"Is Big Oil to blame? Sure. Partly. Big oil companies have been gouging consumers for years. They have made almost $1 trillion in profits over the past decade, in part thanks to ridiculous federal subsidies and tax loopholes. I have proposed legislation to end those pointless giveaways to some of the biggest and most profitable corporations in the history of the world.
But there’s another reason for the wild rise in gas prices. The culprit is Wall Street. Speculators are raking in profits by gambling in the loosely regulated commodity markets for gas and oil.A decade ago, speculators controlled only about 30% of the oil futures market. Today, Wall Street speculators control nearly 80% of this market. Many of those people buying and selling oil in the commodity markets will never use a drop of this oil. They are not airlines or trucking companies who will use the fuel in the future. The only function of the speculators in this process is to make as much money as they can, as quickly as they can.I’ve seen the raw documents that prove the role of speculators. Commodity Futures Trading Commission records showed that in the summer of 2008, when gas prices spiked to more than $4 a gallon, speculators overwhelmingly controlled the crude oil futures market. The commission, which supposedly represents the interests of the American people, had kept the information hidden from the public for nearly three years. That alone is an outrage. The American people had a right to know exactly who caused gas prices to skyrocket in 2008 and who is causing them to spike today.Even those inside the oil industry have admitted that speculation is driving up the price of gasoline. The CEO of Exxon-Mobil, Rex Tillerson, told a Senate hearing last year that speculation was driving up the price of a barrel of oil by as much as 40%. The general counsel of Delta Airlines, Ben Hirst, and the experts at Goldman Sachs also said excessive speculation is causing oil prices to spike by up to 40%. Even Saudi Arabia, the largest exporter of oil in the world, told the Bush administration back in 2008, during the last major spike in oil prices, that speculation was responsible for about $40 of a barrel of oil."

Bernie Sanders

(Source: CNN, via mochente)

The Gas and Oil Party

The GOP is at it again. A bill introduced by Rep. Cory Gardener (R-CO), called the Jobs and Energy Permitting Act of 2011, would “eliminate needless permitting delays that have stalled important energy production opportunities off the coast of Alaska.” In other words, it would get rid of regulation that is preventing oil companies from drilling in protected reserves off the coast of Alaska. There is also the reluctance to let oil companies drill in new places in Alaska because of the Exxon-Valdez spill.

An aspect of this bill that I find interesting is the fact that the writer of it phrased oil drilling as “energy production opportunities.” It almost begs the question as to whether the GOP knows how terrible more drilling sounds after the cold proof of the BP spill. Plus, while this bill was written beforehand, the recent spill in the Yellowstone River doesn’t place this bill in a better light.

Then, we come to my favorite part of the bill (emphasis added):

The bill would also eliminate the permitting back-and-forth that occurs between Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and its Environmental Appeals Board.  Rather than having exploration air permits repeatedly approved and rescinded by the agency and its review board, the EPA will be required to take final action – granting or denying a permit – within six months.  All appeals will go to the D.C. Circuit Court for resolution because of the national implications of oil production on the Outer Continental Shelf and the need for consistency in decision-making.

Basically, this section establishes that any appeals made against EPA regulations will fall under the jurisdiction of the D.C. Circuit Court. While this seems unimportant, this is actually the most notable part of the bill. Out of the 13 judges on the bench of this court, 9 were appointed by Republican presidents. This means that, essentially, any appeals that claim the EPA regulations are too broad, or impose too much on businesses, will prevail. Gardener says that the reason for this provision is because of the “national implications of oil production” and the “need for consistency”. This makes absolutely no sense. While there are national implications, any Federal Appeals Court would be fit to handle cases related to EPA regulations. Just because this court is situated in D.C., it carries no more weight than any other Circuit Court of Appeals. As for the second point, this “consistency” only serves to limit justice. By restricting appeals cases to only one court, there will never be any differences in interpretations of laws, possibly resulting in a bias. This is especially true with the currently conservative Supreme Court, which is the only court above a Federal Appeals Court.

In America, we have a problem. Well actually, we have a shitload of problems, but this video focuses on one of many: deflated gas prices. While Americans have begun to drive less due to the spike in gas prices, the price could actually be much higher.

Seriously, watch this video.