State of the Union — Definitions

February 4, 2012 by

Most who watched the State of the Union message probably agree with the near-universal evaluation — a campaign speech, not a State of the Union address.  For a nanosecond it seemed that the President had had an epiphany; he promised to pursue an “all of the above” energy policy, but then spelled out what that means:

Continue to mislead the American people by calling law-based tax treatments “subsidies” to U.S.-based integrated oil companies (though every company is protected against double taxation on overseas earnings, and every manufacturer has the right to the  manufacturers’ tax credit).

Continue to misuse “subsidy” to justify unrelenting efforts to impose new taxes on the largest U.S.-based oil and gas companies (and render them less competitive vis a vis foreign-based national oil companies expanding efforts and investments seek new energy supplies in U.S., Cuban and South American waters).

Continue huge subsidies, grants, interest-free loans and hand-outs to “green” energy companies that claim “near-economic” technologies to transform America’s energy-based economy  (ignoring the decades such change will take, and the list and scale of recent failures, misappropriations, shady contracts and misdealings that continue to waste taxpayer money).

Promise tax breaks to U.S. manufacturers who build  facilities in this country (while seeking to eliminate that tax credit for U.S. oil companies’ refinery facilities here).

Promise to double the new manufacturers tax credit for “high-tech” companies (although a definition of “high-tech” will lead to countless law suits — and although the oil industry is one the most high-tech on earth, it remains threatened by tax credit removal).

Continue to delay a pipeline that would open new Canadian oil supplies to U.S. refineries and customers and would create at least 17,000 new U.S. jobs during the two- to three-year construction period (all to pander to environmental groups whose im is to prevent Canada from developing its huge resources in Alberta.  The pipeline critics hope to stop development of the resource; they  ignore the fact that the Chinese National Oil Company has bought 30% of one development project and has set aside $12 Billion to pipe Canadian oil to Pacific ports for new Chinese ships to move to China).

Announce with a flourish that he will “open” the Gulf of Mexico to new exploration and development leases, but never mention the fact that his action delayed those lease sales by 2 years or more.

And slow domestic exploration and development of astounding new resources of oil and natural gas, now that the oil companies have developed the technology to provide for U.S. needs for decades into the future.

So that’s it.  The President’s real understanding and goal when he speaks of “an all of the above energy policy.”

This entry was posted in Energy Taxes, Hydraulic Fracturing, Keystone XL, Offshore Drilling, Regulation, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.