Now & Then

Found this tonight at Bloomberg.com:

Crude oil rose to a record above $135 a barrel in New York on concern that supplies are inadequate after U.S. stockpiles unexpectedly dropped last week.

U.S. crude inventories fell 5.32 million barrels to 320.4 million barrels last week, the biggest drop in four months, the Energy Department said yesterday. Gasoline supplies plunged by 755,000 barrels when analysts expected an increase.

``The price was roaring before the inventory report and was going up regardless, but that gave it the extra push,'' said Rowan Menzies, head of research at Commodity Warrants Australia Ltd. in Sydney. ``I'm beginning to think that this is a serious macro event, with oil at these levels, and it's going to have some serious consequences.''

Crude oil for July delivery rose as much as $1.87, or 1.4 percent, to $135.04 a barrel in after-hours electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. It was at $134.85 a barrel at 9:30 a.m. Singapore time.

Which reminded me of this:

U.S. Rep. Mark Souder voted today for House passage of H.R. 3893, the Gasoline for America's Security (GAS) Act of 2005. The bill passed the House by a bipartisan majority of 212-210.

"We continue to see gas prices rise at the pumps, and yet we haven't built a new oil refinery in the United States since the 1970s," Souder said. "The GAS Act will help lower gasoline prices within the free market system by increasing capacity, streamlining fuel supply, providing transparency in gasoline pricing, fighting price gouging, reducing bureaucracy, and revitalizing refineries."

Back to today, here's what Souder's Deputy Chief of Staff, Martin Green, had to say in an "op-ed" piece on May 5th:

While there’s been a lot of talk about reducing gas costs, Congress has taken no real action. Nationally, the cost of gas has risen $1.29 per gallon since the Democrats took control of Congress, despite House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s promises to reduce it. Moreover, two powerful House Democrats have actually proposed increasing gas taxes (up to an additional 50 cpg).

Energy, however, is a long-term challenge for the United States. It’s as much a national security problem as it is an economic one, and reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil requires serious action at home.

Considering Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela and Russia are among the world’s top oil producers, we have to keep in mind that we’re enriching them each time we fill up our tanks. Moreover, because the world’s biggest oil firms are state-owned, we’re enriching their regimes directly. And we’re letting them dictate what we pay.

What’s the solution?

Mark Souder favors increasing every type of domestic energy resource, including biofuels (ethanol and biodiesel), clean coal, oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and along our Outer Continental Shelf, as well as nuclear, hydro, solar and wind power. He also wants to increase oil refining capacity (including at Indiana’s Whiting refinery), because it’s a major system bottleneck and no new refinery has been built since the 1970s. Congressman Souder is taking a broad approach to reducing our dependence on foreign oil and stabilizing fuel costs.

The Democrat leadership in Congress, however, won’t budge. Because of the powerful environmental lobby, Speaker Pelosi rejects domestic oil drilling, clean coal, and nuclear power. And, as we see with Sen. Ted Kennedy (who opposes a wind farm near Cape Cod because he thinks it unsightly), they’re not especially fond of alternative energy, either.

Where does that leave us? With the status quo — which everyone should find unacceptable.

So it's the fault of the Democrats that America still faces problems with gas prices, problems that Mark Souder supposedly helped solve, three years ago. If Mark Souder is reelected this year, it won't be because he or anyone on his staff ever bothered to tell any of his constituents the truth.