Salisbury - While speaking at a Chamber of Commerce lunch in Salisbury today, Andy Harris M.D. announced his "Prescription for the Pain at the Pump." Andy's plan offers both short-term and long-term solutions to the out of control fuel costs. Andy announced his plan at a Chamber of Commerce meeting because "The greatest threat to our economic wellbeing is the rising fuel costs."
"I will take the lead in fighting against these out of control gas prices," said Dr. Harris. Rising fuel costs impact the most basic necessities of life, like groceries at the supermarket. "Working families should not be forced to decide whether to fill up the gas tank or put food on their table," Harris added.
"Because the liberal Washington Democrats refuse to alleviate the pain at the pump, it is time to elect people who will represent the values of working families. I will do just that," Harris said.
Below is Dr. Andy's "Prescription for the Pain at the Pump"
1. Temporarily suspend the federal and state gasoline taxes of $.42 from Memorial Day through Labor Day
2. Increase efficiency and simplify the refining process by temporarily reducing the over 40 different gasoline blends nationwide to four blends.
3. Open domestic natural gas and oil production in areas such as off the Aleutian Islands, in ANWR, and on the continental shelf to decrease our dependence on oil from foreign countries.
4. Increase long-term oil-refining capacity by establishing fast-track approval for construction of new refineries and expansion of existing refineries.
5. Provide incentives for technological innovations in alternative forms of energy like nuclear, cellulosic ethanol, solar, geothermal, and hydrogen cell.
Paid for by Andy Harris for Congress
1. wont work. This will only increase oil profits, and they have enough of our money. To lower prices set by supply and demand, you need to either increase supply or decrease demand. Cutting the tax does neither.
ReplyDelete2. wont help. And replaces state's rights and regulations with big government control from Washington. NOT an improvement.
3. will make very little difference, and will destroy environmental beauty. It will also take years to ramp up. A pure pander.
4. We don't need more refineries. We need more CRUDE OIL at low cost!
5. Fine. Those are good ideas. Too bad it's an afterthought at the end.
All in all, a very disappointing proposal. Mostly head in the sand stuff designed to increase oil profits. It looks like it was culled from API propaganda.
What we need are more nuclear power plans and really good electric cars for daily driving.
OK, Joe!
ReplyDeleteGas is approx 12 cents a gallon in Iraq and $4 dollars plus here, does anybody especially our want to be elected Congressman see the irony in this? Our young military HEROES are bleeding in Iraq and we are bleeding at the pumps.
We know what the good Doctor is proposing, they all propose the same thing. What we the voters want to know is what is he GOING to do?
It sure would be refreshing to hear someone running for office to pledge to fulfill his/her promises and back that pledge up with the promise not to seek a second term if unsuccessful.
Wish we could just elect him now.
ReplyDeleteGo Andy!
JOE, WHAT HAPPEND TO MY COMMENT?
ReplyDeleteHarris wants to pump our own oil so we don't have to pay $140 barrel. Sounds good to me.
ReplyDeleteI don't here the Democracts presenting any solutions.
"Harris wants to pump our own oil so we don't have to pay $140 barrel. Sounds good to me."
ReplyDeleteUhh... It will still be $140/barrel (or maybe $200 by then). All that changes is where the multi-national company pumps it up, and whose backyard becomes filthy.
It won't work, since we've only got about about 3% of the world's oil reserves in the US. They will come in and make a big mess, and we'll still be paying too much!!
"I don't here the Democracts presenting any solutions."
You're just not paying attention.
The key to oil independence is to reduce demand. This is by making more energy efficient cars, going with renewable fuels, and then taxing the hell out of oil (as is done in Europe), so we actually use something else.
Then the economy will stop bleeding...
Then we will stop sending major money to Arabs.
I believe that this is what you can expect from the Democrats, though only some of this is actually promoted openly.
So what's Kratovil's answer then? You see, no one has said a word about him. Oh, that's right, he's freakin clueless with ZERO experience. Like Obama as President, Kratovil would make a great Congressman, NOT!
ReplyDeleteYou just keep supporting and hiring Idiots like that Housewife Mayor and you'll get what you deserve. In the mean time we'll be sitting in Delmar, Delaware laughing our asses off.
In my opinion, Andy Harris is VISITING the Shore on a very regular basis. He's now purchased a home here on the Shore, investing in a future BEFORE he is elected. Think hard now and tell me how many times Frank has been here????????????
Wake up Eastern Shore. If an Idiot like Duvall wants to vote to Frank simply because I support Andy Harris, well, are you an Idiot too?
Kratovil was just here a few days ago, actually.
ReplyDeleteAnd he's from Queen Anne's county. Doesn't that count for something?
joealbero,
ReplyDeleteIt's not only about who gets elected. Regardless of who gets elected, we need to educate and engage all our leaders.
Andy Harris' energy proposal is bad. It's simply bad for the Eastern Shore, and he should know that. If he is to be elected, we need to make sure he knows better than to be a shill for the oil industry.
He should do what's best for the people he represents, even if that takes some political courage.
stop thinkin combustion engine, its a dinosaur, soon to be a fossil. it hads its day, it was grand, NUCLEAR POWER IS THE FUTURE OF ENERGY IN AMERICA. we would probably have nuclear power plants everywhere if it werent for the cold war and 3/mile island. fear does wierd stuff to people. im no export that for sure, but i believe the cooling water the plant needs does no damage to the body of water it is returned to. i think the fish thrive as a matter of fact. could you imagine if we had our shit together as a country enough we could give an alotted amount of juice to every american,(over that on them), how much money would that free up to stimulate the economy.. ones allowed to dream...
ReplyDelete1. I agree that cutting taxes is not the answer. We've already proven the ability to pay $4 per gallon. So in place of taxes, those in charge of getting fuel in your car are going to take a larger profit since the market allows it.
ReplyDelete2. Reducing the amount of gas blends will have a huge impact on refineries. Part of the reason that we have a shortage of refinery capacity is because they need to stock so many blends.
3. Why no mention of oil shale recovery techniques? The Rocky Mtns have more oil than Saudi Arabia! So long as oil is $80/barrel, it's profitable to recover this resource. Perfecting the technique will make it even less expensive. This is a long term answer that will not do anything for us now.
4. We do need more refineries. They need to be owned outside of the current oligopoly to increase competition and encourage storing more inventory so that the markets aren't so exposed to wide price swings. Another long term answer - at least 6 years to see any benefit.
5. Another longer-term answer.
The idea of shrinking demand over increasing supply is exactly what a liberal would recomend, because liberals dont use rational thought. Our economy is existent on energy and the affordability of energy to keep our economy moving literally. Everyone would like to switch to alternative energy but we will make the transition when the market is ready and its affordable. Also, the idea of "taxing" the oil companies. Any one who understands business knows that corporations do not pay taxes, cusumers pay taxes. When you tax a company they factor that into there cost of doing business, as the cost of doing business goes up so do prices. A business works on a profit margin, and exists on only two pieces of papers costs/profits. Its not like if you slam oil companies with taxes to the point that there profit margin is minimalized that they are going to work pro bono, they will just increase there rates. It is common sense to anyone who understands how things work, and not how they wish things would work or hope things work.
ReplyDelete"The idea of shrinking demand over increasing supply is exactly what a liberal would recomend, because liberals dont use rational thought."
ReplyDeleteThis assumes that we have the luxury of time. We do not. This assumes that we can explore our way into increased supply. We cannot.
Are you aware that virtually every major oil field in the world is now underproducing? Do you know what a Hubbert production curve is?
Reduced supply is coming. We can either plan for it and make some hard choices now, or we can do nothing but dig up every drop we can find and wait for future shortages to slam us hard.
This is the real functional difference between the liberals and the conservatives. Liberals want to take steps today to reduce demand and to save the economy. Conservatives want to preserve a past that just cannot continue. If conservatives "win" this argument and continue to drive their big fat and wasteful SUVs, then we will go into the future very unready. Our economy will shatter in ways you can only imagine when the SHTF.
Oil companies lobbied Congress a few years ago to pass a bill stating that oil drilled in ANWR did NOT have to be used or sold in the U.S. but could be sold to the highest bidder worldwide. So oil companies would get to drill in a U.S. wildlife refuge and sell the oil anywhere they could get the biggest profit. The law PASSED so why do people keep saying drill in ANWR to help oil prices in the U.S.?
ReplyDeleteHow about hydro-electric power? We have plenty of dams and are surrounded by water.
ReplyDeleteI got an idea...lets look at this from another perspective...
ReplyDeleteHow about the major auto dealers actually produce an engine that gets 100 miles per gallon. Then I will gladly pay $4 per gallon.
The auto dealers are just as bad because they are in bed with the oil companies. They have the technology to build the engine but don't want to because the oil companies help fund them.
Andy's proposal is admireable but it is unrealist because he is only 1 guy. He can ride this platform to get elected but it will never get the support in DC.
Good effort, Andy.
"How about hydro-electric power? We have plenty of dams and are surrounded by water."
ReplyDeleteI think that the last time anyone used hydro-power on the Eastern Shore was when they ran Furnace Town using water power to run the bellows.
You must mean car manufacturers, not dealers. Dealers have nothing to do with gas milage.
ReplyDeleteJoe...
ReplyDeleteSorry...you are correct...I was referencing the major auto manufacturers in the post above, not dealers.
It is a shame that they CAN produce a car with higher mileage but refuse to do so.
Capitalism at its best.
There is a car that is getting 100mpg right now. It is on the market, if you can afford it. The Prius was just "upgraded" with a solar panel on the roof. Seriously. It runs off gas and solar powered battery. The battery in the trunk is bigger and costs more to replace than the current $900 battery it is running on at this time. They've had this technology long enough it's been tested and now released for purchase. Shame they waited until now, but that's business. To bad it was Toyota that released it first. I guess if we want anything that makes us believe it is American made we'll have to wait for one of the BIG 3 to bring it to market.
ReplyDeleteHow about removing oil from the commodities market?? Futures contracts are easily manipulated to drive prices up and keep them up. We should learn from enron that manipulation of commodities/utilities futures are too easily accomplished.
ReplyDelete