Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DhhD

(4,695 posts)
Thu Sep 4, 2014, 11:24 AM Sep 2014

TX R-Joe Barton Hoping to Lift Crude Export Ban and Raise the Price of Gasoline in America.

Less supply in America means higher gasoline prices for consumers, more profits for Big Oil. Big Oil wins again by selling exports. With less supply and higher prices causing problems, Big Oil hopes to talk consumers into getting Congress to lift the ban. Keeping the ban in place, will help working consumers here in America.

http://fuelfix.com/blog/2014/09/03/barton-time-to-lift-crude-export-ban/

The federal government is also studying the issue. The government’s Energy Information Administration will soon issue a report analyzing how the price of oil around the globe affects gasoline costs inside the United States. The document is expected to provide additional ammunition to export advocates, who have argued that the existing ban is a relic of the OPEC oil embargo that does not mesh with today’s booming domestic crude production.

Also, who/what persons are doing this gasoline usage study and what persons are writing the report? Look out for this GOP scam.

http://fuelfix.com/blog/2014/08/18/eia-to-cast-new-data-into-oil-export-debate/




5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
TX R-Joe Barton Hoping to Lift Crude Export Ban and Raise the Price of Gasoline in America. (Original Post) DhhD Sep 2014 OP
The right says drill so we have more domestic upaloopa Sep 2014 #1
Wasn't this asshole the one who apologized to BP during a hearing after the "spill" in the Gulf? winstars Sep 2014 #2
Yes. Barton even said something to the effect that the taxpayers should pick up BP's bill DhhD Sep 2014 #3
Barton is nothing but white cloud Sep 2014 #4
Yep that the same Joe Barton white cloud Sep 2014 #5

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
1. The right says drill so we have more domestic
Thu Sep 4, 2014, 11:50 AM
Sep 2014

production to lower gas prices and now ship it out of the country.
The teahadists will never get this.

DhhD

(4,695 posts)
3. Yes. Barton even said something to the effect that the taxpayers should pick up BP's bill
Thu Sep 4, 2014, 12:09 PM
Sep 2014

for the damages. The government said that it would take about $20 Billion to cover the damages.

Just read that BP may get away with paying $1 Billion. So Barton may be boasting and roasting the taxpayers some more. What judges are allowing this to happen? Who appointed them. Who and why was Feinberg appointed to over see the payment for damages?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Feinberg

"Mr. Feinberg, employed by BP, has decided on his own authority that all claims recipients must release all companies who caused this disaster from any and all legal responsibility, no matter how grossly negligent they were. This sweeping release, which assigns victims’ claims to BP, benefits only one actor: BP – the company that happens to pay Mr. Feinberg’s salary.". In January 2011, Judge Barbier, the federal judge over the oil spill litigation, after hearing evidence and arguments of the attorneys, ruled that Kenneth Feinberg was not independent of BP and could no longer claim to be so. Feinberg had been telling victims he was their lawyer and did not answer to BP.
The letter also criticized Feinberg's lack of transparency around compensation:
"Despite repeated calls for the release of documents establishing the formal relationship between BP and Feinberg Rozen, as well as its subcontractors who are reviewing and adjudicating claims, almost nothing has been publicly released. And now we learn, as reported by Reuters on November 22, 2010, that BP and Feinberg Rozen consider their arrangement “verbal,” i.e., they have not committed to writing the firm’s compensation arrangement so there can be no public examination of it. Is the public to believe that there is no paper evidence at all documenting a $10 million per year financial arrangement between BP and Feinberg Rozen? What about the contracts between BP, Feinberg Rozen and the subcontractors who are advising and adjudicating claims and also being paid directly by BP? Surely these contracts must be in writing and released. This failure to release the terms of all these financial arrangements under circumstances of tremendous historic and public significance is simply unacceptable."

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»TX R-Joe Barton Hoping to...