If someone speaks out against,votes against, petitions against, etc. domestic drilling for oil to reduce our dependency upon foriegn oil should they be allowed to use our limited supply.  Should we take away their right to drive and limit them to public transpotation?  Would this lower our demand on oil there by decreasing the price for everyone else?
207328
Great idea, stops them from bitching and puts their money where their mouth is
34860
How about we just stop driving cars that give less than 20 miles/gallon? That will accomplish just as much as alternative energy and it's probably easier. \n\n\nBy the way, can you guess the 5 countries that we get most of our oil from?\n\nWould you have guessed Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, and Nigeria are 4 of the top 5? Saudi Arabia is the only Middle Eastern country in the 5 (at #3).\n\nThat last comment is exactly why it can't happen. People aren't willing to sacrifice the looks of a car in order to lessen our dependence on oil. Everyone wants someone else to solve their problems instead of doing something about it themselves. Typical.
431860
I say bring it on. And, after the investigations have concluded you will hear that they find no wrongdoing. I know you libs and your conspiracies have it all figured out, but oil companies do not make but 8 or 9% profit on gasoline. Your answer for everything is more government control. It's supply and demand, THAT is what drives prices and we are in competition with China since we are the two countries who consume most of the oil in the world. Oh, one more thing, It's not George W. Bush's fault either!\n\nExcellent post! It's nice to know there are like minded people out there.
182946
absolutley nothing would happen...everyone would buy gas either the day before or the day after, a one day boycott woud do nothing. G.W. Bush does not set the prices for oil...if Americans would accept that OPEC sets the prices and not be afraid to drill in less than 1/10th of one percent of AnWar and in the gulf of mexico (hwere communist cuba already drills) and decreasing the dependancy on foreign supplies, andin the mean time pursue feasible alternate fuels can we do something about the "HIGH" prices of gas.
447197
I suggest reading 'armed madhouse' by greg palast. In this book he makes the arguement (with footnotes) that the reason we went into Iraq is for the oil. But not to take the oil. No ... we want to keep the oil in Iraq. You see economic supply and demand would dictate that if the second largest oil producing nation was bogged down by an occupation then prices would soar. Hmmmm and how have the oil companies been fairing since the invasion???? Who's side do you think this honest patriot is on?? http://blogs.it/0100206/stories/2004/03/15/houseOfBushHouseOfSaud.html
311019
We are importing about half of what we use now. If you would like to choose which half of our nation cannot use oil, then we could quit importing.\n\nIt isn't a matter of how much oil is in the ground. We can't produce it fast enough, or refine it fast enough to more than marginally outpace demand.
414906
Yes there has.  Due to the falling price of wholesale crude on the international commodities market, OPEC announced an intent to cut back production of crude.  Further, as we head into winter months, heating oils and diesel fuel (for shipping of goods) has a spike in consumption.\n\nWhat this means is the volatility of the crude, fuel, gasoline, and heating oil markets are directly effected by the speculators on the market itself.  What you are seeing is a market response to speculator manipulation of the price.  It has nothing to do with the elections, just brokers and individual investors trying to make a quick buck.\n\nThe best response to this would be a massive investment in the ability of the US market to refine a greater quantity of our imported crude, and to explore even greater quantities of crude from domestic sources.
244276
Hrm... sounds like your mom is picking a whipping boy.  Oil companies are responsible for the price of oil.  Punishing charities for high gas prices is like beating your kids because your neighbors kids stole your mailbox.  \n\nOnly two ways I can think of for consumers to affect to price of oil:\n\n1)  Quit using so much.  When the demand goes down, so will the price.  Oil conservation and alternative fuel sources can do a lot to lessen the price at the pump.\n\n2)  Selective boycotting.  Boycotting is the consumer's most effective method of getting what they want out of the corporations that serve them.  Unfortunately, few boycots accomplish anything.  Much like a labor strike, a boycot must be well organized, direct, and limited.  For instance, a consumer protection union could organize its members to boycot one particular gasoline provider in a local area.  If they made it clear to the gasoline company exactly how much money they would lose, the company could be induced to offer a discount to union members.  This works out for both parties.  The union members get cheaper gas from a particular company, which gives them a reason to ALWAYS buy their gas from that company.  In this way, the company reduces it's margin but increases it's sales (including sales of drinks, beef jerky, cheap sunglasses, cigarettes, and all the other crap that gas stations make money on).  \n\nSlightly off topic, a few points to consider for those adherents of Marketpressurism who maintain that the federal government has no control over the price of oil:\n\nThe US federal government is the world's largest consumer of petroleum products.  Simply by increasing their consumption (such as by sending thousands of tons of people, vehicles, military and construction equipment, etc. halfway across the world) they can have a significant effect on global demand.\n\nThe US Strategic Petroleum Reserve is the largest government-owned emergency oil stockpile on earth.  By varying the rate at which we fill the Reserve or by okaying the release of some Reserve stock into the circulating supply, the executive branch of government can have a very direct effect on oil prices.\n\nSince the majority of oil consumed in America is produced abroad, the price of oil is very dependant on how much oil foreign countries are willing to sell to the US.  By pressuring or working out deals with foreign governments that supply oil, the federal government can have a large influence on the available supply, thus lowering prices.\n\nIf a government heavily funds and supports alternative fuel development and conservation measures, they can actively reduce oil consumption throughout the country.  This reduces the price of oil, albeit slowly.
73001
in response to neparis2001: How about a car that runs on bull$hit? The conservative republicans are spreading plenty of that around. \n\nOr, you can do what I do. I refuse to support MidEast oil. All of my gas purchases are from Citgo, which comes from Venezuela. The only way that OPEC and the big oil companies are going to lower their prices is if we start hitting them where it hurts - in the wallet.
259510
Just so you have facts. Clinton allowed the 5 major oil companies to buy up all the smaller (not quite a monopoly which is against our laws) Yes he knew why they wanted too. These 5 companies can now set the price and there is enough for all to make big profits. One of the claims they say is they are doing this in case of further shortages (baloney).  This is not silly putty (which no one must have) and the government should be able to have some control on peoples needs (remember our heating depends on this yet alone work needs and hospitals need heat and Police and Firemen need to be able to have fuel to get around). We are stilling getting the same amount of oil as the last couple years -we are using a bit (not much) less-so it isn't a shortage (yet).) Because these 5 major companies have a lot of money they also control some in government (yep-favors another story) . So it seems they can do what they want-they only have to answer to shareholders (be surprise who some of them are). Until the People or Media turns on them they have upper hand. Just thought I would give basics to you.
667459
So far, there's not enough demand to warrent the extra cost of developing alternative energy sources.  In order to stop using oil (for power) we will need to find cheaper ways of getting alternative energy or become much more motivated to do so.
486476
Republicans can pass it in the lame duck session.  If the libbies don't block it with a filibuster.\n\nAnd it will hurt them a lot yes.\n\nLibbies need to end their concerns about off shore drilling. Its perfectly safe.  I worry more about over-fishing.\n\nOK BEER TIME!  Who wants one too??
29825
The people at Halliburton need American soldiers on the ground to protect the oil wells.\n\nWe have to put up with this because the crazy christians who voted for President Bush are more concerned about preventing abortions and gay marriage than the lives of American soldiers.\n\nRepublican voters are willing to pay a lot.
630173
Drilling ANWR and offshore areas that have been restricted by ecowhacks is simply a matter of looking at what is truly in the best interests of this country.. \n\nthe proposed drilling area in ANWR consists of a 2000 acre plot of land, no bigger then 4 square miles in an area the size of California. \n\nThe logistics of refining and transport exist as the trans-alaska pipeline from Prudhoe to the Kenai, it's likely the TAP would at this time be adequate to handle any potential increase in volume. \nAs far as drilling in the reserve the impact on the surround water is minimal at well. If one looks at the geology of the area, ground water is generally surficial sources. Drilling of oil occurs at depth, pumped to the surface (IN a pipe) and put IN another pipe. \n\nHow drilling ANWR effect crude prices? Well that is a situation that I don't think we can truly answer. The fact is oil prices are tied to global consumption. The chinese entering the free market has dramatically changed the economics if precious minerals. \n\nHow it does effect the US economy is we are drilling in an area that is politically stable contrary to the middle east. I for one think in order to insure we are not influenced by factors outside the US we should not be dependent on sources of goods from outside the US. A very large portion of our trade deficit is for oil from Mexico, Venezuela and the Arabian penisula.\n\nHighlights of HR 5429:\n• Limits surface development to 2000 acres of the 10-02 Area;\n• Establishes a leasing program for the 10-02 Area; \n• Repeals prohibition of oil and gas leasing on federal and native lands in the10-02 Area;\n• Allows the establishment of 45,000 acres in the 10-02 Area to be designated “Special Areas” of unique or sensitive importance;\n• Sets a 200,000 acre minimum lease size;\n• Requires the first sale to be 22 months after enactment;\n• Establishes a “project labor agreement” for all lessees;\n• Requires site environmental analysis for each lease, and compliance with all Federal and State environmental codes;\n• Requires use of “best commercially available technology” for development;\n• Splits revenue 50-50 between State and Federal Governments;\n• Sets up an “Impact Aid” and “Community Service” program to any Alaskan community that can demonstrate impacts from development.\n\n Only 8% of ANWR Would Be Considered for Exploration Only the 1.5 million acre or 8% on the northern coast of ANWR is being considered for development. The remaining 17.5 million acres or 92% of ANWR will remain permanently closed to any kind of development. If oil is discovered, less than 2000 acres of the over 1.5 million acres of the Coastal Plain would be affected. That¹s less than half of one percent of ANWR that would be affected by production activity.
144190
We should riot against the oil companies. Their the most greedy people I've ever seen or heard of. \n\nThe oil companies need to go under strong investigation (not governmental investigation cause the government could care less about us) Whoever is found out (how ever many people that is) that have raised gas prices to where certain families struggle to get to school and work should be immediately forced to donate ALL their money and be thrown in prison awaiting the public's vote on what to do to them. -- that sounds a little extreme but the oil companies have ruined so many lives that they deserve it.
214937
It's a little late to be talking about school when she needs gas tomorrow?\n\nThese people don't understand how it is... it's not always so easy to just "make more money"... hahaha... but I suspect they will learn that soon enough on their own...\n\nI don't think the government cares... so we should all vote...
85455
Ok, the guy who wrote about the US having a secret stash of oil... did you know that everybody KNOWS that the US has there own oil up in Alaska... so it's not much of a secret if CNN has reported on it and congress has asked the President to tap into our own oil reserves. I think what the originator of this question was saying is, instead of the entire world sitting on their hands and letting the Saudi's or OPEC or whoever get away with pretty much robbing the world blind with oil prices the world should fight back with what ever means neccessary.\n\nAnd whoever it was that said it was OPEC that sets the prices not the Saudi's, well you obviously are one of the many many people in the world that are blind to the situatation, OPEC is an organization that is run by man y countries, the list of countries that run OPEC are: Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and lastly Venezuala. The last time I looked most of those countries hate the U.S... so what his point was about OPEC is beyond me.\n\nRaise the price of everything, I say do it. What do we have to loose? If the entire world did it what options would OPEC have? I dont care how many countries are using oil, the good thing is that there are ALTERNATIVES to fossil fuel now and they will only become more and more advanced, let's see what OPEC and it's members do when we dont need their oil... THEN the price of everything they import should go through the roof. Fight fire with fire I say, they obviously dont care if the cost to heat out homes this winter is $400 per month, then we shouldn'y care if they starve. DAMN this administration for letting this go on. Kudos to the originator of this post, and I will gladly be your running mate in the next election!!!! God Bless the USA.