Tuesday Open Line


Yesterday, the White House released a data filled look at oil prices and production in response to GOP claims Obama is to blame for near $4.00 a gallon gasoline prices.  The station at Garnett St and Raleigh Road intersection seem to always have the lowest prices in town.  But the gas prices have been this high before, under Bush’s presidency.  So I’m confused why GOP says its Obama’s fault for our current prices. 

Apparently, one particular news station generally accused to be aligned with the GOP has been trying to convince viewers that it’s Obama’s fault, that Obama is ordering the prices up to destroy America.  The White House says the President has no control over oil prices.  So which one is right?  Apparently the news station can’t get their story straight either.  In 2008 during a spout of high prices, the GOP was under fire then defending Bush against high oil prices, with the station running such gems as:

Fox News, March 21, 2008

BILL O’REILLY: Next time you hear a politician say he or she will bring down oil prices understand it’s complete BS. Americans want lower gas prices — cut back. Sell those SUVs. Ride a bike when you can. If every one of us bought 10 percent less gasoline, prices would fall fast. That’s what the candidates should be saying. We need a strong leader who’s honest, smart, courageous and willing to explain dubious associations. That’s what we need.

Fox News, June 27, 2008

UNIDENTIFIED EXPERT: It is so painful what is going on with Americans across the country. And what they should do — and this is what I would advise — get rid of those gas guzzlers. Buy decent insulation for your house. And tell your local elected officials, Get on the stick and more mass transit infrastructure spending. Because those kinds of fixes could really help Americans across the country.

Fox News, July 1, 2008

CHERYL CASONE, Fox Business News: You know, at this point, it really is tough for this president. I have to be honest with you, because he really does not have any control what’s gonna happen with the markets and with the economy, and with oil prices and supply and demand and gasoline, it really is out of this president’s hands.

Fox News, Nov. 22, 2008

CAL THOMAS: Well, one of the problems we’ve had for a number of years in the media — and the entire media, mostly journalists, is that these charges get put out there, against the Bush administration or somebody else. And journalists don’t really examine the substance of it like they do during a political campaign. At least in the Washington Post and sometimes on O’Reilly with his “Reality Check” on this channel, they look at certain claims or promises to see what the facts are behind them.

And the facts are, as you suggested, no president has the power to increase or lower gas prices. Those are market forces.

Some blame oil speculators as a source for high prices, some disagree.  Check this news article from back in 2009:

Dan Gilligan, president of the Petroleum Marketers Association, represents more than 8,000 retail and wholesale suppliers, everyone from home heating oil companies to gas station owners.  When 60 Minutes talked to him last summer, his members were getting blamed for gouging the public, even though their costs had also gone through the roof. He told Kroft the problem was in the commodities markets, which had been invaded by a new breed of investor.

“Approximately 60 to 70 percent of the oil contracts in the futures markets are now held by speculative entities. Not by companies that need oil, not by the airlines, not by the oil companies. But by investors that are looking to make money from their speculative positions,” Gilligan explained.

Gilligan said these investors don’t actually take delivery of the oil. “All they do is buy the paper, and hope that they can sell it for more than they paid for it. Before they have to take delivery.”

“They’re trying to make money on the market for oil?” Kroft asked.

“Absolutely,” Gilligan replied. “On the volatility that exists in the market. They make it going up and down.”

(read more)

In early 2009, here’s some reports of oil companies holding whole tankers full of oil in the ocean, with the explicit purpose of keeping supply back to increase prices, with at the time of that report 80 million barrels of crude waiting  at sea in tankers.

Citigroup Inc.’s commodities-trading unit hired a second vessel for storing crude to profit from higher prices later in the year, shipbrokers said.

Phibro LLC booked supertanker Ashna to store crude for as many as three months, according to the reports by SeaLeague AS in Oslo and Athens-based Optima Shipbrokers. The tanker was booked for storage on the U.S. Gulf Coast, SeaLeague said. Citigroup spokesman Jeffrey French declined to comment.

Phibro is also storing North Sea Forties crude on a 1 million barrel vessel off Scotland’s Orkney Islands. Royal Dutch Shell Plc and BP Plc are keeping crude on vessels to profit from so-called contango, a market where buyers pay more for delivery later in the year than today. A purchaser buys oil now, keeps it for months at sea, and sells oil futures that are higher than the spot price.

Shell, Europe’s largest oil company, hired a supertanker earlier this week to store crude off the U.K. coast, according to shipbrokers. Morgan Stanley is also seeking a vessel to store crude, four shipbrokers said yesterday.

Traders have hired tankers to store at least 15 million barrels of North Sea oil, according to the median estimate of six North Sea traders and analysts surveyed this week. As many as 80 million barrels of crude are being stored at sea globally, Frontline Ltd., the largest owner of supertankers, said yesterday.

(read more)

Here’s another gem from a report on the leaked US cables:

When oil prices hit a record $147 a barrel in July 2008, the Bush administration leaned on Saudi Arabia to pump more crude in hopes that a flood of new crude would drive the price down. The Saudis complied, but not before warning that oil already was plentiful and that Wall Street speculation, not a shortage of oil, was driving up prices.

Saudi Oil Minister Ali al Naimi even told U.S. Ambassador Ford Fraker that the kingdom would have difficulty finding customers for the additional crude, according to an account laid out in a confidential State Department cable dated Sept. 28, 2008,

“Saudi Arabia can’t just put crude out on the market,” the cable quotes Naimi as saying. Instead, Naimi suggested, “speculators bore significant responsibility for the sharp increase in oil prices in the last few years,” according to the cable.

Prince Abdulazziz was “extremely worried” that high prices would destroy the demand for oil, according to the May 7, 2008, account of his meeting with embassy officials.

“Aramco is trying to sell more, but frankly there are no buyers,” the cable quoted him as saying, referring to the Saudi state oil company. “We are discounting crudes.”

 Another confidential document from the embassy in Riyadh, dated Feb. 14, 2007, indicates that Saudi officials had concluded years ago that speculation played at least as big a role in setting oil prices as traditional issues of supply and demand did.

(read more)

And then the argument is “But.. Keystone”.  The same news station flopping around above had this to say in January, 2012 entitled Six reasons Keystone XL was a bad deal all along:

1. Keystone XL Would Not Reduce Foreign Oil Dependency
2. Keystone XL Would Have Increased Domestic Oil Prices
3. Keystone XL Overstated Number of Jobs to be Created
4. Current Keystone Pipeline Leaked 12 Times in Last Year
5. The Environmental Concerns About Oil Leaks Are Justified
6. Mining Tar Sands Would Worsen Global Warming

(read the details on each point on their article here)

I’m tired of the political and what I can only see as propaganda he said she said.  To now say speculators aren’t causing oil prices to increase and blaming it all on Obama when last election season Bush couldn’t do anything to help prices.. Whatever is the right thing, just get the story straight.   It’s instances like this why people see the channel as untrustworthy.

Discuss and more on today’s Open Lines!