Sen. Scott Brown (R) appeared in Plymouth, Mass., last week, and a voter asked about ending tax subsidies to the oil industry. The senator's response was unexpected.
The clip, recorded by American Bridge 21st Century, can be a little tough to hear, but in response to the question, Brown said, "Oil companies don't get subsidies.... I'm positive. They're able to take deductions like every other business."
This doesn't make sense. As Brad Johnson explained, the oil industry receives $7 billion in subsidies a year. When Brown says he's "positive" he has it right, his understanding of the facts is the opposite of the truth.
It's tempting to think the Republican senator, who's routinely struggled with the basics of public policy, is just confused and didn't intentionally try to mislead the voter, but as Joan McCarter mentioned, Brown has voted several times on whether to continue the tax subsidies to the industry. He must have had some understanding of the issue at the time of these votes.
So why tell someone oil companies "don't get subsidies," when he must know that's not true?
Leave a Comment:
"He must have some understanding of the issue."
Why? Good employees do not need to understand "issues", they just need to do as they are told. If they want to keep their job.
He knows exactly whats going on. He's lying. He's a politician.
... and he should be hung for treason for deliberately lying to the American people!
I'm not sure this rises to a level that warrants the death penalty.
As a politician representing this country, he/they should be held in the absolute highest standards, especially since they are in such crucial positions of power. A politician caught lying to the American people should be a treasonous act and absolutely warrant the death penalty!
There is a whole reality out there that the left completely misses. I'll bet you guys really think cookies are made by elves.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2012/04/25/the-surprising-reason-that-oil-subsidies-persist-even-liberals-love-them/2/
Why lie? Are you suggesting that people need a reason to lie?
If the truth does not suit you or it stands in your way then a decisive leader must lie to those who he leads. It is a heroic thing to take on the guise of the devil in order to gain support. Not everyone has the courage to throw caution to the wind and assure your own eternal damnation. (After all he would never deny the existance of God or a Judgement day In fact like most right wingers he would probably claim to have seen God)
He's not confused, and he's not trying to be intentionally misleading. He's just stupid.
I think it's very possible he's clueless enough to not know what he was voting on. He might have got instructions on which way to vote. Then again, he could be outright lying.
With Repubicans, it's difficult to tell: lying, ignorant, stupid or some combination?
Lying, ignorant, and stupid, in varying degrees depending on the subject.
Because he's a Republican liar. . . just like the rest of them!
"..., is just confused and didn't intentionally try to mislead the voter,..."
Brown like most of the GOTP doesn't really have a clue about what his job is or what he's supposed to do nor does he understand. At some point WE stopped being taught CIVICS in school - you know a basic understanding of how our government works, what it really is supposed to be doing, the 3 branches of government and why they are separate, how legislation gets crafted, what the role of "the people" is and how our participation in government does matter. It also doesn't help that WE now have a corporate owned media that no longer provides the "information" to the people just propaganda which leads to further confusion, alienation, and misunderstanding.
I believe it was Ben Franklin that said something about "WE get the government WE deserve when WE don't pay attention to what's going on" - it's not a direct quote but it does sum up what has happened. WE have installed people into office that don't have a clue about what they're supposed to be doing (besides supporting the top 1%), we have a good portion of the population that not only doesn't understand and are afraid of "government" - but these are the very people that don't appreciate learning, facts, or knowledge of any kind! Scott Brown, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin - all are perfect examples of the stupidity on the right and their inability to comprehend basics!
No Scott Brown wasn't lying, he's just completely stupid and thinks that everyone else is stupid also!
I think it would be real nice if somebody in the blogosphere unpacked the subsidities issue. If the oil companies get the same tax breaks as everybody else, Brown is right and the left is misleading us, but if, as I suspect, they really get additional credits or subsidities over and above what is available to everyother business, then Brown should be shown the error of his ways.
Wikipedia to the rescue! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies
In a nutshell: "A 2009 study by the Environmental Law Institute[5] assessed the size and structure of U.S. energy subsidies over the 2002–2008 period. The study estimated that subsidies to fossil-fuel based sources amounted to approximately $72 billion over this period..."
They get special treatment. It goes way back to when it was deemed necessary to give them a break so they would explore for oil deposits. And, to defray some other costs. They haven't needed these subsidies for many years. And it is very obvious they do not need them now. We all know this because they are at the top of the ladder when it comes to profits. The make many billions every year. A few years back they even admited they did not need the help. Byt lately they have been in bed with their Republican friends who will give them the money even though they no longer need it. They is easy to understand. It is another casese of GOP eliteism.
He voted in lock step with his party in his first 3/4 of his term,then he moderated somewhat in the last part.People of Mass.surely have to see this phony for what he is.They must remember this is a six year term.
Subsidies come into play when the regulardies aren't playing. Scott Brown learnt his numbers in skool.
He understands perfectly well. The oil industry position is that a targeted tax deduction is not a subsidy - only a direct payment is a subsidy. So when Brown says the oil industry doesn't get subsidies and in the same sentence says, "they're able to take deductions like every other business," he is parroting the industry line.
And, yes, every business can take every deduction it qualifies for- every mom-and-pop grocery can take a deduction for the expensing of intangible drilling costs and the preferential percentage depletion for oil and natural gas wells, if it qualifies.
And if it doesn't qualify, that's not the oil industy's fault, is it?
Which is a lie. It is a direct payment. You can fudge it the final wash of income and expenses, but it is a subsidy just like farm subsidies. Why spin this for them. Do not even go there. Devunk the lie. Don't muddy the waters. Tjhey get the money before they prepare their taxes. It is income. It is not a tax deduction.
You all know Scott Brown is absolutely right, right?
The oil companies don't get subsidies. They get credits and deductions just like any other company is able to get, for buying drilling and refinery equipment, and for searching for pockets of energy-rich resources in the soil. If you want some of those sweet deductions you, too, can just buy an oil rig and start drilling! You don't have to be an oil company! You could be a solar cell manufacturer and get the exact same deductions for buying drilling equipment!
Sheesh. Google "oil company deductions" and you get a NY Post article right at the top that spells out the
oil company spin, er ... reality for you in plain English!I take it that you are a paid hack of Big Oil. And to mention an article in a Rupert Murdoch owned tabloid certainly destroys any credibility that you probably never had in the first instance.
Sarcasm alert there SamuraiCowboy.
I'm not sure it matters. Oil companies have the money to invest and explore on their own. As it sits, they take no risk to just drill anywhere. The taxpayer flips the bill for them to explorer, them to take a resource out of the ground and they go and sell it.
He is from the GOP (greedy one percent) what else would he do but lie. Taxes are for poor and the middle class to pay. Subsidies for an industry that makes 500% profit what else would you expect. Suck away until the titt goes dry it the GOP motto. They always say smaller govenment but they really mean smaller taxes for the big corporations and send the labor over seas.
Tom from the post above is correct. It's a quibble over the financial accounting. A subsidy is a mainly economics term and a credit/deduction is an accounting term.
If a company, however, gets money or a form of economic aid, directly for research and development from the US government outside of a the credit/deduction system which is in place that can be concerned a subsidy/grant.
A subsidy can also be thought of, in the broadest terms, as something like getting a hard to acquire loan guarantee from the government at very favorable rates. Solyndra got that, remember?
All in all. Most of the oil industry gets to take a capitalize their expense (tangible drilling costs and intangible drilling costs) over the (first year and first two years). Those tangible and intangible drilling costs are either acquiring acreage (from a farmer or the US govt in the case of offshore), or direct drilling costs for a well (usually around 5million for a shale gas well onshore and 100 million for deepwater offshore). In that vein...when they capitalize and deduce that expense from their revenue, they end up not paying taxes to the govt.....
Why should these guys start telling the truth NOW? They lie about most things these days, it seems...and don't think twice about it...Just part of the way they 'win'....Liars and cheats...quite a sad state of affairs for US.....
He knows they don't get subsidies, because all the crowned heads of Europe told him.
"Look at me everyone! I'm Scott Brown! I'm so pretty! Vote for me because I'm pretty. I don't know diddly squat, but it doesn't matter 'cause I'm so pretty! Vote for me!"
What a dolt.
That youtube clip needs to be turned into an oil slick ad.
Surely I'm not the only one who sees the irony in Brown arguing that the oil industry gets no government subsidies while walking in the middle of a blacktop street?
The government acquired the land for, paid for, built and maintains that street. It, like millions of other similar miles of street, use barrels and barrels of oil in their creation. But the even bigger subsidy is that those blacktop streets facilitate and encourage easy, cheap use of individual automobiles. Which is to say the government-purchased (and centrally planned!) network of streets and highways is a huge driver of ongoing base demand for the oil industry's products -- surely one of the biggest subsidies, albeit indirect, given to any industry, ever.
But, those roads were built with taxes paid on oil. It's all a big circle where this stuff is inter-related. What is the perfect balance? And we need to be looking at WHAT the subsidies really are. It's not like one giant check, one lump sum given to oil companies for one thing. There are some pretty helpful programs in those subsidies. (Like the one that helps families afford heating oil.) We all need to study up on the details before we yell too loudly. Not saying that a lot of tax credits and subsidies aren't crazy...but sometimes, while the title of a program might seem silly and wasteful, when you look at the details you find out it is very helpful to a lot of regular folks. Just sayin'...
In general I agree with that sentiment, but when you have an industry, whatever it is, that is making all-time record profits, profits per quarter equal to the GDP of entire countries, it is hard to justify any subsidies for any reason. You want to help underprivileged families afford heating oil? Subsidize them directly. But if there were ever an argument for means testing in a time of limited government resources, this is it. They simply do not need the explicit subsidies (particularly because they get so many implicit ones -- like being in a small club with, for example, Phillip Morris, that gets to sell a product with extraordinary negative externalities without having to reflect any of those in the price of the product.)
All I am saying is that folks need to look at what all those subsidies really are and who they go to. For some bizarre reason of accounting, the Heating Oil assistance is grouped in with oil subsidies. And there are some more in there like it. I wholeheartedly agree that oil companies don't need "help." But, at the same time, they should be eligible for the same tax credits that all other businesses receive...so, maybe we need to revisit ALL tax credits for businesses.
Well, to be fair, Sen. Brown was disingenuous, but so was the question. The really important question and answer here is WHAT are the "subsidies/tax deductions?" There are some programs that I think most people support. The devil is always in the details. And it's time we all start ignoring the sound snippets and "Aha!' silliness and start studying the details to find real answers.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2012/04/25/the-surprising-reason-that-oil-subsidies-persist-even-liberals-love-them/
The devil may be in the Dockers as Sen. Brown walks like a hostile dressed-up ape.
Wait a minute - are you telling me that Oil Companies get "Free Stuff" from the government?
They do not need the money. They are gouging us enough. It needs to stop! There is colusion among the companies in pricing at the pump. They are charging us too much if they make billions every month. Why are all the gas stations charging the same price within pennies of each other? Is there true competition? Then the get a (choose your word if you must) on top of this. Do not get lost in symantics. Farmers do not quibble over farm "subsidies." Do not let somebody like Frank Luntz on the Republican side frame everything in the words that the Republican's think sound good for them and sound bad for the Democrat's. We went through that with tax, penatly, fee, et al. The GOP gets to choose which words are scary and which words are positive. You have to see through their game. Call them on it. This crap is such a waste of time. We argue over words instead of concepts. I am tired of devious sneaky con people. Thats what this election is all about. Go for the facts not the words.