Thursday, June 19, 2008
House Democrats call for nationalizing oil refineries
House Democrats, in response to demands from Republicans that we open up protected areas to oil exploration and production, have proposed nationalizing the oil refineries.
House Democrats responded to President's Bush's call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. This was at an on-camera press conference fed back live.
Among other things, the Democrats called for the government to own refineries so it could better control the flow of the oil supply...
Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), member of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the most-ardent opponents of off-shore drilling.
1115
We (the government) should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market.
In other words, they not only want to limit the production of oil within the United States by declaring vast areas off-limits, they want to control the refining of it. It is not clear whether when given this control the Democrats propose to refine more gasoline from no additional crude (an impossibility), import more foreign oil so that they can refine more gasoline, or reduce the production of the refineries as well as the oil wells and thereby raise the price of gasoline further.
The Democrats should be careful what they wish for. The evil genius Rovian thing to do would be to let the Democrats nationalize the oil refineries. The resulting economic catastrophe would guarantee a Republican Congress for a generation.
27 Comments:
By 
, at
Thu Jun 19, 07:02:00 AM:
They've gone mad! Given Democrat control of the MSM, I wouldn't count on the Democrats being blamed for the economic fallout of nationalizing refineries.
By 
davod, at
Thu Jun 19, 07:08:00 AM:
I bet Hinchey has been to Venezuala more than once.
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 07:52:00 AM:
Did anyone besides Hinchey actually call for nationalizing refineries? The article implies that this is the position of Democrats as a group but doesn't substantiate it.
By Georg Felis, at
Thu Jun 19, 08:25:00 AM:
Well we've had at least 2 so far caught on-camera, I suspect its support is something like an iceberg (9/10th underwater)
We should not have to worry about it too much, most Dems have at least enough sense to see how stupid an idea this is. But the special few keep writing campaign commercials for the Republicans every time they hit a camera :)
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 08:43:00 AM:
More importantly, what does Barack Obama think of this?
Probably don't have to think too hard to guess...
By HeatherRadish, at
Thu Jun 19, 09:05:00 AM:
Interesting comment, after thirty years of shutting down all new refinery construction with red tape...
By antithaca, at
Thu Jun 19, 09:47:00 AM:
hinchey is my congressman. he's a loon. and a hypopcrite (drives of BWM 5-series cuz it's a good "daily commuter")
he embarrasses me every congressional session.
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 09:59:00 AM:
Just how will they acquire these refineries. I'm no scholar but doesn't the constitution require that they give the owners (the shareholders) just compensation? Are they going to raise taxes in order to afford the transaction? Is this another example of robbing Peter to pay Paul? The government never produces anything, it just transfers resources based of political expediency.
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 10:21:00 AM:
These are the same morons who can't run their restaurant, Medicare, Post Office or anything else! They need to check into a home with tubes up their noses!
By Purple Avenger, at
Thu Jun 19, 11:02:00 AM:
I'm no scholar but doesn't the constitution require that they give the owners (the shareholders) just compensation?
Congress: how about a buck fifty and a bag of Cheetos?
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 11:08:00 AM:
Does anyone else realize that this is COMMUNISM? NOT Socialism.
What is Communism? It is Government control of all industry.
Healthcare and the Oil Industry are merely FIRST STEPS.
Once done, what is to stop the nationalization of any and all industries?
The Democrats are flat-out COMMUNISTS. They are intentionally crushing our economy so that they have an excuse to nationalize various industries.
Does no one see this?
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 11:14:00 AM:
L'il easier on the rhetoric, there.
Mexico's oil industry is nationalized, and I don't think they are communist. The Democrats have a ways to go before you can apply the "commie" label to them.
By John Thacker, at
Thu Jun 19, 11:38:00 AM:
Rep. Hinchey represents Ithaca, home of Cornell U., I believe.
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 11:47:00 AM:
Paul Zrimseck-
There is a Progressive Caucus that Maxine Waters and Maurice Hinchey are members of. They have alliances with other groups that are more overtly Socialist.
They are very big into nationalizing industries like the health, pharmaceutical and now, oil.
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 11:57:00 AM:
Anon-
One of the reasons there is so little Democratic opposition to stopping illegal aliens from Mexico is they may not be communist, but they are socialist. That is one of the reasons Mexico, with all that oil, is one of the poorest nations on earth but is #8 on the list of millionaires.
The Democrats are becoming an openly socialist party right before our eyes. Social Security was the first step, like my father said a long time ago. Somewhere he had a letter from the government guaranteeing him that the income tax would never go above 2%. We all know how long that lasted once they had a mechanism in place to directly remove money from our paychecks.
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 11:57:00 AM:
anon @ 11:14 "Mexico's oil industry is nationalized, and I don't think they are communist."
But, their economy is so poorly managed that they feel they must emmigrate 10% of their polulation here so they can earn a living....
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 12:37:00 PM:
I wouldn't have any trouble believing that the House Progressive Caucus has come out in favor of nationalizing refineries-- though even there, I'd expect to see the claim backed up be a statement from caucus leaders. If someone's telling me that "House Democrats" want to do that, the statement would need to come from someone like Nancy Pelosi or Steny Hoyer, not some random wackjob from the back benches. (A bill with a long list of co-sponsors would be an acceptable substitute.)
By Purple Avenger, at
Thu Jun 19, 02:58:00 PM:
No problem as long as you like $20/gal gas that is only available every 5th day between 3:30am and 5:30am, all federal holidays excluded of course.
By , at
Thu Jun 19, 05:14:00 PM:
Yes, Mexico's oil industry is nationalized and they aren't communist --- merely corrupt, inefficient, and dependent on their neighbor to the north to buy their oil and take their excess population.
El Zhombre
By lugh lampfhota, at
Thu Jun 19, 08:23:00 PM:
Ya'll go ahead and debate what to call these totalitarian wannabes and count heads. I didn't hear Obama, Pelosi or any other dems criticize either Watters nor Hinchley's comments.
Far as this redneck is concerned, I lose any Constitutional right and it's war. I ain't planning on living in another Venezualia.
BTW, Mexico damn near elected a Marxist as el presidente in the last election.
I expect Mexico to be the next state to fall to the Bolivarian Revolution.
Ya'll better rethink this concept of free, invincible America. Hard times are coming.
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Thu Jun 19, 10:07:00 PM:
Paul Z's caution is well-taken.
Lugh could use a breath o' the optimism of the descendants of Balor still on the native soil.
By SR, at
Thu Jun 19, 10:56:00 PM:
Careful Anon (5:14PM) You are starting to sound a bit like Alec Baldwin.
By Noocyte, at
Fri Jun 20, 01:33:00 AM:
Welly-well-well. See how the mask doth slip, nyet?
This one here is a haymaker and no mistake. Here's hoping that the McCain campaign shows the uncharacteristic good sense to make a bale out of it!
There would indeed be more than a touch of delicious schadenfreude at the havoc which would ensue, should these miscreants be permitted to stumble a few steps down that red-brick road. But the suffering which it would visit on my fellow Americans is hardly worth the lesson.
These people must be stopped cold at the voting booth, or there are very dark days indeed ahead (literally, actually, if they should have a crack at DMV-ing the energy sector!)
By Jim in Virginia, at
Fri Jun 20, 06:25:00 AM:
I expect nationalization to gain traction. As oil prices keep rising, Congress feels the need to 1) find a scapegoat and 2) appear to do something. Among a certain segment of the population, the evil of offshore drilling is an article of faith, like global warming.
The other Congressional responses to expect are to suck up to the Saudis (sell out you-know who) or to demonize them. I'd love to watch the Dems try to make the Arabs the bad guys.
By , at
Fri Jun 20, 09:58:00 AM:
Nationalization would be crossing too bright a line. It's a non-starter, and almost everyone knows it. If you want to worry about the government doing something stupid, worry about price controls-- and keep your eye on both sides of the aisle.
By , at
Fri Jun 20, 03:49:00 PM:
Suppose we take the idea of nationalization seriously. What could the government actually do to affect fuel prices?
Run the refineries beyond 100%?
Pass a law lowering the price of oil on the global market?
Run the oil economy with characteristic government efficiency?
By TigerHawk, at
Fri Jun 20, 08:16:00 PM:
Paul Zrimsek,
I agree with your last comment. Price controls are far more likely than nationalization, and that at least a few Republicans are also likely to succumb to the temptation.
