• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Giving U.S. Gas!!!


Well-known member
Feb 19, 2005
Reaction score
in the middle of America
Political Leaning
The Bush Administration has announced some changes they want Congress to consider to meet the 9 million barrels of gasoline level that we burn each day as a nation. This will affect you if you use gasoline, diesel, natural gas, propane or home heating oil. It will also affect you if you use electricity. Some of us do.

The Administration wants regulations on polution relaxed, not eliminated, for some period of time so the refiners can catch up to the needs of the country. This, the Administration says, is essential with gasoline stocks low, oil stocks high and home heating oil season on the horizon. These more relaxed regulations, on a temporary basis, could help lower and if not, at least slow the rise in fuel costs for us all (a pocketbook issue).

The Administration also wants more exploration into offshore drilling with the consideration that drilling techniques have improved drastically in the last 20 years. They want to see more exploration in ANWR and reports prepared about what could be done to tap oil reserves there and protect the environment at the same time. It is thought hat ANWR could be tapped and with less than 2% of the land surface being disturbed (a pocketbook and environmental issue).

The Administration is also looking into having oil companies that commit to build new refineries build them on military bases where they would pay less for leasing and not be as accountable to public lands laws but still be responsible for land pollution and clean up with public tranparency so any incidents couldn't be covered up but rather exposed when and if they happen (a legal issue).

These moves would definitely help our energy problems and of course these proposed changes bring out the same critics (environmentalists and their politicians that profit from campaign funds just as oil companys give to Democrats and Republicans).

The environmental groups already have spokesmen out on MSNBC saying we must not let new refineries be built because it will increase pollution across the world. This in the face of the most restrictive environmental regulation in the world. I know many here have argued that the environmentalists aren't the reason for high gas prices and I won't argue that here; I'll leave that up to those who believe that just as I do. What I will argue is that we need more refinery capacity, even if we go hybrid or sandals. If we don't build capacity that has been stopped for the last 26 years, we won't ever have anything close to energy stability.

I say the environmentalists are overreacting and we need refineries built. What the Bush Administration wants has to be approved by congress after congress writes and debates the bill. I say what the Administration wants is responsible and good for all of us, now and in the future.

This is being reported on MSNBC, FNC and CNBC this morning. Comments are also coming from Alan Greenspan sometime after noon EST. These are important discussions that are going on and you should tune in today before the media starts to take sides. I'm sure the media only wants the best for us but they really don't have a clue what we really want or need.

This would be an excellent time to educate yourself before the media begins it's certain to happen distortion.
:duel :cool:
Top Bottom