New McCain Ad Blames Obama For High Gas Prices.

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
domestic drilling is a long run dead end, its just delaying the inevitable by a few months and a few cents.

How can you be so sure, I have seen "experts" on both sides disagree, and I have seen the Dem's proclaim the supply and demand have nothing to do with it.

Worst case scenario we keep some oil money at home.

I think the ultimate is sillyness is the democrats saying drilling at home will do nothing while pressuring OPEC to increase supplies lmao. You cant make this shit up.

Because OPEC increasing supplies is an immediate fix while drilling domestically in places that there is no infrastructure set up to do so would take years.

Why do such simple, obvious points have to be spelled out?

But I thought it wasnt a supply issue? You see where I am going with this? Dems wanting OPEC to increase supplies means their line about speculation is crap. They obviously dont believe it, why would you?

Long term OPEC can only do so much. Drilling at home is an obviously solution we can control. It has to be done unless you enjoy plopping armored corps down in the deserts around the world to fight for a scarce resource.

Alternative energy isnt going to happen tomorrow or within the next decade on any meaningful scale.

 

[Lemon law]

Right now, oil companies how leases to 18 million acres offshore they can drill on right now. And they have been sitting, and sitting, and sitting on those leases and not drilling.

Its pretty damn clear that they want the leases only so they can make sure no one drills on them as they dribble oil onto world markets. If we want to pop the oil bubble, getting Iraq up to even close to full production would do much to end the opec cartel that, like debeers, restricts supply.

But do not believe oil company hype for a second on Anwar, they say it can yield a million barrels a day, when the whole Alaskan North slope does not yield that anymore.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: lupi
Trying to curb speculation will do about as much to lower the current gas price as anything that BHO has announced. Unless there is a worldwide bans, any reenactment of US legislation will just have that 220 billion dollars of speculators jump from the Chicago commodity exchange back to London, or the one opening in HK, or whereever else they are traded.
.

If this were true then why didn't we see a runup in prices prior to the Enron Loop being enacted?

Capital for "investing" in oil is *HERE*, to move it overseas introduced a whole host of transaction costs and frictional issues that greatly reduce the profitability of the transactions. Why do you think they're using "dark pools" to invest in currently? It ain't because it's expensive. Once the pools are eliminated it will again become an expensive proposition to invest in these areas and prices will drop.

Additionally, do you think any other country wants to be host to the manipulation of their population for capitalistic purposes? They'll probably move even more quickly than we are to curb the problem.

Simply saying that in the absence of something that didn't exist 7 years ago, it would exist, is to ignore logic and reason.

Priority #1 needs to be eliminating this bullshit with speculation. Priority #2 needs to be drilling domestically. Priority #3 needs to be taking a large portion of those profits, incentivising them tax-wise to be re-invested in alternative energy.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Right now, oil companies how leases to 18 million acres offshore they can drill on right now. And they have been sitting, and sitting, and sitting on those leases and not drilling.

Its pretty damn clear that they want the leases only so they can make sure no one drills on them as they dribble oil onto world markets. If we want to pop the oil bubble, getting Iraq up to even close to full production would do much to end the opec cartel that, like debeers, restricts supply.

But do not believe oil company hype for a second on Anwar, they say it can yield a million barrels a day, when the whole Alaskan North slope does not yield that anymore.

Perhaps those 18 million acres dont have oil worth drilling? There are proved reserves in many of these off limit locations. And Ill believe what every study has concluded on ANWR. About 8-10 billion barrels of oil that we cant touch.

Just think if we would have been allowed to drill it a decade ago like congress wanted but Clinton didnt allow? 1-1.5 million more barrels a day on the market. More than Iraq can offer up now.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Long term OPEC can only do so much. Drilling at home is an obviously solution we can control. It has to be done unless you enjoy plopping armored corps down in the deserts around the world to fight for a scarce resource.

Ironic, isn't it, that those clamoring for us to abandon the ME are also bitching and whining about gas prices and oil. Talk about clueless...

Alternative energy isnt going to happen tomorrow or within the next decade on any meaningful scale.

I hope you're wrong on that.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Genx87
Long term OPEC can only do so much. Drilling at home is an obviously solution we can control. It has to be done unless you enjoy plopping armored corps down in the deserts around the world to fight for a scarce resource.

Ironic, isn't it, that those clamoring for us to abandon the ME are also bitching and whining about gas prices and oil. Talk about clueless...

Alternative energy isnt going to happen tomorrow or within the next decade on any meaningful scale.

I hope you're wrong on that.

I hope I am as well. But lets be realistic. One of the best potential cross over fuels(ethanol) will take at least a decade before our cumbersome govt stops sending money to the big ag lobby. In the mean time the worst possible candidate for ethanol(corn) will be the staple of our alternative energy push.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
domestic drilling is a long run dead end, its just delaying the inevitable by a few months and a few cents.

How can you be so sure, I have seen "experts" on both sides disagree, and I have seen the Dem's proclaim the supply and demand have nothing to do with it.

Worst case scenario we keep some oil money at home.

I think the ultimate is sillyness is the democrats saying drilling at home will do nothing while pressuring OPEC to increase supplies lmao. You cant make this shit up.

Because OPEC increasing supplies is an immediate fix while drilling domestically in places that there is no infrastructure set up to do so would take years.

Why do such simple, obvious points have to be spelled out?

But I thought it wasnt a supply issue? You see where I am going with this? Dems wanting OPEC to increase supplies means their line about speculation is crap. They obviously dont believe it, why would you?

Long term OPEC can only do so much. Drilling at home is an obviously solution we can control. It has to be done unless you enjoy plopping armored corps down in the deserts around the world to fight for a scarce resource.

Alternative energy isnt going to happen tomorrow or within the next decade on any meaningful scale.

I don't believe that there is a supply issue personally. I was just countering your point that drilling domestically would alleviate the need to ask OPEC to increase production based on the fact that the costs to build the infrastructure to do so and the time to market would end up being counter productive. and not help at all.

AltEng isn't going to happen as long as our current mindset is to find other places to drill for the current energy source either. I know that our current technological baseline includes oil as a source for harnessing AltEng to get to the consumer and we can't completely get away from it yet however, we aren't really going to have the incentive to get to that minimum usage baseline as long as we keep drilling to find more and more to feed the habit either.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Harvey


Somehow, I don't think McCain will get much help from Pickens or any of the other experts who have already told America all the domestic oil we could drill wouldn't do squat to gas prices, and it wouldn't be available for at least a decade.

So if a prominent oil man(or other "experts") would come out and say that it would reduce gas prices and back McCain's plan you would believe it?


You are sure about the 10 years for oil but how long before "alternative energy" is ready to go prime time?

That same oilman owns companies that invest in wind power and natural gas. Pickens plans may be altruistic on it's face, but have no doubts he's doing this for further profit. That said, I don't entirely disagree with him and his plan, I just don't think he's a good example of alternative energy promoters.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: CPA
That same oilman owns companies that invest in wind power and natural gas. Pickens plans may be altruistic on it's face, but have no doubts he's doing this for further profit. That said, I don't entirely disagree with him and his plan, I just don't think he's a good example of alternative energy promoters.

I definitely agree with this assessment. He's not pushing this because he's a charitable guy, he smells profit and is taking advantage of the situation to get his face in front of everybody. He's the same dude who bought up a huge portion of northern Texas to buy the aquifer underneath the area so he could sell it to southern Texas.

I love how he talks about how we're sending $700BN overseas. Why? Because he wants the 700BN to himself.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Genx87
Long term OPEC can only do so much. Drilling at home is an obviously solution we can control. It has to be done unless you enjoy plopping armored corps down in the deserts around the world to fight for a scarce resource.

Ironic, isn't it, that those clamoring for us to abandon the ME are also bitching and whining about gas prices and oil. Talk about clueless...

Alternative energy isnt going to happen tomorrow or within the next decade on any meaningful scale.

I hope you're wrong on that.

I hope I am as well. But lets be realistic. One of the best potential cross over fuels(ethanol) will take at least a decade before our cumbersome govt stops sending money to the big ag lobby. In the mean time the worst possible candidate for ethanol(corn) will be the staple of our alternative energy push.

I've always wondered why THAT isn't a bigger issue. Sure, ethanol from corn is big noise in Iowa (man did I get sick of hearing about it when I lived there), but nobody else gives a damn about the corn farmers. So why not spend all that money on REAL solutions? It would please Republicans because it wouldn't be extra government spending, and they could cozy up to the environmental and alternative energy folks to help offset their constant calls to drill playgrounds for oil. And Democrats would like it because they could, for once, look like they supported environmentalism and alternative energy WITHOUT coming across like idealistic but non-practical tree huggers.

Seems like the best of both worlds, honestly. I'm not sure why our only significant source of alternative energy spending is on such a ridiculous boondoggle.

 

[Duwelon]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
domestic drilling is a long run dead end, its just delaying the inevitable by a few months and a few cents.

Try a few years or more. Sitting on our ass as has been proven is a dead end.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
domestic drilling is a long run dead end, its just delaying the inevitable by a few months and a few cents.

How can you be so sure, I have seen "experts" on both sides disagree, and I have seen the Dem's proclaim the supply and demand have nothing to do with it.

Worst case scenario we keep some oil money at home.

I think the ultimate is sillyness is the democrats saying drilling at home will do nothing while pressuring OPEC to increase supplies lmao. You cant make this shit up.

Because OPEC increasing supplies is an immediate fix while drilling domestically in places that there is no infrastructure set up to do so would take years.

Why do such simple, obvious points have to be spelled out?

But I thought it wasnt a supply issue? You see where I am going with this? Dems wanting OPEC to increase supplies means their line about speculation is crap. They obviously dont believe it, why would you?

Long term OPEC can only do so much. Drilling at home is an obviously solution we can control. It has to be done unless you enjoy plopping armored corps down in the deserts around the world to fight for a scarce resource.

Alternative energy isnt going to happen tomorrow or within the next decade on any meaningful scale.

I don't believe that there is a supply issue personally. I was just countering your point that drilling domestically would alleviate the need to ask OPEC to increase production based on the fact that the costs to build the infrastructure to do so and the time to market would end up being counter productive. and not help at all.

AltEng isn't going to happen as long as our current mindset is to find other places to drill for the current energy source either. I know that our current technological baseline includes oil as a source for harnessing AltEng to get to the consumer and we can't completely get away from it yet however, we aren't really going to have the incentive to get to that minimum usage baseline as long as we keep drilling to find more and more to feed the habit either.

It will happen, why wouldnt it? The question is do we want to hamstring our economy in the process or make it easier on ourselves? There is little question oil will run its course this century. It is just a matter of how hard we want to be on ourselves and how many wars we want to get into in the process.

There certainly is a supply issue. Demand is keeping up with supply and creating a sense of shortage. You dont have to be at 100% consumption to feel the strain of supply.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Genx87
Long term OPEC can only do so much. Drilling at home is an obviously solution we can control. It has to be done unless you enjoy plopping armored corps down in the deserts around the world to fight for a scarce resource.

Ironic, isn't it, that those clamoring for us to abandon the ME are also bitching and whining about gas prices and oil. Talk about clueless...

Alternative energy isnt going to happen tomorrow or within the next decade on any meaningful scale.

I hope you're wrong on that.

I hope I am as well. But lets be realistic. One of the best potential cross over fuels(ethanol) will take at least a decade before our cumbersome govt stops sending money to the big ag lobby. In the mean time the worst possible candidate for ethanol(corn) will be the staple of our alternative energy push.

I've always wondered why THAT isn't a bigger issue. Sure, ethanol from corn is big noise in Iowa (man did I get sick of hearing about it when I lived there), but nobody else gives a damn about the corn farmers. So why not spend all that money on REAL solutions? It would please Republicans because it wouldn't be extra government spending, and they could cozy up to the environmental and alternative energy folks to help offset their constant calls to drill playgrounds for oil. And Democrats would like it because they could, for once, look like they supported environmentalism and alternative energy WITHOUT coming across like idealistic but non-practical tree huggers.

Seems like the best of both worlds, honestly. I'm not sure why our only significant source of alternative energy spending is on such a ridiculous boondoggle.

Because the lobbying in Washington keeps it that way. There are much better ethanol sources but it will take years to get the subsidies and govt push for corn ethanol to cease.

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Pabster
I hope you're wrong on that.

I hope I am as well. But lets be realistic. One of the best potential cross over fuels(ethanol) will take at least a decade before our cumbersome govt stops sending money to the big ag lobby. In the mean time the worst possible candidate for ethanol(corn) will be the staple of our alternative energy push.

I've always wondered why THAT isn't a bigger issue. Sure, ethanol from corn is big noise in Iowa (man did I get sick of hearing about it when I lived there), but nobody else gives a damn about the corn farmers. So why not spend all that money on REAL solutions? It would please Republicans because it wouldn't be extra government spending, and they could cozy up to the environmental and alternative energy folks to help offset their constant calls to drill playgrounds for oil. And Democrats would like it because they could, for once, look like they supported environmentalism and alternative energy WITHOUT coming across like idealistic but non-practical tree huggers.

Seems like the best of both worlds, honestly. I'm not sure why our only significant source of alternative energy spending is on such a ridiculous boondoggle.

Cellulosic ethanol is the next big push, IIRC the plan is to phase out incentives in place for corn ethanol ($0.51/gal) and then begin to heavily subsidize the development of cellulosic ethanol. A recent bill introduced a tax credit of $1.01/gal for cellulosic ethanol production I believe. I think commercial scale production costs about $2.25/gal, so that makes it extremely competitive. The goal is to get production costs down to about $1/gal by 2012.

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
domestic drilling is a long run dead end, its just delaying the inevitable by a few months and a few cents.

How can you be so sure, I have seen "experts" on both sides disagree, and I have seen the Dem's proclaim the supply and demand have nothing to do with it.

Worst case scenario we keep some oil money at home.

I think the ultimate is sillyness is the democrats saying drilling at home will do nothing while pressuring OPEC to increase supplies lmao. You cant make this shit up.

That's what I was thinking but sometimes the obvious eludes me 😕

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
domestic drilling is a long run dead end, its just delaying the inevitable by a few months and a few cents.

How can you be so sure, I have seen "experts" on both sides disagree, and I have seen the Dem's proclaim the supply and demand have nothing to do with it.

Worst case scenario we keep some oil money at home.

I think the ultimate is sillyness is the democrats saying drilling at home will do nothing while pressuring OPEC to increase supplies lmao. You cant make this shit up.

Because OPEC increasing supplies is an immediate fix while drilling domestically in places that there is no infrastructure set up to do so would take years.

Why do such simple, obvious points have to be spelled out?[/q]


Yeah spell it out for me because they way I see it, more supply equals lower prices plus we create good paying jobs and we keep our oil money at home, how is that a bad thing?

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Harvey


Somehow, I don't think McCain will get much help from Pickens or any of the other experts who have already told America all the domestic oil we could drill wouldn't do squat to gas prices, and it wouldn't be available for at least a decade.

So if a prominent oil man(or other "experts") would come out and say that it would reduce gas prices and back McCain's plan you would believe it?


You are sure about the 10 years for oil but how long before "alternative energy" is ready to go prime time?

That same oilman owns companies that invest in wind power and natural gas. Pickens plans may be altruistic on it's face, but have no doubts he's doing this for further profit. That said, I don't entirely disagree with him and his plan, I just don't think he's a good example of alternative energy promoters.

I have no problem with his intentions (to make money) but I can't see that wind farms and solar power can be financial feasible, what I mean by that is I can't see wind and solar costing us less that coal and such.

I hope I'm wrong.

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: CPA
That same oilman owns companies that invest in wind power and natural gas. Pickens plans may be altruistic on it's face, but have no doubts he's doing this for further profit. That said, I don't entirely disagree with him and his plan, I just don't think he's a good example of alternative energy promoters.

I definitely agree with this assessment. He's not pushing this because he's a charitable guy, he smells profit and is taking advantage of the situation to get his face in front of everybody. He's the same dude who bought up a huge portion of northern Texas to buy the aquifer underneath the area so he could sell it to southern Texas.

I love how he talks about how we're sending $700BN overseas. Why? Because he wants the 700BN to himself.

Nothing wrong with that.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: CPA
That same oilman owns companies that invest in wind power and natural gas. Pickens plans may be altruistic on it's face, but have no doubts he's doing this for further profit. That said, I don't entirely disagree with him and his plan, I just don't think he's a good example of alternative energy promoters.

I definitely agree with this assessment. He's not pushing this because he's a charitable guy, he smells profit and is taking advantage of the situation to get his face in front of everybody. He's the same dude who bought up a huge portion of northern Texas to buy the aquifer underneath the area so he could sell it to southern Texas.

I love how he talks about how we're sending $700BN overseas. Why? Because he wants the 700BN to himself.

Nothing wrong with that.

Right pocket, left pocket. He just paints the switch in a feel-good sense.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
domestic drilling is a long run dead end, its just delaying the inevitable by a few months and a few cents.

How can you be so sure, I have seen "experts" on both sides disagree, and I have seen the Dem's proclaim the supply and demand have nothing to do with it.

Worst case scenario we keep some oil money at home.

I think the ultimate is sillyness is the democrats saying drilling at home will do nothing while pressuring OPEC to increase supplies lmao. You cant make this shit up.

Guessing you assume this is only supply related 🙂 -- only Republicans could keep trying to make people believe shit like that

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
domestic drilling is a long run dead end, its just delaying the inevitable by a few months and a few cents.

How can you be so sure, I have seen "experts" on both sides disagree, and I have seen the Dem's proclaim the supply and demand have nothing to do with it.

Worst case scenario we keep some oil money at home.

I think the ultimate is sillyness is the democrats saying drilling at home will do nothing while pressuring OPEC to increase supplies lmao. You cant make this shit up.

That's what I was thinking but sometimes the obvious eludes me 😕

Correct me if I'm wrong but when they say domestic drilling will do nothing on prices aren't they talking about today, tomorrow, next week, next month, and next year rather than 5-10 years from now?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
domestic drilling is a long run dead end, its just delaying the inevitable by a few months and a few cents.

How can you be so sure, I have seen "experts" on both sides disagree, and I have seen the Dem's proclaim the supply and demand have nothing to do with it.

Worst case scenario we keep some oil money at home.

I think the ultimate is sillyness is the democrats saying drilling at home will do nothing while pressuring OPEC to increase supplies lmao. You cant make this shit up.

Guessing you assume this is only supply related 🙂 -- only Republicans could keep trying to make people believe shit like that

I havce never stated it is 100% supply related. But acting like a lack of supply is having nothing to do with the current runup is simply stupid. Democrats in congress seem to agree as they call for increased supply from OPEC.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: loki8481
god damn the America where Nancy Pelosi and the democrats in congress don't let states decide for themselves.

The federal gov't taking powers at the expense of the states is a new thing? 😕

It needs to come to an end, but it's about the entire fed gov't, not just Nancy and dems.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Harvey
Topic Title: New McCain Ad Blames Obama For High Gas Prices.

The thing I find amazing is all the things Obama is responsible for and he is not even President yet.

Imagine if he actually somehow buys enough Electoral votes (which I doubt he can) and gets in as President what he will be "responsible" for.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Have any bills related to speculation made it past committee yet?

ASCII and you shall RECEIVII 🙂

DORGAN BILL WOULD PUT DOWNWARD PRESSURE ON GAS PRICES BY CUTTING OIL SPECULATION

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

CONTACT: Justin Kitsch
or Brenden Timpe
PHONE: 202-224-2551

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) ? U.S. Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) introduced legislation today designed to put downward pressure on gas prices by curbing the rampant speculation taking place in the energy futures markets.

Dorgan?s legislation, called the ?End Oil Speculation Act of 2008? orders the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to use its emergency authority to crack down on the root cause of the recent surge in energy prices ? those who drive oil and gas prices to record levels by engaging in excessive speculation. The legislation sets out the specific requirements to force the CFTC to shut down the excess speculation.

The legislation:

• Requires the CFTC to classify all trades as either ?legitimate hedge trading? by commercial producers and purchasers of actual physical petroleum products, or, all other trades that would be classified as ?non-legitimate hedge trades;
  
• Require the CFTC to order an increase in margin requirements to 25% for the trades classified as non-legitimate hedge trades;
  
• Requires the CFTC to revoke or modify all prior actions or decisions that prevent the CFTC from protecting legitimate hedge trades and discouraging speculative trades;
  
• Requires the CFTC to convene an international working group of regulators to ensure the protection of petroleum futures market from excessive speculation and world wide forum shopping;

?This bubble of excess speculation in the energy futures market has driven up oil and gas prices well beyond that which is justified by supply and demand,? said Dorgan. ?While these speculators are making money hand over fist, American families are suffering from record prices at the gas pump. To help our economy and bring some relief to American drivers, we must wring this speculation out of the market.?

?There is a 50 percent margin requirement for people when purchasing stocks, but only a five to seven percent requirement for those speculating in energy futures,? said Dorgan. ?These speculators are using money they don?t have to buy oil they?ll never use, making money on both ends, and the American public gets stuck with the bill every time we fill up our tank.?

Dorgan?s legislation orders the CFTC to use all of its existing authority to investigate, regulate, monitor, report, and take immediate action against those who engage in excessive speculation.

?We are trading 20 times more oil than we take delivery of each day. The world uses about 86 million barrels of oil per day, yet trades approximately 1.5 billion barrels of oil per day,? said Dorgan. ?This casino-like speculation is causing sky-high gas prices that hurt our economy and our families. The steep run up in prices is damaging our economy and is especially damaging to those who live in large rural states like North Dakota.?

?The price of fuel has reached crisis levels in this country, and there is no end in sight,? said Dorgan. ?Immediate action is needed to reduce speculation and reduce energy costs in this country.?

And it's contageous

Oil speculation: What Congress wants

Lawmakers are threatening to get tough on traders and have introduced 9 different bills. But it's unclear if they'll succeed.

By David Goldman, CNNMoney.com staff writer
Last Updated: June 24, 2008: 1:34 PM EDT

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Close loopholes on foreign oil trading. Limit hedge funds from pouring money into the market. End oil speculation altogether.

Congress is vowing to take actions that it believes will reverse runaway crude and gasoline prices. Oil rose above $136 a barrel on Monday - more than double what it cost a year ago - and gas hovered around $4.07 a gallon.

Lawmakers have introduced nine different bills on speculation - not to mention many more that tackle other causes of escalating fuel and oil prices. Several of the speculation measures have bipartisan support. No fewer than four separate hearings have been scheduled for this week, including a House hearing held Monday exploring foreign trade regulation.
.
.
(continues)

Harvey, I have one question I cannot get an answer for, what is the difference in price OPEC gets for a barrel of oil and the price delivered to the refinery?