Obama Spokesperson Reaffirms Commitment To Rolling Back Oil Company Subsidies
A spokesperson for the Obama transition team is reaffirming the President-elect's commitment to rolling back the subsidies that oil companies enjoy, confirming that Obama's campaign promise on this score is still fully operative.
"Yes," replied Obama transition team spokesperson Nick Shapiro, when we asked him whether Obama remained committed to rolling back the oil company subsidies.
We posed the question to the Obama in the wake of yesterday's news that Obama wasn't imposing a windfall profits tax on the oil companies, something that got some progressives to worry whether Obama was preparing to soften his policies in the face of corporate opposition.
The Obama spokesperson's reaffirmation of his commitment to rolling back oil company subsidies could help mitigate such angst. It's unclear how or when the rollback will take place, since Obama hasn't even taken office yet.
The reason this is noteworthy is that the Obama campaign has largely refused public comment on its legislative priorities. Yesterday The Huffington Post was able to get an Obama spokesperson to offer the same one word answer -- "yes" -- to the question of whether Obama remained committed to the Employee Free Choice Act, the leading priority of the big unions.
On the subject of the windfall profits tax, Obama aides argue that there's no story there to begin with. They say that the policies were meant to be triggered by oil prices above $80 a barrel and that when the Obama campaign rolled out his middle class rescue plan in mid-October it didn't have the tax in it, because prices had dropped, meaning there's nothing new here.
"Obama announced the policy during the campaign because oil prices were above $80 per barrel," an Obama aide said. "They are currently below that now and expected to stay below that."
"They are currently below that now and expected to stay below that."
Until the economy improves, then things will change. The eventual rise of oil is one of the few things that we can count on.
December 4, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
You obviously don't understand, oil prices are low *now* so therefore we don't need to do anything. In fact, we should be back out there supporting the economy by buying huge gas-guzzlers from the big 3 so we don't have to bail them out!
December 4, 2008 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why buy an Escape when you can buy a Hummer? We didn't need those water supplies in the West anyway....
I guess you are kind of right, this policy is putting the economy over, well, everything else.
December 4, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Get rid of corporate welfare, check. Good times are coming for the country.
December 4, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
An aside, as a geologist and having recently read 'Hot Flat and Crowded', I'm coming around to believe Friedman's idea that gas needs a floor price to make it stable enough to encourage investment in wind, solar, nuclear, etc. This drop in gas prices is good for the average poorer person, but it sucks for those trying to get money to improve, say, wind efficiency.
December 4, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
You could tack on a $1/gallon gas tax right now and it would still be cheaper than it was a month ago, while generating about $140B per year in revenues. That would just about pay for health coverage for every uninsured person in America. Alternatively, you could make a significant cut in payroll taxes or other regressive taxes. If you're ever going to add on a significant gas tax, there is no better time than now. As long as the revenues were used correctly, there would be no significant added burden on people who couldn't afford it.
Wishful thinking. It's not gonna happen.
December 4, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can you IMAGINE the public reaction. Even though logically you are correct.
December 4, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
One question--how in the world did Europe do just that? Here, it would be political death. Was it their framing?
December 4, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
A whole different attitude from top to bottom over there. America's individualist philosophy is a double-edged sword.
Also, Europe doesn't have 8 years of Bush causing a deep distrust of anything governmental in their populace.
December 4, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, yes. 8 years of Bush does leave one somewhat mistrustful. What didn't he mess up?
December 4, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think the oil companies have been spending their record profits on increased wind efficiency.
Ending the incentive to exploit oil paired with new incentives for alternative energy will go further in meeting our goals than having oil companies take massive profits and hoping they will invest a pittance in wind.
December 4, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
No no, it's about creating a market for competition for oil. The oil companies, especially EXXON, won't do anything. But if you create an atmosphere that puts wind and others on a near-level playing field that's stable, the thinking is that people will actually put money into alternative energy research even without de-facto government incentives. When oil's low, investing in wind just makes no business sense.
December 4, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a good indicator of misunderstandings to come.
We have been subjected for eight years to a maladministration with the cognitive capability of a two-year-old, and now find the MSM is incapable of distinguishing between a promise to deal with a temporary emergency (high oil prices = windfall profits tax) and a broad, long-term policy (cutting corporate welfare subsidies for oil companies.)
The repugs are going to exploit this cognitive disability as much as possible, so let's all start exercising our policy discrimination muscles now.
December 4, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
yeah, this one is particularly egregious
December 4, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
"maladministration"...
Nice!
Captures the last 7+ years beautifully.
December 4, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
It would be a good book title.
December 4, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
No shit. This is exactly the deal.
December 4, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
>>something that got some progressives to worry whether Obama . . .> >
Progressives worrying??? Nahhhh.
December 4, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Progressives, "those on the left", Democrats: all carrying the worry gene.
December 4, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
True dat. There was a story in the NYT before the election about how liberals just couldn't believe we would actually win. Every bit of good news had to be some sinister ploy. One guy would be up at night worrying about Obama's poll numbers in Vermont . . . freaking Vermont--the state respsonible for his largest margin of 38 points!
December 4, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Times does a nice job of enabling this obsessive worrying, what with stories before the election about how the increased majorities for the Democrats pose "challenges" for the Democrats. Funny. One might think increased majorities for one party would suggest "challenges" for the opposition...
December 4, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
If the media can find one Democrat or progressive blogger who's worrying, it's a big story about how "the left is worried"; they didn't even look for one conservative who worried about the GOP for the past eight years.
December 4, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have been following this story. I first saw an article about it on HuffPo where the author said that Obama has already broken this promise based solely on the fact that it was no longer listed on change.gov. I left a long and angry post asking why the author did not attempt to get a comment from Obama's team or why they haven't explored the fact that there may be another reason why it was removed. I didn't curse in my post, but it must have been bad enough that they decided not to put it through. The next day, I see the same article with minor word changes, under a different author and under a different section of HuffPo. The next day, it was present as new article but as a press release from the activist group that was pushing the issue. Then I saw it on Mother Jones - the very same article and its "sources". Then it showed up on Reuters with a statement from an "aide" - no name, nothing. I left another comment asking if this was official statement from Obama's team why isn't there a name listed for this aide? So after 4-5 days of trying to stir this up with no success, the HuffPo decided to run it as their main headline. Making it appear that there was some running debate or uproar about this "broken promise". They listed quotes from all of these articles -which was actually one article- and now they have over 4,000 people all in a twist. And after all of that I find this article on TPM with a quote and a name completely denying that Obama has not broken his promise. WTF? Is this what I stopped watching the MSM for? more of the same? misleading headlines, hyped up stories?
December 4, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Are liberals freaking out over nothing? Yes.
December 4, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Silly us! :-)
December 4, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is it me, or do the Oil companies look alot less evil now that they are one of the few industries that aren't begging for our spare change?
December 4, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's just you. I'm looking at the pump thinking "they got us for $4 a gallon?!?!? ... supply and demand my ass."
December 4, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's just you.
Besides, they're still got those obscene profits floating their boats right now.
December 4, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Less evil? I don't see Halliburton "begging for our spare change" either...
Their boys are leaving the White House. And maybe eventually we'll even find out about Cheney's energy policy meeting (during which they probably had a big white board marked with the heading, "Make hay while the sun shines").
Now they'll be concentrating on slowing down the transition away from oil.
December 4, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a good friend who works for evil Exxon Mobile. Despite their record profits (which have not been reinvested), he has not had a raise is SIX (6) freaking years. SIX YEARS!!
These people are EVIL!!
December 4, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want to know what's going on here? The same guy, Llyod Chapman that started this rumor on Nov. 24th on Huffington Post has now posted another article saying that Obama now drops campaign promise to end contracting abuses - using the same evidence as with the windfall profits tax - it wasn't listed on the website. Here is the link from Nov. 24th : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lloyd-chapman/corporate-giants-force-ob_b_146214.html And here is the link to article about contracting abuse: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lloyd-chapman/obama-drops-campaign-prom_b_148524.html
December 4, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Both the Bush and Clinton Administrations "accidentally" left out contract terms requiring oil companies pay royalties on offshore oil leases.
There are many in Congress, D and R alike, who are opposed to oil companies paying royalties to the public for drilling on public lands or under public waters. They get pretty huffy about this and it's the sort of thing I expect would die in the Senate between R and conservative D obstruction and Senate D timidity.
So, we should get behind this effort, if Obama really intends to follow through (he's backing off on repealing Bush's tax cuts to the rich and on a windfall profits tax. That's not "worry," that's the latest news).
Now, if you're a private landowner, you get paid some handsome royalties. But these Ds and Rs think the public deserves lesser treatment.
December 4, 2008 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
"(he's backing off on repealing Bush's tax cuts to the rich and on a windfall profits tax. That's not "worry," that's the latest news)." - It is the latest false story being pushed by handwringers on the Left. Obama said in a press conference that his team is looking into whether it is best to repeal or let the Bush tax cuts expire. I'm more concerned with the tax cuts for the middle class- this is what America will be watching out for. The windfall profits tax story has been debunked. I will reserve judgement on Obama's policies until I hear them from his mouth or an authorized spokesperson - someone who gives their name, not some anonymous "aide". I don't trust the media anymore - whether it's the MSM or the Liberal/Right-Wing. I'm done. I'm not a journalist but I can't believe the shit that gets past the editor's desk.
December 4, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink