Associated Press
Time will tell if expectations are met, but new reports this week suggest American consumers can expect "more relief at the pump heading into peak summer driving season."
After topping out at $3.92 in early April, gasoline now averages $3.68 a gallon. Weak demand, slumping crude oil prices and ample inventories could push prices to $3.55 by mid-June, says Brian Milne, analyst at Telvent DTN.
That's a far cry from $5-a-gallon fears in early 2012, when crude prices surged earlier and faster than ever before on fears that tensions with Iran threatened supplies. [...]
"We're getting a bit of a break here,'' says Tom Kloza of the Oil Price Information Service, who notes that domestic supplies are at their highest levels since 1990.
If this holds up, it's good news. But I'm curious about the political angle to this.
Last summer, with gas prices rising, several leading Republicans came up with a curious accusation: President Obama was causing pain at the pump deliberately, as part of some undefined environmental agenda. This odd line was pushed by Haley Barbour and the Koch brothers, among others.
In the ensuing months, prices came back down, and the talking point went away -- until March, when prominent Republicans like Newt Gingrich, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, and assorted Fox News figures said higher gas prices are the "conscious policy of this administration."
It was, even by conservative standards, a ridiculous accusation. But before their attacks slip down the memory hole, how about a little accountability: do Republicans still believe Obama is trying to get higher gas prices on purpose?
When they see gas prices fall, do they think the president, who apparently can dictate what happens at the pump by snapping his fingers, deserves credit, or does Mitch Daniels and his cohorts believe Obama is just incompetent in his quest for higher prices?
Leave a Comment:
Is this a trick question? Remember how Obama said
Prices are coming down because of a perception that the global economy is in trouble. You know, supply and demand? That's the action in front of a backdrop where perceptions see the EPA, refineries closing, coal fired plants closing, half a Keystone pipeline, etc..
You make less sense than usual. You are not a clever bulldog at all.
Prices would go up if supply was going down eap. This doesn't even follow normal supply and demand logic. If you believe there is going to be less of something then your price tag for that something goes UP it does not go down. Baseball cards sell for more money if they are rare, not less (to use an analogy).
Secondly if the market is responding to global pressures then this means anything PBO has done and any policy passed in the US would not effect the cost of gas. So you are immediately contradicting your first premise by your second premise. This doesn't make any sense.
It should also be pointed out that supply and demand has to do w/ the physical quantity available. If how people feel about a situation is what drives prices up or down then you are automatically invalidating the idea that prices are set by policy. So that means in your last paragraph the first sentence also contradicts the last sentence. This is even more confusing. You are, in effect, arguing that nothing Romney or Obama can do will effect the cost of energy. And since you started your post by arguing that Obama's policies would effect energy....
Seriously it's like a paradox inside of a paradox inside of a paradox inside of an enigma.
It's "Obama's fault" when gas prices go up but it was a "free market" issue when it happened under Bush.
Hey! I was gonna say that.
So, I'll add that Obama wants to reinvigorate Jimmy Carter's energy ideas, and higher gas prices would help get us off the Demon Oil. (an excellent lubricant, and raw stock for plastics).
But, until the Pain at the Pump becomes literally unbearable, we will continue to buy Hummers.
Well let's see, three and a half years ago when Obama took office gas was how much? $1.78?
Bush is looking better all the time.
How much was gas in the summer before the election? About where it is now
Of course, 4 years ago at this time, when Bush was still in office, gas prices were about where they were now...then they started going down mid-summer. By Election day, they were around $2.40 average, and when Obama took office, they were lower than that...
So you can argue that the more it became clear Obama was going to be our next President, the more reassured Americans were about war in iraq ending and a cease in escalating tension for more war in the Middle East, resulting in less ridiculous speculation and thus lower gas prices...
You're welcome...
Oh, and don't get me wrong, I know you're just a creep looking to raise a ruckus. You don't give a rat's butt about political issues; you just want to see if you can make liberals' head explode. I wouldn't be surprised if you troll Malkin-like websites with leftist rhetoric, too. So it's not like I want to give you attention you don't deserve, but I'm sure there are some nitwits out there who genuinely think as you do, so this rebuttal is more for them then for you. Congratulations, you've now been given oodles of attention. Try not to let your head swell too much, remember thou art mortal.
I appreciate the desire here. But the basic rule holds: don't feed the trolls.
Whenever the stock market gets killed, as it did under Bush, it apparently wreaks havoc with the speculators. When the market really got killed in 2008 gas dropped down to $1.75 or so. Even now when the market drops a hundred or so points, if it doesn't immediately recover, oil takes a dip within a day or so. A couple weeks later the dip appears at the pump. When the opposite happens, the appearance of the higher pump price is almost instant.
Eap does not realize that this sentence contradicts this sentence from his first post:
Again if perception is what effects prices as opposed to the actual commodity and it's availability then this would mean you are automatically invalidating any and every claim about policy effecting the cost of energy. What is more, it should be noted, cap-and-trade never passed. And it should also be noted that PGWB supported cap-and-trade as well as McCain. In fact cap-and-trade was a Republican idea. Please refer to eap's first post if you want to know what I'm referring to here w/ cap-and-trade.
http://www.consumerenergyreport.com/2012/03/14/charting-the-dramatic-gas-price-rise-of-the-last-decade/
There ıs one group of people who aren't worryıng about gas prıces: CEOs. A new study just released by the Assocıated Press usıng data from Equılar, an executıve pay research fırm, says the typıcal chıef executıve of a US publıc company made more than nıne-and-one-half mıllıon dollars, a 6% ıncrease from the year before. And the raıse gıven to the CEOs' workers? A measly 1%.
Detaıls are here: http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1185402--typical-ceo-in-u-s-made-9-6-million-last-year?bn=1
How dare you call them 'CEOs'!!! They're 'Job Creators' and they need every bit of that $9.5mil to create more jobs. How else could they hire their pool boy, landscaper, maid, butler, aide de camp, etc?
Probably cheering for oil companies because they own stock in oil, furthering their dividends, they need MORE, to hell with the environment.
It's as if they have no posterity to think of, hmmmm… interesting. To think about our posterity in other ways besides accumulating wealth and debt, like heath and pursuit of happiness. Having an understanding that things do not just fall into theirs laps because parents had opportunities and were opportunists with no other cares but their own.
It is interesting how people can adjust their choices about an issue and in this case about abortion and birth control. But one must keep in mind that by God people have been given freewill to choose what they want to do in their own personal lives. And you must not let people who do like to control and crave power over others dictate how you should live your life. In this very scenario, I remain as Pro-Choice, since in the first place I would not want to be telling somebody else on how to live their life or what their choices should be. It is hard enough in this world and than to go and say the rights and liberties of others should be removed or taken away is just outright wrong to do. In America, we have fought too long and hard for the rights, equality and liberties for all people to just simply let these people dictate what someone else should do or how someone else should live their life. And too much of late, we see how really these people are power craving, arrogant, corrupt, greedy, hypocrites, and deceivers to what is really only self serving without the care or concern of others and how the consequences of their actions will bring just further despair upon people.
Thoughtful and gracious. Thanks, Deb-3596991
"It was, even by conservative standards, a ridiculous accusation." This line confuses me. Conservatives have standards?
Yes, conservatives have standards. It's often called religion. It's also why conservatives will often fail those standards, they are hard to meet. The left on the other hand doesn't have much use for standards, it makes life easier. For example....
http://www.examiner.com/article/report-murray-feinstein-boxer-pay-female-staffers-less-than-male-staffers
"Shooter": Apparently what really makes life easier is abandoning any serious effort at fairness and accuracy (or would that be fairness and balance?). Linking to right-wing-nut blather written by "Joe Newby" for the "Spokane Conservative Examiner" (based on still more wing-nut blather by Andrew Stiles in the "Washington Free Beacon") is not impressive.
Less impressive still? Even in the article(s) to which you linked, after accusing the Democratic senators of having a more than 35% gender-based disparity in the salaries paid to their staff, "Joe Newby" was compelled to point out:
"The figure is based on a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report, and is technically accurate. However, as CNN's Lisa Sylvester has reported, when factors such as area of employment, hours of work, and time in the workplace are taken into account, the gap shrinks to about 5 percent"
Wow. So, people doing different jobs, for different hours and at different levels of seniority, make different incomes. And, in other news, grass is green! A five percent gap may well be a matter of statistical "noise" resulting from the relatively small data base, in effect a "margin of error". I can certainly see why you and Joe Newby, with your mighty conservative standards, wouldn't hesitate to conflate that to a more than 35% disparity! Nice try, troll.
For those who don't know, Shooter 242 has been thrown off every internet discussion board he's been at - TPM, Political Animal when Kevin ran it, etc. His main claim to fame is Worst Fascist Troll on the net. The only response that works with this piece of excrement you scrape off your shoe is the sound of silence.
If that's true then Rachel's oft repeated mantra that women only make 77% what men do is bogus as well? Works for me!
Heh.
I know, I know, DNFT, but I can't let this go unanswered. Ms. Sylvester's reporting in that instance was referring very specifically to data re the compensation of the comparatively small population of staffers of the U.S. Senate. The kindly (and super-smart) Dr. Maddow's "oft-repeated mantra" is referring to the U.S. employment market overall. Two rather different things.
Math is hard, heh? Especially for you, Shooter... ;-)
Eap you do realize pretzel was making fun of the assertion you just made, yes?
Honestly how did you miss that?
And you also realize that what you would be arguing, eap, is that it's a good thing for women to be paid less than men.
Sighs.
It's neither of course. The Republicans aren't stupid. They know that the president of a single country has little-to-nothing to do with the price at the pump, they know how oil prices fluctuate and how it's based on many factors, few of which are able to be adjusted by any one person.
They also know that Americans will react to things they notice, and gas prices are one of them. Gas prices go up, "It's the Democrats' fault!" Gas prices go down, "We're in a recession!"
A worthy question. On a similar note, since they said that gas prices were rising because of holds on domestic drilling and the hold on the Keystone Pipeline, one must surmise that the lowering gas prices are the result of some new drilling. Right? If gas prices go up when we don't drill, then falling gas prices must mean we're drilling someplace new. So I'd like someone to ask Republicans what new wells we opened up or what new pipeline is suddenly moving crude that we're experiencing these falling prices.
Typical GOP rubbish. As the big oil companies, Koch brothers and all the other greedy pigs on Wall St. line their pockets with money stolen from the working class, they still try to influence voters with lie after lie about the Presidnet.
Gas prices are down. Under President Obama, domestic oil production is at an eight-year high (source: http://j.mp/JhFiRi) - higher than it was under Bush. Obama's energy policy is working, and it has had no detrimental effect on gas prices. Prices at the pump are determined primarily by oil consortiums, speculators, and the wider market.
Regular unleaded gas here in LA is $4.50/gallon. Gas prices have not come down appreciably here. Of course BO does not care if gas prices go up because only with higher fossil fuel prices do alternative energy become competitive. Had he been concerned about gasoline prices, he would have already approved the Keystone pipeline instead of waiting until after the election to approve this. Higher gas prices results in demand destruction which along with our crappy economy has resulted in decreased consumption of gasoline. Higher gas prices also forces consumers to buy smaller fuel efficient cars which further reduces consumption. However because WTI follows Brent we still have $90/barrel of oil. If we had more pilelines (which BO opposes) we could move oil from the Dakotas to the refineries in the gulf and a wider area of the country could enjoy the lower gas prices that only the mid-west and Rockies now enjoy/
I just figure that the Rape-Public-Con-artists in the Gomer-&-Oil-Party are about to ramp up the saber-rattling blather about Iran again, obviously in support of the President's supposed plan to increase energy costs and oil company profits (because what, really, could help the environment more?). Then they'll claim it's an example of bipartisan cooperation!
;-)
This is too easy. Here's the story: Folks in the Muslim World love Obama. They see him as their friend. When they heard that high gas prices might keep him from being re-elected, they brought down the price of oil to help him out. That way he can be re-elected and let them take over the world!!!
Anybody got Bill O'Reilly's email so I can send it to him?
Actually, Fox news or Fox Business News covered this a few weeks ago, when gas prices first started to dip (I could've sworn I read about it here. Anyhoo...).
The gist is that gas prices are falling because demand is falling. Demand is falling because of greater economic uncertainty. People aren't planning to travel, aren't going out to shop, aren't going out to have fun. By traveling less and shopping less, fewer goods and services are being purchased, and thus the economy will soon contract. Therefore, lower gas prices is a bad thing and naturally, it's Obama's fault. The fact that there's a lack of proof shouldn't dissuade you from believing what they know to be true.
I feel that Bernanke's hand is in this oil problem and the higher prices. In February of 2011 when oil prices were $3.50 Bernanke said in a statement that the economy had gotten used to this price and had adjusted. In April of 2012 with oil at $3.95 per gallon Bernanke in a statement said that the economy could withstand this new price. I believe he is able to drive prices up in addition to Wall Street and the oil speculators to get more tax revenue off the backs of people who can't afford this.
Further, why won't the government allow the high 78 miles per gallon cars like the Passat 160 that is sold in Europe to be sold in America. This car along with a Ford model are also made in America but can only be sold to South America and are not allowed to be sold in America. A car dealer explained that the government won't allow it for economic reasons. Shocking.
I feel that Bernanke's hand is in this oil problem and the higher prices. In February of 2011 when oil prices were $3.50 Bernanke said in a statement that the economy had gotten used to this price and had adjusted. In April of 2012 with oil at $3.95 per gallon Bernanke in a statement said that the economy could withstand this new price. I believe he is able to drive prices up in addition to Wall Street and the oil speculators to get more tax revenue off the backs of people who can't afford this.
Further, why won't the government allow the high 78 miles per gallon cars like the Passat 160 that is sold in Europe to be sold in America. This car along with a Ford model are also made in America but can only be sold to South America and are not allowed to be sold in America. A car dealer explained that the government won't allow it for economic reasons. Shocking.
Almost 2 years ago I wrote to you about the "Real Cost Per Gallon of Gasoline" which is $16.50 to $18.50 once you factor in the oil wars etc. etc.
Now take an additional look at this. The following now adds insult to injury.......................
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBnlXGvA1Wk&feature=player_embedded
Republicans can't give the Democrats any compliment whatsoever. Even if it is something that obviously benefits everyone. They can also say nothing good about President Obama. It is just a stupid blame game that they will try in every way to miss lead everyone to get themselves back in power. The gas price game is something that no president has control over for sure. I live in North Carolina where there is a gas tax on every gallon sold. I can go to Virginia or South Carolina and get gas sometimes ten cent to fifteen cents cheaper. The tax is supposedly used for upkeep of the roads and byways of our state. It is obvious to me that some counties do not get an equal share of the pot to keep up the interstates running through their jurisdiction. I do admit that we do have one of the best road systems in the United States, but I think that the money should be served equally to keep up our main highways and interstates as well as all interstructure.
Gas prices are the result of conspiracy between Republican-owned oil companies and Republican-owned hedge funds.
Rachael please, sit down and take a deep breath. Imagine, asking a Republican to accept responsibility for anything. David Vitter is still in the Senate right?
Hello guys! I am a new member here. Glad to visit this kind of forum that relates to the topic
what am I looking for. By the way, I know site that is also related to this topic. Hope you
will visit it for sometime. http://www.tubeprofiles.com. Thanks in advance and have a good day
to all of us. :)