Senator Cantunderstandeconomicsverywell wants to make it illegal for prices to be determined by supply and demand
With gas prices above $3 a gallon in many places, Congress should pass legislation by Memorial Day to make price-gouging a federal crime, Sen. Maria Cantwell said Saturday in the Democrats' weekly radio address.Speaking of high gasoline prices, did Sen. Cantfigureoutwhygasolinepricesaresohigh speak out last year on behalf of lowering gasoline prices in this state by 9 1/2 cents a gallon? I don't believe that she did. Meanwhile, Sen. Cantfigureoutthatyoucantlowerpricesifyousuppresssupply reiterates her opposition to drilling for oil in a tiny portion of the Alaskan wasteland. I thought of Sen. Cantformulatepolicywell when I read this quote in today's Wall Street Journal profile of Charles Koch
Politicians often come up with misguided policy solutions," he continues, "because they suffer from Hayek's 'fatal conceit' and believe they can violate basic laws of economics. They are just as misguided as the man who jumps out the 14th floor of a building convinced that he can repeal the law of gravity."Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at May 06, 2006 11:39 AM | Email This
I just heard a discussion about the whole gasoline sitch from one of my favorite market gurus, Jim "Boo yah!" Cramer. He of course studies the markets and their dynamics and reiterated that it is very much a supply and demand problem. GET THIS: He has met with oil company executives and they've shown him at least 30 investigations done by feds and nothing has ever been found! They'd have found something by now if there WAS anything.
Refineries are going 24/7, though they are supposed to have more down time than that for maintenance, but they have to keep crankin' to keep supply going. Of course, it would help if more refineries were built, but libs prevent it. But it would sure help increase supply of gas. After hearing his discussion, I'm more convinced than ever that Maria is just plain embarrassing and is insulting the intelligence of the people with her craziness. I wish she would listen to valuable discussions like the one I heard this morning, instead of wasting her and our time.her PR advisor should be fired. OH for a senator who actually understands the situation and solves problems instead of feigned ones. Senator Gorton comes to mind....
Try explaining to a friend or neighbor the simple reasons why gas prices are currently high, and you'll get price gouging, Bush's oil buddies, obscene oil profits and other ignorant reasons for $3 a gallon gas.
Cantwell's simply preying on the ignorance of voters.
Posted by: jimg on May 6, 2006 12:12 PMAnd that excitable liberal Mr. Connelly recently opined that she still has time to screw things up--especially if she runs a clunky Al Gore like campaign--which at present is where all indicators point.
And if anyone wants to watch the first 'debate' between McGavick and Cantwell, go here for the video.
Posted by: Patrick on May 6, 2006 12:16 PMPosted by: pseudotsuga on May 6, 2006 12:23 PM
Just use the facts of supply and demand, and the obvious contradictions in Cantwell's own policy statements that will do anything BUT lower the price of gasoline.
Start these Ads up ASAP, and run them in primtime TV hours during the weekdays. McGavick has the bucks to do this and he should start doing it immediately. Run them into the Fall as the Fall TV season begins. A great place to start would be during the last few shows of this season's American Idol on FOX. Millions, and millions of viewers watching and learning about Cantwell's doomed ideas. Priceless.
Exposing Cantwell for the opportunistic, Socialist politician that she is, will be the surest and quickest way to convince voters to dump her in November.
Posted by: Jeff B. on May 6, 2006 01:22 PMSo who is "screwin' the pooch"???????????????
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on May 6, 2006 01:22 PMIt's the US Government and the WA State Government, particularly the WA State Government under Gregoire.
The sooner we shrink government and remove the socialists, the sooner we'll open the way for private business to fill our energy needs.
Posted by: Jeff B. on May 6, 2006 01:44 PMYou got her name wrong. It is Can'twellfigurethingsout.
Posted by: pbj on May 6, 2006 02:50 PMAnd while Cantwell may be "outspoken on energy issues during the past year" she is no leader on this issue. In fact, she's not much of a leader on any issue before the Senate. Rather, her press shop blabs about the topic de jour, trying to make it look like Cantwell's engaged in all sorts of advocacy on behalf of Washingtonians...as one MSM article said, even her allies are telling her to pick an issue and stick to it.
If gas prices are the issue she's chosen--she's in for a rough next few months.
Posted by: Patrick on May 6, 2006 02:56 PMG.
Posted by: gregg on May 6, 2006 03:16 PMNo amount of wishful thinking is going to change the fact that the US does not produce or refine enough oil for its needs. ANWAR & continental shelf exploration might help in the short term, if drilling is ever allowed, but until the US consumers buy more efficient, smaller cars, the demand will continue to grow for more oil & the countries of OPEC will be the ones supplying it. Removing the state and Federal taxes temporarily would also help but, again, is only a short-term fix.
Cantwell can ask for all the legislation she wants, but it's still a matter of supply and demand.
Posted by: Clean House on May 6, 2006 03:16 PMOh..my...goodness. That's like saying "We cannot work our way out of poverty!" Sorry, but I'm just not going to let stuff like that stand~!
Posted by: M on May 6, 2006 05:09 PMCantwell's idea of price controls flunks Economics 101. Her stand about not drilling in ANWR is stupid - it just keeps oil prices up that much longer. If Bush signed an Executive Order to go forward with drilling in ANWR, prices would go down maybe 30 cents/gallon. Don't count on the Republicans in Congress to get it through because they have caved twice before. I don't trust the President in the situation either, just as I don't trust him on securing our borders.
Posted by: KS on May 6, 2006 05:10 PMNixon price controls.
I think pols should have a grasp of history, not polemics.
Posted by: JCM on May 6, 2006 05:42 PMShow me one documentated case of oil companies gouging.
Posted by: JCM on May 6, 2006 05:46 PMI don't believe there is price gouging. Since 1979 the government has investigated claims of gouging by oil companies 11 times, with no findings of gouging. Now the idiots back in DC (and that includes most members of both parties) are going to launch another investigation.
Notice how little the D party honchos think about Cantwell? She's a cypher for five years, and not that it's an election year the party give her a few chances to be visible, e.g., blocking drilling in ANWAR and delivering the D's Saturday address. It's an obvious attempt by the party to give her some visibility in an election year to fool the voters into thinking she's an effective senator. If elected, expect her to disappear until 2012.
Even Billy O' on FOX perpetuates the notion that there is a gouge. It makes him more popular with his viewers. He refuses to sit down with Cavuto and be educated as it is not in his perceived best interest.
Posted by: Fed Up on May 6, 2006 06:41 PMFortunately, the law of gravity is a law of physics and the laws of physics are singularly unimpressed by democratric processes. And in this case even less impressed with Democrats like Cantthinkwell!
Posted by: Fed Up on May 6, 2006 06:48 PMFor example, if 250 sqaure miles would be used (I'm just pulling a number out of thin air), could an area of at least 250 square miles be set aside as an addition to ANWR or one of the other wildlife refuges.
I remember when Emerald Downs was about to be built and some enviors were screaming about how some acreage of wetlands were going to be destroyed. As part of the deal to allow construction to go forward, the developers had to create new wetlands elsewhere. They ended up creating 2-3 times more wetland acreage than was used at the track site, I believe.
Why can't a similar plan be used at ANWR? For every square mile that's used for oil drilling, maybe 1.5 to 2 square miles would be set aside as new ANWR land. That could help blunt the enviros who are screeching about how the "precious" area of ANWR would be "lost forever," since lands devoted to wildlife refuges would actually grow significantly.
Posted by: MES on May 6, 2006 08:46 PMYou see the issue isn't really about "spoiling the land", it's about obstruction. They don't want us to drill under any circumstances. No matter how urgent the need, no matter how slight the imposition, no matter how hard we work to mitigate.
That is why we should smile, nod approvingly, and then just do it....
Posted by: alphabet soup on May 6, 2006 09:07 PMHas anyone looked into her assertion that Brazil is a model for the U.S. to follow? Isn't that country covered mostly in jungle, with extremely dense population centers??? How is that comparable to the U.S.? Don't we have like ^5 more miles of highways?
Posted by: Patrick on May 6, 2006 10:47 PMHow long have Cantwell and the Dems refused to open ANWR? How long have Cantwell and the Dems refused to open offshore oil drilling? Has Cantwell conveniently forgotten just a few months ago that she and the Dems voted en bloc to maintain the stranglehold placed on new refineries?
In a classic case of bad regulations spawning still further bad regulations to fix the previous bad regulations, Cantwell is supporting the most asinine legislation on the face of the earth: to make price gouging a federal crime.
What determines "price gouging" and how eliminating this mythical scourge is supposed to fix anything isn't really explained. This is hardly odd since this a just a mad fever dream of Cantwell and the Democratic Party.
If Maria really wants to do something about high prices how about this: GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY! Discard the NIMBYism and BANANAism* that has brought oil exploration and refining capacity to a virtual standstill in this country.
* BANANA = Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything
Reality:
"We can cut down the rain forests to plant sugar cane to make ethanol instead.
Me:
I don't care how much gas costs, just don't make me wait in line.
I agree. To hear Cantwell talk about the oil industry, you'd think she know's about some kind of grand conspiracy theory to inflate prices. It's what she calls a "just-in-time" market.
But in her latest talk show routine, she may have let the proverbial cat out of the bag.
1) She made it known that what companies are doing now isn't illegal, but that if her legislation were passed into law--it would be. She acknowledged that her "gouging" allegations are all speculation at this point, except for some Oregon case to which she vaguley alluded.
2) She wants to give investigators like the FTC more teeth in their investigations. Hmprh. What kind of teeth? She conjurs up Enron, and dances around the real effects her proposals would have, if any.
In her debate with Sen. Santorum last week, she got awfully defensive near the end of the conversation. In fact, I think he caught her off-guard when he called her out on the very thing you highlight above: the Dems are the ones who have made domestic oil exploration/development nearly impossible. Oh how fast she fell back on her "the oil companies are evil" talking points...
Transcripts of her talk show debuts here.
Posted by: Patrick on May 6, 2006 11:07 PMOver 10 years ago Clinton vetoed opening ANWR for drilling. We'd have the oil now.
Posted by: Ryan on May 6, 2006 11:12 PMYeah, how about this Oregon case she's talking about? What was at issue? How does it show that her legislation would give law enforcement new tools to fight possible "price-gouging"???
I emailed the good Senator's office, and got a standard blow-off response...
Posted by: Patrick on May 6, 2006 11:12 PMSomeday the GOP in WA is going to understand that signs that say "Vote " is not a party platform. If they're going to win seats, they have to take the offensive.
I thought things would change when Chris Vance finally bagged it, but it looks like we've got more empty suits running the show. How very depressing.
Maria Cantwell has got to be the most depressingly dumb senator that Washington has ever had - and that's really saying something.
If the state GOP can't help put Mike Mc over the top and get this loser out of congress this year, we really need to look at a major bloodletting in the state party. I'm tired of writing campaign contributions to a state delegation that doesn't get it.
Posted by: johnny on May 6, 2006 11:38 PMWhile having tons of fun with Ms. Cantseemtofindlogicalconsistencywell, you have skewered her on the points where she is vulnerable. Of course, her tactic is to gain enough votes in King County that the rest of the state wont matter. Logical consistency sells well in Seattle. So, it just might work.
But, in the meantime, it will be fun to watch as the illogical positions she takes that also happen to be directly contradictory are paraded before us.
Hopefully, she will explain to us how she understands the first thing about raising a family, while she is single and childless herself.
Posted by: BananaLand on May 7, 2006 01:32 AMWhy the hell would Cantwell want to support an initiative to take away revenues to fix our transportation infrastructure?
The issue isn't gas taxes - it's companies like Exxon Mobil making record profits while consumers have to fork over more than three bucks for every gallon of gas they buy.
Any competent person who understands economics knows that you can't have public services for free. They have a cost, Stefan, you moron. Do you think we can build and repair roads for free? Do you think we can replace hazardous bridges for free? Do you think we can offer transit service for free? NO!
Every public service we've got COSTS MONEY! And that's something you clueless right wingers conveniently ignore. You also ignore the fact that a large majority of the public is in favor of quality public services, and once they understand the consequences of cutting the revenue that funds those services, they will vote AGAINST an anti tax proposal.
You have no business bringing up I-912, Stefan, nor associating Cantwell with it. Your arguments are crap and your points are moot.
Better luck next time, dumbass.
Posted by: GoreDefender on May 7, 2006 01:40 AMI apologize for sticking my two cents worth into the political discussions of the State of Washington. In my humble opinion, it is Senators like Cantwell who are responsible of the condition of this Country, your State and the for placing our National Security in the hands of foreign governments--some friendly, some not. She or her predessor passed the Excess Profits Tax as a way of fixing soaring gas prices in the seventies and placing restrictions on where our oil companies can drill. They have forced our oil companies to seek the Supply elsewhere. I think it is time to hold our elected Senators and Representatives accountable for their bloviating and ask them to limit themselves to our general welfare and to enforce the Powers granted them by the Constitution of the United States. they are costing me money and I don't appreciate it.
Thank you Stefan for your BLOG. It tickles me no end. Very Respectfully, Tom Kubiak, Colonel, USAF (Retired)
Posted by: Tom Kubiak on May 7, 2006 05:56 AMI apologize for sticking my two cents worth into the political discussions of the State of Washington. In my humble opinion, it is Senators like Cantwell who are responsible of the condition of this Country, your State and the for placing our National Security in the hands of foreign governments--some friendly, some not. She or her predessor passed the Excess Profits Tax as a way of fixing soaring gas prices in the seventies and placing restrictions on where our oil companies can drill. They have forced our oil companies to seek the Supply elsewhere. I think it is time to hold our elected Senators and Representatives accountable for their bloviating and ask them to limit themselves to our general welfare and to enforce the Powers granted them by the Constitution of the United States. they are costing me money and I don't appreciate it.
Thank you Stefan for your BLOG. It tickles me no end. Very Respectfully, Tom Kubiak, Colonel, USAF (Retired)
Posted by: Tom Kubiak on May 7, 2006 05:56 AMI apologize for sticking my two cents worth into the political discussions of the State of Washington. In my humble opinion, it is Senators like Cantwell who are responsible of the condition of this Country, your State and the for placing our National Security in the hands of foreign governments--some friendly, some not. She or her predessor passed the Excess Profits Tax as a way of fixing soaring gas prices in the seventies and placing restrictions on where our oil companies can drill. They have forced our oil companies to seek the Supply elsewhere. I think it is time to hold our elected Senators and Representatives accountable for their bloviating and ask them to limit themselves to our general welfare and to enforce the Powers granted them by the Constitution of the United States. they are costing me money and I don't appreciate it.
Thank you Stefan for your BLOG. It tickles me no end. Very Respectfully, Tom Kubiak, Colonel, USAF (Retired)
Posted by: Tom Kubiak on May 7, 2006 05:57 AMI apologize for sticking my two cents worth into the political discussions of the State of Washington. In my humble opinion, it is Senators like Cantwell who are responsible of the condition of this Country, your State and the for placing our National Security in the hands of foreign governments--some friendly, some not. She or her predessor passed the Excess Profits Tax as a way of fixing soaring gas prices in the seventies and placing restrictions on where our oil companies can drill. They have forced our oil companies to seek the Supply elsewhere. I think it is time to hold our elected Senators and Representatives accountable for their bloviating and ask them to limit themselves to our general welfare and to enforce the Powers granted them by the Constitution of the United States. they are costing me money and I don't appreciate it.
Thank you Stefan for your BLOG. It tickles me no end. Very Respectfully, Tom Kubiak, Colonel, USAF (Retired)
Posted by: Tom Kubiak on May 7, 2006 05:57 AMSpeaking of vital I-912 infrastructure, how is that 125 Millon Dollar Emergency Gerbil overpass system working for you on I-90? Thats money well spent. Forget humor, come back when you can do rational thought.
Posted by: No over riding legal authority on May 7, 2006 07:38 AM
Any competent person who understands economics knows that you can't have public services for free.
Since when were gasoline prices a public service?
I was sure they were a private industry...oh, wait, except in countries where we have STATE RUN OIL! Ah yes, communism/socialism rides again!
They have a cost, Stefan, you moron. Do you think we can build and repair roads for free? Do you think we can replace hazardous bridges for free? Do you think we can offer transit service for free? NO!
True--but how much of the money earmarked for these things ends up being sucked down the drain into human services programs? What is the relationship of gasoline costs to these other things? Wouldn't it be better to use tolls on those things, and reduce taxes on gasoline?
Every public service we've got COSTS MONEY! And that's something you clueless right wingers conveniently ignore.
I guess the clued-in right wingers don't ignore it, but apparently cluelessness extends also to those who demand gasoline revenues be the funder of public services.
You also ignore the fact that a large majority of the public is in favor of quality public services, and once they understand the consequences of cutting the revenue that funds those services, they will vote AGAINST an anti tax proposal.
A red herring--at first glance, who WOULDN'T be against quality public services? But then we read the fine print and say, "Which services? At what cost? To heck with that! How many MORE wasted tax dollars can you squeeze from the voter turnips?"
Ah, but of course, we are talking about squeezing dollars from bloated oil execs, who clearly have more than their fair share!
Stop bogarting those greenbacks, dude!
Nuclear, unlimited power, clean, no emissions, and safe the new generation reactor are physically incapable of melting down.
Coal, with clean burn technology we can minimize emissions.
Oil sands and shales of North American. An estimated 2 Trillion barrels have of the total known worlds reserves are here.
Those are the true immediate discussion point for an energy policy. Gnatwell's emissions are a mere f*rt in a hurricane.
Posted by: JCM on May 7, 2006 10:01 AMAll Right! Come on, now! Oooh yeah!
Got it in me, I've got it in me,
Ain't gonna quit until it all comes out.
Gonna do it, ain't nothin' to it
Just shake my hips, throw my head
Back and shout...
Chorus
Been a long education
But my homework is done.
I'm gonna Rock the Nation
Just-a wanna have fuuuuuuuuuun, yeah!
Gonna shake it and I ain't gonna break it
I'm gonna show you what it's all about.
Got it in me, got it in me now,
Ain't gonna quit until it all comes out.
(Repeat chorus)
Got it in me, oww..
Don't wanna quit until it all comes out
Gonna shake it, ain't gonna break it
I'm gonna show ya' what it's all about.
Been a long education
But my homework is done.
I'm gonna Rock the Nation
Rock the Nation
Rock the-
Rock the-
Naaaaaaaaaation, yeah...
We don't need clean coal, we need dirty coal. A strong, tough energy policy is one that sticks it in the face of the whiney democrat brats like Sen. Canttalkgood in the senate who have used their power over the GOP to squeeze the energy market.
They'll only respond to overwhelming force and that means building more refineries and more power generation facilities. Making them clean facilities will just send the message to the Dems that they were right all along and it will only encourage them to take more.
The same goes for ANWR. The only way to shut those bitches up will be to drill the shit out of that wasteland. We'll ship the oil to China where the rest of Alaskan oil goes and we'll use the money to artificially drive up the price of windfarms. That'll put the moose crap in those NIMBY nerds' granola bowl!
Posted by: Hummer War on May 7, 2006 10:45 AMI stand corrected!
I am goinghaving to track you down! I am recovering from some surgery and laughing hurts!
Posted by: JCM on May 7, 2006 10:59 AMActually, that's not true. If we worked 1/2 of our day for the government and really got what we paid for we'd probably be happy, but everywhere we look we see waste, corruption, cronyism, and just plain stupidity.
The real problem with the government is that it works to hard to tell us what's good for us and not hard enough to listen to what we want.
For instance, you liberal fools babble on about mass transportation like it's some sort of godsend when the undeniable fact is that the working public really doesn't want it. That's why there a millions of cars on the road while buses go half empty even though they cost nothing to ride.
If the government was intelligent, it would realize that most cars are single occupancy, and work to design cars that efficiently run for a single occupant - but that wouldn't allow politicians to create cushy government union jobs for bus drivers and a mountain of bureaucrats.
A single occupant car design could be developed for a fraction of what a new freeway costs, and would probably increase our current freeways and parking garages by 3 to 4x. It would allow people to go where they want to go instead of following existing routes. It's what people want and it would be a lot more fuel effcient than half empty mass transit. The government could afford to develop something like this, but they won't because the government is too warped to think that way.
If the private sector had control of the funding of our goverment transit department for even one decade, they could solve the problems that the government can't. Instead, idiots like Cantwell want to play God and tell us there's only one way to do things and she's smarter than all of us.
Well guess what, I've met Maria and she wasn't much of a winner. The best thing I can say about her is that she's proof that anyone can make it in the USA, and that's being kind.
We conservatives want to keep money out of the hands of government because it consistently uses the funds to inefficiently solve the wrong problems while ignoring what people really want. We don't pretend to know better - but we know what doesn't work.
Posted by: johnny on May 7, 2006 11:11 AMOnce again your pathetic attempt to superimpose leftist stereotypes of the rights viewpoints leaves you looking like the mouth-breather that you are. Apparently you've been eating too much of that moose poop...
Posted by: alphabet soup on May 7, 2006 11:25 AMNice try (that you know of).
Posted by: Amused by liberals on May 7, 2006 02:34 PMTypically gouging is a temporary phenomenon until the market returns to normal. Sadly, the energy market now is about as "normal" as it will get for the forseeable future.
However, it is pretty hopeless to convince the American people of this or any other basic fact of economic theory. If McGavick tries -- and I hope he does -- he will lose by even a bigger margin than he is behind already.
Posted by: Bruce on May 7, 2006 11:00 PM