More unintended consequences of current U.S. Energy Policy -- or lack thereof.
Drop in Miles Driven Is Depleting Highway Fund; Loan From Mass Transit Is Urged
By MATTHEW L. WALD
Published: July 29, 2008
WASHINGTON — Gasoline tax revenue is falling so fast that the federal government may not be able to meet its commitments to states for road projects already under way, the secretary of transportation said Monday.
The secretary, Mary E. Peters, said the short-term solution would be for...(complete article here).
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Higher Gasoline Taxes Coming
Washington is talking a massive tax increase through gasoline. I guess you could class this with the "sin" taxes such as on alcohol and tobacco products. Ostensibly this tax is billed as necessary to fund improvements to our transportation infrastructure. I believe it is to curb demand for fuel. Either way, it takes our money and puts it into the ineffecient hands of the Federal Government if these recommendations are made law.
Highway Panel to Seek Higher Gas Tax
By CHRISTOPHER CONKEY and DANIEL MACHALABA
January 12, 2008
WASHINGTON -- A congressionally mandated commission will recommend broad upgrades to the nation's transportation infrastructure and a hefty increase in taxes, but divisions within the panel suggest it could take years to reach a consensus on the issue.
The National Surface Transportation Policy and...(complete article here).
Highway Panel to Seek Higher Gas Tax
By CHRISTOPHER CONKEY and DANIEL MACHALABA
January 12, 2008
WASHINGTON -- A congressionally mandated commission will recommend broad upgrades to the nation's transportation infrastructure and a hefty increase in taxes, but divisions within the panel suggest it could take years to reach a consensus on the issue.
The National Surface Transportation Policy and...(complete article here).
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Senator Hutchinson on the New Energy Bill
This is my Senator talking. I've been a big fan of hers since before she was elected. She would probably make an excellent President.
Capitol Comment
by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
Emphasis on Energies of Future Threatens the Supplies of Today
November 23, 2007
"The major obstacle to the development of new supplies is not geology but what happens above ground: international affairs, politics, investment and technology." —Daniel Yergin, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of "The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power."
With oil prices soaring to record highs, currently over $90 per barrel, and Americans increasingly feeling the impact, Congress can choose to magnify the problem or be part of the solution.
In response to skyrocketing energy prices, caused largely by greater worldwide demand and static supply, new energy legislation passed in each house of Congress is, in fact, bereft of real energy. It would jeopardize our national security, threaten our economic stability, and indeed raise the very obstacles to which Yergin alludes.
The only way to address our national crisis is to increase the supply of energy. However, legislation proposed in Congress would actually lead to reductions in energy supply and target the oil and gas industry with $16 billion in new taxes.
The assumption is that...(complete post here).
Please refer to my post yesterday for my comments on this subject.
Capitol Comment
by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
Emphasis on Energies of Future Threatens the Supplies of Today
November 23, 2007
"The major obstacle to the development of new supplies is not geology but what happens above ground: international affairs, politics, investment and technology." —Daniel Yergin, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of "The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power."
With oil prices soaring to record highs, currently over $90 per barrel, and Americans increasingly feeling the impact, Congress can choose to magnify the problem or be part of the solution.
In response to skyrocketing energy prices, caused largely by greater worldwide demand and static supply, new energy legislation passed in each house of Congress is, in fact, bereft of real energy. It would jeopardize our national security, threaten our economic stability, and indeed raise the very obstacles to which Yergin alludes.
The only way to address our national crisis is to increase the supply of energy. However, legislation proposed in Congress would actually lead to reductions in energy supply and target the oil and gas industry with $16 billion in new taxes.
The assumption is that...(complete post here).
Please refer to my post yesterday for my comments on this subject.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Pelosi's Plan to Tank the U.S. Economy
I fear the House Speaker is only playing politics with the non-thinking public's "gut" reaction to Big Oil's profits.
Pelosi targets oil firms in energy push
By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Defying a threat of a presidential veto, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi intends to push ahead with a $21 billion tax package, including repeal of tax breaks for major oil companies, as part of an energy bill, aides to the speaker said Tuesday.
Democratic leaders circulated a summary of the legislation that includes the new taxes as well as a requirement for a 40 percent increase in automobile fuel efficiency, a huge increase in the use of ethanol as a motor fuel, and a mandate for utilities to use renewable fuels.
Republicans earlier this year blocked Senate attempts to pass new energy taxes, contending they would hinder domestic oil and gas production. Democratic supporters of the taxes said...(complete article here).
Several issues here -- oil companies need profits in order to explore for and develop new energy sources -- including renewable sources such as ethanol. As for ethanol -- we are unable today to handle it logistically. We don't have the infrastructure in place. I think we will see numerous ethanol start-ups for sale in the coming months. Who do you think will buy them? My bet is it will be the oil companies. Taxing the oil companies more will only hurt consumers. The taxes will be passed on to the ultimate users. Taxing businesses is only a creative form of taxation on consumers. I guess that in a way that would encourage conservation because the consumers would have less money to spend on gasoline, or heating oil, or electricity, or food -- which brings us back to ethanol....
Pelosi targets oil firms in energy push
By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Defying a threat of a presidential veto, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi intends to push ahead with a $21 billion tax package, including repeal of tax breaks for major oil companies, as part of an energy bill, aides to the speaker said Tuesday.
Democratic leaders circulated a summary of the legislation that includes the new taxes as well as a requirement for a 40 percent increase in automobile fuel efficiency, a huge increase in the use of ethanol as a motor fuel, and a mandate for utilities to use renewable fuels.
Republicans earlier this year blocked Senate attempts to pass new energy taxes, contending they would hinder domestic oil and gas production. Democratic supporters of the taxes said...(complete article here).
Several issues here -- oil companies need profits in order to explore for and develop new energy sources -- including renewable sources such as ethanol. As for ethanol -- we are unable today to handle it logistically. We don't have the infrastructure in place. I think we will see numerous ethanol start-ups for sale in the coming months. Who do you think will buy them? My bet is it will be the oil companies. Taxing the oil companies more will only hurt consumers. The taxes will be passed on to the ultimate users. Taxing businesses is only a creative form of taxation on consumers. I guess that in a way that would encourage conservation because the consumers would have less money to spend on gasoline, or heating oil, or electricity, or food -- which brings us back to ethanol....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
