Here's a letter I got from Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU's Washington, D.C. Legislative Office today. It is urgent. Please read this and call your Congressperson now, then Steny Hoyer's office and Nancy Pelosi's office. 202-224-3121. Please call now!
Dear ACLU Supporter,
Despite the outrage coming from a broad coalition of concerned citizens, by tomorrow night the House of Representatives will vote on whether or not to gut the Constitution and give immunity to phone companies who broke the law and spied on Americans.
We have to act now. Even if you’ve emailed, called or visited your members of Congress about FISA, we need you to contact them again today.
Congress is moving so fast and so secretively that we only got a copy of this bill this morning. I can tell you it’s horrible. It contains vacuum cleaner style surveillance that sweeps up the phone calls and emails of Americans. And it’s blatantly unconstitutional.
The bottom line is that this is legislation that benefits a few of our country’s largest corporations while taking away basic rights from the rest of us. And it is unacceptable.
I’m going to spend the rest of the day on the phone calling Capitol Hill trying to stop this bill. I hope you will spend whatever time you can to make the voice of freedom heard in Congress -- make calls, ask your friends and family to call -- please do whatever you can.
Put Congress on notice that the American people don’t want a "compromise" that sells out our rights. Act now. We’re hearing the vote is tomorrow, so we could have less than 24 hours.
Believe me, no matter what happens, the ACLU will continue fighting this -- if necessary, in the courts.
Thank you for all you have done through this fight. Your dedication has truly inspired me and all of us at the ACLU. Now, let's hit the phones!
Thank you,
Caroline Fredrickson, Director
ACLU Washington Legislative Office
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
About Those Torture Memos...
Yesterday, I watched a little of the current Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, chaired by Sen. Carl Levin (D) of Michigan, which is exploring how various forms of torture became a "legal" means of extracting information from detainees at Guantanamo Bay. By "legal" I mean it was condoned by Department of Defense officials, from Donald Rumsfeld on down, in contravention of the U.S. Constitution, of the U.S. Military's Code of Conduct, and of the Geneva Accords.
In the docket was the former chief legal counsel for the DoD, one William "Jim" Haynes, who had an unbelievably blank memory for one of the most senior lawyers in the United States government. This man was in charge of 10,000 other lawyers at the DoD. Yes, that is correct, by his own testimony. 10,000. I heard him say it. But it was clear from his own muddled testimony -- and by the printed record of his own memos submitted as evidence -- that Haynes chose to ignore the advice of most of those 10,000 lawyers, and he approved the torturing of prisoners. Then he blamed it on low-level officers at Gitmo. A true gutless wonder of the Universe.
What most amazed me was this: when he was answering questions put to him by Sen. Levin, he just couldn't recall a darn thing about anything. As soon as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) of South Carolina -- who one might think would be more friendly, but who sounded just as skeptical as Levin did -- started to cajole Haynes' memory banks with a little Southern charm, well, Mr. Haynes chirped up little details that only a moment earlier had eluded him.
This man contradicted himself in testimony numerous times in just the brief 30 minutes I watched this hearing on C-Span. I can't imagine what the rest of the hearing was like.
A few moments after Sen. Graham finished, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) of Missouri whapped Haynes sideways with several angry verbal two-by-fours , and you could hear all the air escaping the room as if sucked out into the vacuum of space by a hole the size of a pea made by a micrometeorite bulleting through a steel fuselage.
It was fascinating.
If you don't know what this latest Bush Administration scandal is about -- so maddening that retelling it nearly caused Keith Olbermann to blow a blood vessel in his temple tonight, let me make it simple:
It's about Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan, extreme rendition, civil liberties, waterboarding, Habeas Corpus, three Supreme Court rulings, the Military Commissions Act, John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzales and illegal military tribunals.
It's about using torture on completely innocent people around the world who were turned over to the CIA for money by their neighbors who didn't like them, and then these hapless prisoners were kept in isolation, without charges, abused, sometimes raped, sometimes even killed, by our government, all in the name of "protecting Americans," using our taxpayer money, and with our tacit consent, since U.S. citizens had (presumably) elected these same dangerous clowns. An in turn these Bozo's have bloodied our Constitution for political gain in front of God and the whole freakin' planet.
And remember, most of the hundreds of prisoners held at Guantanamo have been released without charge, and without recourse for the abuses inflicted on them and their families. By our government. And to this day, not one person held at Guantanamo Bay has ever been convicted of an act of terrorism.
So, it's also about getting this story out before the election, so the public will have a little more guilt on their conscience, and think twice before electing yet another Bush-ite Republican to the White House -- yet another clown who thinks that perpetual war and terror threats and oil company war profiteers makes for sound foreign policy.
And perhaps of equal importance for some member of Congress, it's about cleaning up our house now, before the Europeans start indicting our past and present elected and appointed officials for War Crimes. Don't think it can't happen. I'm believing more and more that it will. And not just for this mess.
* * *
IT WAS TOP DOWN, STUPID
The Bush Administration's "Bad Apples" Theory Goes Sour
By Phillipe Sands
Posted Wednesday, June 18, 2008, at 1:19 PM ET
Slate.com
When the Abu Ghraib scandal hit in the summer of 2004, two of the administration's most senior lawyers—White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales and the Defense Department's General Counsel Jim Haynes—stood before the world's media and laid out the official explanation for newly aggressive interrogation within the U.S. military: It was the result of a bottom-up request from an aggressive combatant commander at Guantanamo; it was implemented within the law and on the basis of careful legal advice; and it produced useful and important results. These new techniques had been essential in getting vital security information from men they labeled "the worst of the worst."
A memo Gonzales and Haynes made public that day sketched out this move to military cruelty. Written by Haynes and signed by Donald Rumsfeld on Dec. 2, 2002, the document discarded a military prohibition on cruelty promulgated by President Lincoln as long ago as 1863. Haynes' memo recommended 15 new techniques, including nudity and forced grooming, humiliation and deception, dogs, sleep deprivation, and stress positions like standing for up to four hours. Three other techniques—including water-boarding—were not given blanket approval, although their future use in individual cases was not rejected, either. Rumsfeld approved the memo, scribbling next to his signature authorizing these techniques the observation, "However, I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to 4 hours?"
Four years after that memo became public, Congress has moved to examine the accuracy of the administration's account of the circumstances under which it was prepared. The author of the Rumsfeld memo became the subject of extensive questioning Tuesday before the Senate armed services committee. Many will say it is too little and too late. I disagree. Congress has a vital role to play in establishing accountability for the American torture policy, although yesterday's faltering efforts to jog Jim Haynes' memory hardly inspire confidence that it can do so.
Read the whole story here.
In the docket was the former chief legal counsel for the DoD, one William "Jim" Haynes, who had an unbelievably blank memory for one of the most senior lawyers in the United States government. This man was in charge of 10,000 other lawyers at the DoD. Yes, that is correct, by his own testimony. 10,000. I heard him say it. But it was clear from his own muddled testimony -- and by the printed record of his own memos submitted as evidence -- that Haynes chose to ignore the advice of most of those 10,000 lawyers, and he approved the torturing of prisoners. Then he blamed it on low-level officers at Gitmo. A true gutless wonder of the Universe.
What most amazed me was this: when he was answering questions put to him by Sen. Levin, he just couldn't recall a darn thing about anything. As soon as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) of South Carolina -- who one might think would be more friendly, but who sounded just as skeptical as Levin did -- started to cajole Haynes' memory banks with a little Southern charm, well, Mr. Haynes chirped up little details that only a moment earlier had eluded him.
This man contradicted himself in testimony numerous times in just the brief 30 minutes I watched this hearing on C-Span. I can't imagine what the rest of the hearing was like.
A few moments after Sen. Graham finished, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) of Missouri whapped Haynes sideways with several angry verbal two-by-fours , and you could hear all the air escaping the room as if sucked out into the vacuum of space by a hole the size of a pea made by a micrometeorite bulleting through a steel fuselage.
It was fascinating.
If you don't know what this latest Bush Administration scandal is about -- so maddening that retelling it nearly caused Keith Olbermann to blow a blood vessel in his temple tonight, let me make it simple:
It's about Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan, extreme rendition, civil liberties, waterboarding, Habeas Corpus, three Supreme Court rulings, the Military Commissions Act, John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzales and illegal military tribunals.
It's about using torture on completely innocent people around the world who were turned over to the CIA for money by their neighbors who didn't like them, and then these hapless prisoners were kept in isolation, without charges, abused, sometimes raped, sometimes even killed, by our government, all in the name of "protecting Americans," using our taxpayer money, and with our tacit consent, since U.S. citizens had (presumably) elected these same dangerous clowns. An in turn these Bozo's have bloodied our Constitution for political gain in front of God and the whole freakin' planet.
And remember, most of the hundreds of prisoners held at Guantanamo have been released without charge, and without recourse for the abuses inflicted on them and their families. By our government. And to this day, not one person held at Guantanamo Bay has ever been convicted of an act of terrorism.
So, it's also about getting this story out before the election, so the public will have a little more guilt on their conscience, and think twice before electing yet another Bush-ite Republican to the White House -- yet another clown who thinks that perpetual war and terror threats and oil company war profiteers makes for sound foreign policy.
And perhaps of equal importance for some member of Congress, it's about cleaning up our house now, before the Europeans start indicting our past and present elected and appointed officials for War Crimes. Don't think it can't happen. I'm believing more and more that it will. And not just for this mess.
IT WAS TOP DOWN, STUPID
The Bush Administration's "Bad Apples" Theory Goes Sour
By Phillipe Sands
Posted Wednesday, June 18, 2008, at 1:19 PM ET
Slate.com
When the Abu Ghraib scandal hit in the summer of 2004, two of the administration's most senior lawyers—White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales and the Defense Department's General Counsel Jim Haynes—stood before the world's media and laid out the official explanation for newly aggressive interrogation within the U.S. military: It was the result of a bottom-up request from an aggressive combatant commander at Guantanamo; it was implemented within the law and on the basis of careful legal advice; and it produced useful and important results. These new techniques had been essential in getting vital security information from men they labeled "the worst of the worst."
A memo Gonzales and Haynes made public that day sketched out this move to military cruelty. Written by Haynes and signed by Donald Rumsfeld on Dec. 2, 2002, the document discarded a military prohibition on cruelty promulgated by President Lincoln as long ago as 1863. Haynes' memo recommended 15 new techniques, including nudity and forced grooming, humiliation and deception, dogs, sleep deprivation, and stress positions like standing for up to four hours. Three other techniques—including water-boarding—were not given blanket approval, although their future use in individual cases was not rejected, either. Rumsfeld approved the memo, scribbling next to his signature authorizing these techniques the observation, "However, I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to 4 hours?"
Four years after that memo became public, Congress has moved to examine the accuracy of the administration's account of the circumstances under which it was prepared. The author of the Rumsfeld memo became the subject of extensive questioning Tuesday before the Senate armed services committee. Many will say it is too little and too late. I disagree. Congress has a vital role to play in establishing accountability for the American torture policy, although yesterday's faltering efforts to jog Jim Haynes' memory hardly inspire confidence that it can do so.
Read the whole story here.
Gen. Taguba Says Bush Admin. Officials Committed War Crimes
By Warren P. Strobel | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008
McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — The Army general who led the investigation into prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison accused the Bush administration Wednesday of committing "war crimes" and called for those responsible to be held to account.
The remarks by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, who's now retired, came in a new report that found that U.S. personnel tortured and abused detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, using beatings, electrical shocks, sexual humiliation and other cruel practices.
"After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes," Taguba wrote. "The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."
Taguba, whose 2004 investigation documented chilling abuses at Abu Ghraib, is thought to be the most senior official to have accused the administration of war crimes. "The commander in chief and those under him authorized a systematic regime of torture," he wrote.
A White House spokeswoman, Kate Starr, had no comment.
Read the whole story here.
Read the full five-part series that McClatchy Newspapers published Sunday exposing the Bush Administration's reprehensible policies and practices regarding so-called "enemy combatants" and other victims of the mis-named "War on Terror."
McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — The Army general who led the investigation into prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison accused the Bush administration Wednesday of committing "war crimes" and called for those responsible to be held to account.
The remarks by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, who's now retired, came in a new report that found that U.S. personnel tortured and abused detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, using beatings, electrical shocks, sexual humiliation and other cruel practices.
"After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes," Taguba wrote. "The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."
Taguba, whose 2004 investigation documented chilling abuses at Abu Ghraib, is thought to be the most senior official to have accused the administration of war crimes. "The commander in chief and those under him authorized a systematic regime of torture," he wrote.
A White House spokeswoman, Kate Starr, had no comment.
Read the whole story here.
Read the full five-part series that McClatchy Newspapers published Sunday exposing the Bush Administration's reprehensible policies and practices regarding so-called "enemy combatants" and other victims of the mis-named "War on Terror."
My Comment to Jack Cafferty's Question Today
CNN's Jack Cafferty posed this question to viewers today:
Is drilling for oil in Alaska and off the coast the answer to high gas prices?
Here was my comment (it was still awaiting moderation when Jack read several viewer comments on the air at 4:55 Mountain Time today).
June 18th, 2008 6:24 pm ET
President Bush’s sudden push to open up potential oil fields in US coastal waters might have more credibility — as one of your reports pointed out this morning — if he had the guts to first reverse his own executive order banning that drilling, instead of trying to push it off onto Congress.
Right now, oil produced in Alaska doesn’t reach the US in any case, since Alaska’s heavy crude can only be refined in one US oil refinery in Washington state. Much of Alaskan oil is exported to Japan and other countries. How does that help gas prices in the U.S.?
If the oil companies don’t feel oil produced from US territory should be sent to U.S. consumers now, what assurance does the American public have that new drilling off U.S. coasts would help U.S. gas prices?
If John McCain and George Bush want to help American consumers, instead of lining the pockets of their oil industry buddies — which is what this is really about — why not propose legislation to require that any oil produced from U.S. states and territories be required to be sold to U.S. consumers, and be prohibited from being sold overseas?
Is drilling for oil in Alaska and off the coast the answer to high gas prices?
Here was my comment (it was still awaiting moderation when Jack read several viewer comments on the air at 4:55 Mountain Time today).
June 18th, 2008 6:24 pm ET
President Bush’s sudden push to open up potential oil fields in US coastal waters might have more credibility — as one of your reports pointed out this morning — if he had the guts to first reverse his own executive order banning that drilling, instead of trying to push it off onto Congress.
Right now, oil produced in Alaska doesn’t reach the US in any case, since Alaska’s heavy crude can only be refined in one US oil refinery in Washington state. Much of Alaskan oil is exported to Japan and other countries. How does that help gas prices in the U.S.?
If the oil companies don’t feel oil produced from US territory should be sent to U.S. consumers now, what assurance does the American public have that new drilling off U.S. coasts would help U.S. gas prices?
If John McCain and George Bush want to help American consumers, instead of lining the pockets of their oil industry buddies — which is what this is really about — why not propose legislation to require that any oil produced from U.S. states and territories be required to be sold to U.S. consumers, and be prohibited from being sold overseas?
Dems in Congress Moving Now to Spy on Americans, Reward Telcoms
If you are as alarmed and angered by this as I am, call your congressperson, Steny Hoyer's office and Nancy Pelosi' office today and voice your displeasure. Congress' phone number is: 202-224-3121. I recommend everyone keep this number in their cell phones. I call Congress all the time to tell them what I think. I just called Tom Udall's office as well as Steny Hoyer's and Nancy Pelosi's. It is our right and responsibility to do so. THIS is one of those moments. Here's the article:
by ART LEVINE
The Huffington Post
Posted June 18, 2008 | 01:24 AM (EST)
The Democratic-led Congress, with the support of key House leaders, is moving quickly to expand unconstitutional spying authority on Americans and reward telecoms for breaking the law. As the ACLU's chief lobbyist, Caroline Fredrickson, points out in an email alert:
A sham spying "compromise" similar to the one we warned you about last week could be rammed through both the Senate and House this week. It's moving that fast.
Will you write today and let your elected officials know Americans want them to stand up for our privacy?
In a proposal that makes a mockery of the rule of law, telecom companies that broke the law by supplying mountains of personal information to the government without a warrant will be let off the hook.
Here's what Senators Feingold and Dodd had to say about Senator Bond's proposal, which is very similar to what we expect in the coming days:
"Under the Bond proposal, the result of the FISA Court's evaluation would be predetermined... the FISA court would be required to grant immunity."
Tell your members of Congress to reject a sham immunity "compromise."
There's a deeply disturbing premise behind this dangerous FISA legislation: The president simply had to claim his request was legal for immunity to be granted to telecom companies that illegally handed over personal information.
No matter how illegal, offensive or intrusive a company's invasion of your privacy has been, it won't make a difference, because if the president gave the company a note claiming their behavior was legal, they're completely off the hook.
Congress needs to reject this sham for what it is and insist on real accountability for telecommunications companies that broke the law.
Tell your members of Congress you demand accountability, not immunity!
Throughout the extended FISA debate, you and the ACLU have worked tirelessly to protect personal privacy and the rule of law. Together, we've given the Bush administration a run for their money, defeating a number of freedom-stealing proposals. Don't let Congress cave in now.
Thanks for all you do in defense of freedom.
Read the rest of this story in today's The Huffington Post.
by ART LEVINE
The Huffington Post
Posted June 18, 2008 | 01:24 AM (EST)
The Democratic-led Congress, with the support of key House leaders, is moving quickly to expand unconstitutional spying authority on Americans and reward telecoms for breaking the law. As the ACLU's chief lobbyist, Caroline Fredrickson, points out in an email alert:
A sham spying "compromise" similar to the one we warned you about last week could be rammed through both the Senate and House this week. It's moving that fast.
Will you write today and let your elected officials know Americans want them to stand up for our privacy?
In a proposal that makes a mockery of the rule of law, telecom companies that broke the law by supplying mountains of personal information to the government without a warrant will be let off the hook.
Here's what Senators Feingold and Dodd had to say about Senator Bond's proposal, which is very similar to what we expect in the coming days:
"Under the Bond proposal, the result of the FISA Court's evaluation would be predetermined... the FISA court would be required to grant immunity."
Tell your members of Congress to reject a sham immunity "compromise."
There's a deeply disturbing premise behind this dangerous FISA legislation: The president simply had to claim his request was legal for immunity to be granted to telecom companies that illegally handed over personal information.
No matter how illegal, offensive or intrusive a company's invasion of your privacy has been, it won't make a difference, because if the president gave the company a note claiming their behavior was legal, they're completely off the hook.
Congress needs to reject this sham for what it is and insist on real accountability for telecommunications companies that broke the law.
Tell your members of Congress you demand accountability, not immunity!
Throughout the extended FISA debate, you and the ACLU have worked tirelessly to protect personal privacy and the rule of law. Together, we've given the Bush administration a run for their money, defeating a number of freedom-stealing proposals. Don't let Congress cave in now.
Thanks for all you do in defense of freedom.
Read the rest of this story in today's The Huffington Post.
Scientists find bugs that eat waste and excrete petrol
Silicon Valley is experimenting with bacteria that have been genetically altered to provide 'renewable petroleum'
by Chris Ayres
The Times of London Online
“Ten years ago I could never have imagined I’d be doing this,” says Greg Pal, 33, a former software executive, as he squints into the late afternoon Californian sun. “I mean, this is essentially agriculture, right? But the people I talk to – especially the ones coming out of business school – this is the one hot area everyone wants to get into.”
He means bugs. To be more precise: the genetic alteration of bugs – very, very small ones – so that when they feed on agricultural waste such as woodchips or wheat straw, they do something extraordinary. They excrete crude oil.
Unbelievably, this is not science fiction. Mr Pal holds up a small beaker of bug excretion that could, theoretically, be poured into the tank of the giant Lexus SUV next to us. Not that Mr Pal is willing to risk it just yet. He gives it a month before the first vehicle is filled up on what he calls “renewable petroleum”. After that, he grins, “it’s a brave new world”.
Read the full story here.
by Chris Ayres
The Times of London Online
“Ten years ago I could never have imagined I’d be doing this,” says Greg Pal, 33, a former software executive, as he squints into the late afternoon Californian sun. “I mean, this is essentially agriculture, right? But the people I talk to – especially the ones coming out of business school – this is the one hot area everyone wants to get into.”
He means bugs. To be more precise: the genetic alteration of bugs – very, very small ones – so that when they feed on agricultural waste such as woodchips or wheat straw, they do something extraordinary. They excrete crude oil.
Unbelievably, this is not science fiction. Mr Pal holds up a small beaker of bug excretion that could, theoretically, be poured into the tank of the giant Lexus SUV next to us. Not that Mr Pal is willing to risk it just yet. He gives it a month before the first vehicle is filled up on what he calls “renewable petroleum”. After that, he grins, “it’s a brave new world”.
Read the full story here.
Change that Works for You: Flint, MI
Anytime somebody says Barack Obama gives nice speeches that are short on details, just show them this latest speech...
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Oil Demand in the US is Falling Significantly; Bush Panders
In light of the hoo-ey today by McCain and Bush about opening up offshore oil reserve areas along U.S. coastlines (an obvious pander to gasoline-price-stressed consumers more egregious by logarithmic factors than McCain's old gas tax holiday canard), I thought two articles that appeared tonight might provide some perspective.
Sorry I've been away. Busy, you know.
* * *
Oil Falls a Fourth Day on Signs of U.S. Gasoline Demand Drop
By Christian Schmollinger
Bloomberg News
June 18 (Bloomberg) -- Crude oil fell for a fourth day in New York in the longest losing streak this year on signs that gasoline demand in the U.S., the world's largest consumer, is declining as record prices curb usage.
Consumers purchased an average 9.305 million barrels a day of motor fuels, 3.2 percent less than a year earlier, MasterCard Inc. said in its weekly SpendingPulse report. It was the eighth week of decline. Gasoline demand was down 1.7 percent from last year, the U.S. Department of Energy reported June 11.
Read the rest of the story here.
* * *
Bush To Echo McCain's Plan To Drill In Oceans
H. JOSEF HEBERT | June 17, 2008 09:16 PM EST |
Associated Press | Huffington Post
WASHINGTON — President Bush plans to make a renewed push Wednesday to get Congress to end a long-standing ban on offshore oil and gas drilling, echoing a call by GOP presidential candidate John McCain.
Congressional Democrats have opposed lifting the prohibitions on energy development on nearly all federal Outer Continental Shelf waters for more than a quarter-century, including waters along both the East and West coasts.
With oil prices soaring and motorists paying $4 a gallon for gasoline, political pressures have been growing for more domestic oil and gas production.
"He will explicitly call on Congress to ... pass legislation lifting the congressional ban on safe, environmentally friendly offshore oil drilling," Perino said. "He wants to work with states to determine where offshore drilling should occur."
Bush also will reiterate his call for development of oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, Perino said. McCain has opposed drilling in the refuge, maintaining that the pristine areas in northeastern Alaska should be protected from energy development.
On Monday, McCain made lifting the federal ban on offshore oil and gas development a key part of his energy plan. The Arizona senator said states should be allowed to pursue energy exploration in waters near their coasts and receive some of the royalty revenue.
Bush has made clear in recent weeks that the drilling moratorium in coastal waters should end to allow for more domestic oil production and help "take the pressure off the price of gasoline."
Democrats, as well as some Republican senators from coastal states, have opposed lifting the drilling prohibitions, fearful that energy development could harm tourism and raise the risk of oil spills on beaches.
Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate for president, opposes lifting the ban on offshore drilling and says that allowing exploration now wouldn't affect gasoline prices for at least five years.
Read the rest of the story here.
Sorry I've been away. Busy, you know.
Oil Falls a Fourth Day on Signs of U.S. Gasoline Demand Drop
By Christian Schmollinger
Bloomberg News
June 18 (Bloomberg) -- Crude oil fell for a fourth day in New York in the longest losing streak this year on signs that gasoline demand in the U.S., the world's largest consumer, is declining as record prices curb usage.
Consumers purchased an average 9.305 million barrels a day of motor fuels, 3.2 percent less than a year earlier, MasterCard Inc. said in its weekly SpendingPulse report. It was the eighth week of decline. Gasoline demand was down 1.7 percent from last year, the U.S. Department of Energy reported June 11.
Read the rest of the story here.
Bush To Echo McCain's Plan To Drill In Oceans
H. JOSEF HEBERT | June 17, 2008 09:16 PM EST |
Associated Press | Huffington Post
WASHINGTON — President Bush plans to make a renewed push Wednesday to get Congress to end a long-standing ban on offshore oil and gas drilling, echoing a call by GOP presidential candidate John McCain.
Congressional Democrats have opposed lifting the prohibitions on energy development on nearly all federal Outer Continental Shelf waters for more than a quarter-century, including waters along both the East and West coasts.
With oil prices soaring and motorists paying $4 a gallon for gasoline, political pressures have been growing for more domestic oil and gas production.
"He will explicitly call on Congress to ... pass legislation lifting the congressional ban on safe, environmentally friendly offshore oil drilling," Perino said. "He wants to work with states to determine where offshore drilling should occur."
Bush also will reiterate his call for development of oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, Perino said. McCain has opposed drilling in the refuge, maintaining that the pristine areas in northeastern Alaska should be protected from energy development.
On Monday, McCain made lifting the federal ban on offshore oil and gas development a key part of his energy plan. The Arizona senator said states should be allowed to pursue energy exploration in waters near their coasts and receive some of the royalty revenue.
Bush has made clear in recent weeks that the drilling moratorium in coastal waters should end to allow for more domestic oil production and help "take the pressure off the price of gasoline."
Democrats, as well as some Republican senators from coastal states, have opposed lifting the drilling prohibitions, fearful that energy development could harm tourism and raise the risk of oil spills on beaches.
Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate for president, opposes lifting the ban on offshore drilling and says that allowing exploration now wouldn't affect gasoline prices for at least five years.
Read the rest of the story here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
