implacable war on fossil fuels and campaigns for impotent and unreliable energy sources, he incessantly condemns oil as 'the energy of the past'.  He is obviously referring to his self-fulfilling dream of eradicating oil from our economy; not the proven reality of our oil reserves.  According to the latest research by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), America has more proven reserves and undiscovered resources of gas, oil, and coal than any other country in the world.  Contrast that to the billions of dollars in special interest subsidies that have failed to ameliorate ineffectual 'alternative fuels' and it becomes quite obvious where the energy source of the future lies.

In an impassioned and timely floor speech this morning, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK.), an energy policy hero, elucidated the salient findings of the CRS report.  The report, which was initiated by Inhofe for the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, includes estimates from the Energy Information Administration, U.S. Geological Survey, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.  Here are some of the key points from the report and from Inhofe's research:

• While we only have 28 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, there are 135 billion additional barrels of undiscovered, yet recoverable, oil resources throughout our territory.  In other words, as a result of the war against drilling, we can only "prove" the existence of 18% of the total 163 billion barrels. This is because we can't officially prove the exact amount of fuel resources until we explore and drill them.  If we were to tap into our resources, we could cancel our imports from the Persian Gulf for 50 years, still meeting our energy needs.      

Parenthetically, the cessation of Libya's mere 1.7 million barrels of production per day has caused chaos in the global market.  Were we to pump our oil reserves at a similar rate, the oil would last for 263 years.  This would presumably have a commensurately positive effect on oil prices.

The Consequences of Obama's War on Oil are Dangerous

The charts shown above are from the latest short term energy outlook from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) and posted on the website of the House Natural Resources Committee.  The numbers speak for themselves.  Obama has depredated Gulf oil drilling and exploration, which in turn has forced us to import more oil from terrorist supporting countries.  The president will continue to articulate bald faced lies about the need to ween ourselves off foreign oil, but his war on domestic productivity continues to make us an utter dependent suckling of terrorist oil.  The next few weeks will be crucial for congressional Republicans and their opportunity to exhibit leadership on this issue.  They need to make a comprehensive energy production bill an immediate top priority on the House floor.