Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Bush “Blip Blops” on Energy Policy

Dear President Bush,

What a difference a few months make! Now in an apparent blip blop (as the word flip flopper will not stick to you), you reverse course.

President Bush urged Congress to take back some of the billions of dollars in tax incentives it gave energy companies, saying that with record profits, they don't need the breaks.

Do you think the American people have no long term memory? I know Congress has a lower approval rating than you, but do you think people will really buy that “they did it”?

Signing the energy bill was one thing, and I want to thank the members of Congress for getting a comprehensive energy bill to my desk. Record oil prices and large cash flows also mean that Congress has got to understand that these energy companies don't need unnecessary tax breaks like the write-offs of certain geological and geophysical expenditures, or the use of taxpayers' money to subsidize energy companies' research into deep water drilling. I'm looking forward to Congress to take about $2 billion of these tax breaks out of the budget over a 10-year period of time. Cash flows are up. Taxpayers don't need to be paying for certain of these expenses on behalf of the energy companies.

Memory Check! Just before you signed the Energy Bill in early August of 2005 you issued an update on your accomplishments. The energy portion is below. It clearly calls the policy yours and Congress responsive to the policy you created.

President Bush Will Sign Into Law The First National Energy Plan In More Than A Decade.

President Bush entered office four years ago and proposed the first comprehensive energy plan in decades. Congress has now responded and passed an energy bill, which President Bush will sign into law. The President's national energy plan will increase America's energy security, reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy, increase domestic production, modernize the electricity grid, encourage energy efficiency and conservation, and promote alternative and renewable energy sources.

As for your words on energy, you might want to know your healthcare strategies violate your strategies.

And so the fundamental question is, what are we going to do? What can the government do? One of the past responses by government, particularly from the party of which I am not a member, has been to have -- to propose price fixing, or increase the taxes. Those plans haven't worked in the past.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid just announced price fixing to control costs for implantable cardiac devices. Are you predicting your own strategy will not work "as such plans haven’t done so in the past"?

In August 2004 you spoke to a crowd at an “Ask Bush” event and remarked:

There were two senators -- there were 12 senators who voted against more funding for the troops, two of whom are my opponent and his running mate. (Applause.)


“I don't know if you heard the explanation. He said, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." (Laughter.) That's not the way most folks speak in Ohio.

Did you sign the Energy Bill you proposed and Congress endorsed before "voting against" it? When you signed it big oil already was running record profits. That their prior records have been shattered with each succeeding quarter just continues a propitious capitalist trend or so one might believe …. A big round of Boo's for all!

No comments: