Tag Archives: obama administration

Obama Administration Whitewashing Government Inaction Regarding Oil and Natural Gas Leases

Posted on by
2

In advance of President Barack Obama’s energy speech at Georgetown University, a top oil and natural gas industry leader called on the Obama Administration to abandon its policies “to defer, delay and deny access to domestic resources of oil and natural gas.”

In a statement to reporters during a media conference call this morning, American Petroleum Institute Upstream Director Erik Milito refuted a report by the Interior Department that U.S. oil and natural gas companies are sitting on oil leases granted by the government, refusing to turn them into producing leases.

“The report completely whitewashes the fact that in many cases, the reason these leases have no exploration plans is that BOEMRE is sitting on those plans,” Milito said. “This is like leasing an apartment from the government for $20 million dollars and the government refuses to give you the keys to the apartment – then the government proceeds to complain because you are not occupying the premises.”

Below, because I was unable to participate in the conference call today, I share an excerpt from the full text of Milito’s statement as prepared for delivery by API:

The disturbing reality is that 2011 could go down as the first year since 1957 that there has not been at least one offshore lease sale. Not one.

I’m certain that Americans find it difficult to reconcile that – and the fact that 85 percent of our offshore resources are off-limits to development – despite increased uncertainty in world oil markets and rising worldwide demand for crude oil.
President Obama has a speech on energy scheduled for later today.

We hope he will tell Americans that the administration will abandon their policies to defer, delay and deny access to domestic resources of oil and natural gas:  Resources that could help create U.S. jobs, grow the U.S. economy and provide royalties, rents, and revenues to the U.S. Treasury.

However, reports suggest that the President wants to provide “incentives” to develop the leases the industry currently has, but may or may not, actually have oil and natural gas on them.

The reports are that these incentives include shortening lease terms and increasing royalty rates through a graduated system.

These are not incentives.

They are, in fact, disincentives.

These are actions that will discourage investment here in the US and shift that investment to other parts of the world – to places like Brazil.

We hope the president will abandon energy politics in favor of energy policies that will provide Americans what they want and deserve: more energy, economic growth and more jobs.

We have a million American jobs that we can create if our industry is allowed to produce the oil and natural gas in knows how to produce.

And we have 9.2 million jobs to protect – the jobs across the country supported by our industry.

We urge the president to join the oil and natural gas industry in helping us create and protect those jobs.

It is not too late to get America’s energy policy back on track.

If you oppose the Obama Administration’s actions that are literally killing the nation’s oil and natural gas industries, costing American jobs and making us more dependent on foreign sources of energy, CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE NATION’S CAPITOL, let them know how you feel, and make sure they know you’ll be watching their votes.

UPDATE 3/30/11 at 5:30 p.m. Central: Cross-posted at Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com.

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!

‘Gas Strike’ Fueled by Emotion and Ignorance (Update)

Posted on by
11

This morning, I came across a Facebook event, titled “GAS STRIKE,” that nearly a half-million people have signed up to “attend” today.  Sadly, their effort — which involves boycotting gas stations for one day — is a misguided effort driven more by emotion and ignorance than common sense.

Oil companies produce the oil and make it available on the marketplace, but the price is set by the markets in much the same way as farmers accept the going rate for commodities such as corn and soybeans.

Americans who want “change” in the form of lower gas prices at the pump should stop venting their outrage against oil companies and the small business owners who operate gas stations and convenience stores across the nation.  After all, it didn’t work when tried June 19.  Instead, they should demand President Barack Obama and his underlings — a group that includes Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Energy Secretary Dr. David Chu and everyone in the EPA — end their war of regulation and red tape that is preventing U.S. oil and natural gas companies from tapping domestic sources of energy.

No one but the Obama Administration is responsible for gasoline prices reaching $4 per gallon and higher. If Obama wants to improve the everyday lives of Americans via lower fuel prices, he needs to conduct business in a way that allows more drilling onshore and offshore so that we can actually reduce our dependence on foreign oil and keep 9.2 million Americans gainfully employed and contributing to the economy.

To learn more about how gas prices are set, read The Facts about Rising Gas Prices, an Energy Tomorrow blog post published yesterday.

If you need help paying for gasoline until the Obama Administration ends its war against “Big Oil,” buy a “Will work for fuel” t-shirt.

UPDATE 3/10/11 at 12:28 p.m. Central: Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) makes my point in a just-released video (below).  He even mentions Obama’s statement about skyrocketing electricity prices, a topic I covered in this Nov. 3, 2008, post.

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!

Chrysler Pushing ‘Foreign Policy’ Ad Campaign While Ex-Dealers Sue Government for Millions

Posted on by
Reply

Chrysler will soon begin an advertising/marketing push to cast the automaker’s dealers as “embassies,” according to an Automotive News report*.  The push will coincide with the new brand tagline, “Imported From Detroit,” introduced in a Super Bowl XLV commercial featuring the rapper, Eminem.  One would think, however, that Chrysler might want to focus on “domestic relations” before delving into this kind of “foreign policy.”

Why?  Because, as Associated Press reported today, 64 ex-Chrysler dealers who lost their dealerships in 2009 have filed suit against the government and are seeking damages of $130 million or more.  Of course, the former dealers are suing the government — instead of Chrysler by name — since the automaker is partially government-owned after being bailed out of the financial salvage yard by the Obama Administration.  And they have every right to be angry.

In a post May 20, 2009, I shared several videos — including the one above — in which Chrysler dealers talked about their feelings after being told their dealerships would close.

In a post May 23, 2009, a Texas Chrysler dealer wrote a powerful letter to warn fellow Americans about the future of small business in the United States if the closure of his dealership and others was allowed to stand.

In a post May 27, 2009, I shared research aimed at determining whether or not Chrysler dealers received their “pink slips” (i.e., showed up on the closure list) based on politics.

Finally, in a post on June 9, 2009, I shared no-longer-available video of Chrysler and General Motors (a.k.a., “Government Motors”) representatives testifying before a U.S. Senate committee on the subject of “DealerGate.” I addition, I provided a link to a very-informative Doug Ross post, Dealergate: Some minorities more equal than others.

Though the final chapter of this saga cannot be written until either a settlement or a judgment is reached in the lawsuit, one thing is certain:  If the “Imported From Detroit” campaign works as well as current U.S. foreign policy, we should expert Cairo-style protests outside the Chrysler Building.

*Note: No link provided, since Automotive News is a subscription-required site.

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!

President Obama Continues Anti-Israel Push

Posted on by
1

A red-letter link atop the Drudge Report takes readers to a disturbing Foreign Policy magazine article published Wednesday:  In sharp reversal, U.S. agrees to rebuke Israel in Security Council.  The article, in turn, stands as only the most-recent reminder of many about President Barack Obama’s anti-Israel sentiment.

The State of Israel coin above reflects President Obama’s vision for the future of the Jewish State (i.e., it’s blank).  It went into circulation on the day he was inaugurated as part of “Barack Obama’s Seven Mystery States Coin Collection,” an alternative for coin collectors not interested in the U.S. Mint’s 50 State Quarters® Program.

Since his inauguration, President Obama hasn’t disappointed those who share his vision for Israel.

One month after “44″ took office, U.S. State Department officials participated in the United Nations World Conference Against Racism, an event which had a decidedly anti-Israel tone.

Two months after he took office, NEWSWEEK threw in its support of President Obama’s vision by erasing Israel from a world map they published.

In an American Thinker opinion piece three months after “O” was sworn in, Cliff Thier expressed grave concern about the future of Israel and worries that President Obama will use U.S. Air Force assets to prevent Israeli forces from taking out Iran’s nuclear weapons capability.  No doubt, that concern remains intact today.

Four months after the inauguration, Israel National News reported that the United States was working with both Egypt and Russia to rid Israel of its nuclear weapons, as part of a comprehensive plan to neutralize Iran’s nuclear power.

Of course, I could list dozens — if not hundreds — more examples of the Obama Administration’s anti-Israel stance.  Instead, I’ll simply fast forward to the Foreign Policy piece mentioned in the first paragraph above.  In it, writer Colum Lynch shares this disturbing news:

The U.S. informed Arab governments Tuesday that it will support a U.N. Security Council statement reaffirming that the 15-nation body “does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity,” a move aimed at avoiding the prospect of having to veto a stronger Palestinian resolution calling the settlements illegal.

That, my friends, is akin to U.S. abandonment of the Jewish State at a time during which tensions are high in the Middle East.  This stance must change.  2012 can’t come soon enough.

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!

Proposed SEC Rule Puts U.S. Firms at Disadvantage

Posted on by
1

Does President Barack Obama does not understand basic business principals or, even worse, does.  In case it’s the former (which I doubt), I offer some basics:

Click to download API letter (pdf).

Anyone who’s running a U.S.-based business that competes with foreign companies on a global scale understands that, in order to win contracts and maintain a competitive advantage, you must keep information about your firm’s proprietary technologies and techniques confidential.  In addition, you must keep certain aspects of your company’s finances out of sight of your competitors.  Why?  So that you can maintain a competitive advantage.

On Friday, American Petroleum Institute officials shared concerns about a proposed Securities and Exchange Commission rule that could have a devastating impact on the nation’s oil and natural gas industries.  In a 4-page letter — accompanied by 47 pages of comments — to Securities and Exchange Commission Secretary Elizabeth Murphy.

The letter contained following examples illustrate more specifically these potential harmful effects:

Example 1. Country A invites investors to develop its natural resources. Officials from Country A use Section 13(q) disclosures for projects in Country B to determine the rates of return that SEC filers are willing to accept. Country A uses this information to negotiate more favorable terms. The shareholders of SEC filers participating in Country A’s projects receive a lower investment return than would otherwise be the case.

Example 2. AmeriCo, a U.S. company and SEC filer, wishes to pursue Project X in Country B. In order to be economically viable, Project X requires favorable tax and royalty terms. Country B is willing to grant appropriate fiscal relief for Project X, but does not wish the terms to be publicly disclosed because the disclosure would create pressure for Country B to grant comparable terms on other projects. Country B awards Project X to a non-U.S. oil company that is not subject to Section 13(q) disclosure.

Example 3. AmeriCo, a U.S. company and SEC filer, begins acquiring high-potential exploratory acreage on a confidential basis through agents in Country B. The acreage acquisition requires AmeriCo to pay bonuses to the local governments. Because AmeriCo must disclose these bonuses, its identity is revealed. A non-U.S. competitor of AmeriCo not subject to Section 13(q) steps into the market and begins bidding for remaining available acreage, driving up AmeriCo’s costs significantly.  At the same time, the non-U.S. competitor is able to continue acquiring acreage in another part of Country B on a confidential basis.

Example 4. Country A participates in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and supports country-level disclosure of aggregate payment data. For economic, competitive, and foreign policy reasons, Country A considers the specific commercial terms of its agreements to develop natural resources to be state secrets and has accordingly passed laws prohibiting public disclosure of such terms. If the rules implementing Section 13(q) require disaggregated public disclosure of commercially sensitive terms, AmeriCo, a U.S. company and SEC filer, will be unable to bid on projects in Country A. As a result, Country A’s resources are developed by national oil companies that are not subject to Section 13(q).

“The unilateral approach to revenue disclosure proposed by the SEC would give foreign oil and natural gas companies access to confidential, proprietary information that they could use against U.S.-listed companies when competing for crucial energy resources around the globe,” said Misty McGowen, API director of federal relations, in a statement today that accompanied a copy of the letter.

“API supports the World Bank-backed Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative approach,” McGowen added, because it “encourages disclosure by all oil and natural gas companies of payments made to foreign governments.”

According to McGowen, API officials are hopeful “the SEC works out the anti-competitive aspects of this statute as it finalizes the rule.”

EDITOR’S NOTE: The folks at API, which represents more than 400 companies in the the U.S. oil and natural gas industries, are far too polite to call a spade a spade, but I’m not.  I think the Obama Administration is hellbent on bankrupting “Big Oil,” dismantling the U.S. economy and ensuring that energy-related wealth in the United States is redistributed to interests beyond our borders.

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!

Pipeline ‘Matter of Critical National Interest’

Posted on by
2

One can hardly blame leaders of the nation’s oil and natural gas industries for feeling the need to be aggressive when it comes to combating the Obama Administration’s all-out war against fossil fuels exploration.  Today, officials at the American Petroleum Institute called on the U.S. Department of State to approve the Keystone Pipeline Project as soon as possible “as a matter of critical national interest.”

The pipeline, which would be built by TransCanada Corporation, would be part of a pipeline system bringing oil from Alberta’s oil sands region in Canada to U.S. refineries, according to an API news release.

“Not only is this a chance for the White House to strengthen U.S. energy security and help plan for the nation’s energy future,” said Cindy Schild, API’s refining issues manager, “but it’s also an opportunity to take a specific, public and dramatic action in support of creating new U.S. jobs.  TransCanada estimates that this project will create 13,000 organized labor jobs and hundreds of thousands of additional jobs.”

Canada’s oil reserves are second only to Saudi Arabia, and America imports more oil from Canada than from all Persian Gulf countries.  In addition, more than 342,000 new U.S. jobs are likely to be created between 2011 and 2015 because of Canadian oil sands development, according to a study by the Canadian Energy Research Institute.

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!

Tea Party Movement Goes Global (Update)

Posted on by
2

Little did CNBC reporter Rick Santelli know how far his message would carry after he issued a call for a Chicago Tea Party from the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Feb. 19, 2009.  After spreading across the United States during the past 23 months, it appears that a grassroots movement, similar to the Tea Party Movement Santelli helped launch, has reached the Arab World and beyond.

In recent days, citizens in Albania, Egypt, Jordan and Tunisia, among others, have taken to the streets to protest against oppressive government regimes that have brought mass poverty and discontent.  Along the way, people have died, leaders have fled.

As shown in the video below, a Tiananmen Square kind of moment took place in Egypt yesterday as a lone protester stood in front of a water-cannon truck.

Though it’s difficult to draw side-by-side comparisons of the causes of unrest in foreign lands and those that spurred the Tea Party Movement at home, the concept that too much “Big Government” ideology — excessive taxation, recklessly spending and insurmountable levels of debt — invites inflation, skyrocketing food and fuel prices and high unemployment.

Like we’ve seen abroad, it could lead to rioting in the streets — the kind one oil industry executive predicted on this blog almost two years ago: a real worst-case scenario.

To avoid such calamity, Americans must communicate with their lawmakers at every level of government to ensure they get the message.  Fixing our government and our economy will require them to use sound reasoning skills to make extremely difficult decisions, but those decisions must be made if we are to save this great nation from ruin.

God bless America!

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!

UPDATE 1/30/11 at 8:51 p.m. Central: Though it remains unclear as to what kind of government will take over in Egypt post Mubarak, signs are beginning to point toward bad actors like the Muslim Brotherhood and agents from Iran and Syria helping to stir things up in North Africa.  Therefore, I must make clear that my use of “Tea Party” throughout this post might constitute a bad choice of words.

UPDATE 1/30/11 at 9:59 p.m. Central: The CNN video below supports what I said in the update above.

UPDATE 2/1/11 at 9:58 a.m. Central: I’m not alone.  Fox News Channel’s Jim Angle just used the Tea Party comparison to end a segment on Egyptian citizens’ use of high-technology and social networking tools during the recent unrest there.