Strong Energy Measures Wanted - Poll Shows Most Favor New Drilling, Taxes on Oil Profits

[Psephos]

Source: Wahington Post

A new national poll shows broad public support for government action in the face of $4-a-gallon gas and other energy concerns, giving Republicans a rare opening to go on the offensive against congressional Democrats and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

Nearly two-thirds of Americans now put a priority on "finding new sources of energy" over improving conservation -- a significant shift since 2001 -- and majorities support all of the five potential federal initiatives tested in a new ABC News poll.

There is overwhelming backing for stricter fuel efficiency standards, as large majorities of Democrats, Republicans and independents alike line up behind the idea. There is also widespread support across party lines for a more controversial proposal in the battle over energy policy: offshore oil drilling.

Overall, 63 percent want the federal government to lift its embargo on new drilling in U.S. coastal waters. Nearly eight in 10 Republicans and seven in 10 independents back the idea, as do just over half of Democrats in the poll conducted in partnership with Stanford University and Planet Green.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/09/AR2008080901556.html

[Robbien]

1. Very questionable. "a new national poll"? What new national poll, and who paid for it?

And what questions were asked?

The article doesn't say, but we will all be hearing this distorted lie from MSM continuously over the next several months.

There is no way the majority of Americans want to destroy all of our coastlines so that Exxon can bring up oil to sell to foreign countries at huge profits.

[WriteDown]

2. The article details the poll pretty well

I have no doubt this is true. Working class people are hurting the most right now since they are the ones that generally have the longest commutes due to not being able afford expensive properties near their employment. I think many people would do anything right now to alleviate the pain. I know for me personally that the price of meat has just skyrocketed and stocking the fridge has become difficult.

[Robbien]

5. No it doesn't. Who paid for it? What questions were asked?

Does it mention at all that much of the offshore drilling oil does not get used in the USA but it gets sold to other countries with no benefit at all to US Citizens?

Does it point out that when people say Yes to finding alternative sources for energy, most people don't mean more drilling, but more renewable sources such as wind, solar and ocean currents?

It is a bad article written with the right wingnut viewpoint of drilling in the coral reefs for the profit of Exxon and BP stockholders.

[Psephos]

6. It's an ABC News/Planet Green/Stanford University poll

Here's the ABC News story link: http://www.abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/story?id=5525064&page=1

Here's a link to the entire questionnaire and results: http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1067a1Environment2008.pdf

Here's the methodology statement:

METHODOLOGY: This ABC News/Planet Green/Stanford University poll was conducted by telephone July 23-28, 2008, among a random national sample of 1,000 adults. The results from the full survey have a 3-point error margin. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS of Horsham, PA.

This survey, produced in consultation with Prof. Jon Krosnick and the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University, builds on an ABC News/Washington Post/Stanford poll in 2007, an ABC News/Time magazine/Stanford poll in 2006 and polls by Krosnick at The Ohio State University in 1997 and 1998. Planet Green is a 24-hour lifestyle and entertainment television network launched in June by Discovery, LLC.

[Robbien]

9. All right wing organizations

Stanford's Woods Institute for the Environment is the go to place which capitalists use to find a way to protect profits while pretending to look like they care about the environment.

[Psephos]

11. umm, ok

The point of this post was to provoke discussion about a growing public consensus that offshore drilling has become desirable, and to note that reports of public approval of it are now prominent in major media. As in, maybe we ought to be aware of that trend if we want to do something about it.

ABC, Green Planet, and Woods Institute may not be left of thinkprogress.org, but they're hardly right-wing tools, even if you throw a stink-bomb at them.


"When a wise man points at the moon, the fool stares at his finger."
- Sufi saying

[Robbien]

12. There is no growing consensus. The only thing growing is the propaganda

and people pushing the right wingnut idea of "Drill Drill Drill".

The only thing this article represents is an advertising campaign trying to create false impression of a "growing consensus". It is only BigOil setting using some of its set-aside funds in its drilling campaign to promote the idea of people loving the idea that they get to destroy the environment.

"Everyone knows there were WMD in Iraq"
"Everyone agrees we should allow BigOil free access to our coastlines and national monuments"

Same campaign propaganda methods by the same people.

[ShockediSay]

18. Why not give them the right to drill provided used w/out tax breaks

and used w/in three years?

I suspect what these oily guys want is to extend their tax breaks over acreage they don't have, and forget about the acreage they aren't using

[The Croquist]

13. US Oil exports

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html

The US currently produces 8.322 million bbl/day (2005 est.) and exports 1.048 million bbl/day (2004)

That means that we export about one-eighth of what we produce.

Deep down it doesn't matter if we export some oil, import other oil or use it all domestically except in cost. Oil is oil.

The reason the US exports some oil is because it makes sense. If Mid East oil is closer to where we need it then Alaskan oil it makes sense to sell Alaskan oil to Japan and buy Mid East oil. Below I have various travel distances not using the canals. Generally the supertankers are too big for the canals*:

http://e-ships.net/dist.htm

Valdez Alaska to Mobile Alabama 18,900 miles
Valdez, Alaska to Tokyo Japan 3,400 miles
Saudi Arabia to Mobile Alabama 11,900 miles
Saudi Arabia to Tokyo Japan 7,200 miles

Obviously it is cheaper to move oil from Alaska to Japan and Saudi Arabia to Mobile (15,300 miles combined) then it is to move it from Alaska to Alabama and Saudi Arabia to Japan (26,100 miles combined).

If you don't think the consumer pays the transportation costs just force the oil companies to ship it domestically and see what happens.

* The largest size ships that can go through the canals are:

Panama 80,000 tons
Suez 200,000 tons

Super tankers go up to 550,000 tons.

[Arctic Dave]

17. Flaw to your post,

why deliver Alaskan Crude to the Gulf Coast when they have their own oil. It should say, Alaskan Crude to the West Coast and Gulf Coast oil to Mobile.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

3. Bullshit. Keep calling and writing your reps...

Remind them where you stand. Reps will trust phone calls and letters more than spurious polls.

[RBInMaine]

4. The ignorant public wants a quick fix. They are uneducated in that we can't drill our way out.

[happygoluckytoyou]

7. in a related story.... Larry Craig pulls another new poll out of his ass

[movonne]

8. Remember the right wing own nearly all the media and pollls...I don't

believe most of what is said...and neither should the rest of us...because also the voting machines are also owned by the right wing...

[L0oniX]

10. Heheh ...yea ...a poll of idiots. Offshore oil won't come online for 10 years...

and even then the amount of oil is only a drop in the bucket and windfall taxes will be passed on through gas prices. We are a country of idiots and morons who repeat what the idiots say. Asscarrots!

[MasonJar]

14. ABC is no friend of the environment.

[Uben]

15. Even if we found vast new oilfields..........

....it would not affect the price we pay for oil much. The oil companies sell the oil on the open market. They are in it for profit, and only they would benefit from more domestic drilling. It would create a few more jobs, but othe than that, we would just take a fuckin cuz Butt-wax Bush wouldn't make them pay taxes on it.

[The Croquist]

16. The Federal government will get more net money from US oil then the oil companies will

The government gets a percentage of what the oil companies pump out of federal property now and then they get corporate income tax as well.

[Uben]

20. That's only if....

...it's federal property.

[Psephos]

21. No, they get a lot from the corporate income tax too

And the income taxes from the workers. (Exxon alone paid more in corporate taxes last year than the lowest 40% of all individual Americans together. I'm not defending them - they should pay more.)

And it reduces the amount of $$ we send to countries that couldn't care less about environmental protection, letting us displace some of their dirty techniques with our better, regulated methods.

And it stops putting as much cash in the hands of human rights abusing governments.

And it has a positive effect on the national balance of payments, which strengthens the dollar. Which in turn helps put downward pressure on oil prices.

My mind isn't made up on this issue, but it's appalling to see how both sides treat this as a matter of dogma, not evaluation of all the pros and cons. There are plenty of cons, too. See upthread for a good discussion of those.

:hi:

[roseBudd]

19. What matters is whether the election turns on this, we have an uneducated populace & they are over a

barrel. It would be naieve to believe we can educate them on this issue. We can't.