backtop


Print 95 comment(s) - last by Boingo Twang.. on Mar 7 at 11:06 AM


Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) found that White House advisers had a great deal to do with the writing of the rules

Last week, 30 U.S. senators (29 of which were Democrats) gave President Barack Obama their support for the 54.5 mpg fuel standard by 2025. However, House Republicans still had a bone to pick with these new rules.

The new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) proposal, which was introduced by the Obama administration, the state of California and major automakers, aims to increase the average fuel economy of cars and light trucks sold in the U.S. to 54.5 mpg by 2025 in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the U.S.' dependency on foreign oil.

When the new rules were initially proposed last year, major automakers like Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co. and Chrysler backed it. However, the standard had some strong opposition from the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA), who said the new rules would tack an extra $5,000 to the sticker price of new vehicles in 2025, as well as Republicans who worked to block the standard last fall because they believed that it would regulate many new vehicles that sell for under $15,000 entirely out of existence.

Now, despite the rules getting the green light from 30 U.S. senators, House Republicans still have beef with the new rules. More specifically, GOP has been looking into how involved Obama's advisers were in the development of the new 2017-2025 fuel efficiency standards.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said he investigated Obama's advisers' involvement last August when speaking to White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler.

"Your response seemed to imply that the Executive Office of the President was not significantly involved in the development of these fuel economy/greenhouse gas emissions standards," Issa wrote to Ruemmler.

As it turns out, Issa's investigation discovered that there was indeed substantial participation in the development of the new standards by the White House's Office of Management and Budget, Domestic Policy Council, National Economic Council and Council of Economic Quality.

Ron Bloom, a White House adviser under the Obama administration, spent weeks trying to negotiate with automakers for support regarding the 54.5 mpg by 2025 standard. Bloom also spoke with lobbyists daily in July 2011, ad former White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley met with Ford CEO Alan Mulally.

A finalized version of the rules is due this summer.

Source: The Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Want to save some money?
By jjmcubed on 3/1/2012 7:20:41 PM , Rating: 2
If you think that we can open our spouts all of the sudden and have an effect on the global market, sorry. We can't.

I don't usually comment on these as I get tired of your continued insulting comments.

"This is really simple stuff here"
"Don't you understand?"

You can continue to listen to your "experts" and I'll continue to listen to my "experts". Unless you work in the commodity or trading in oil, I'll continue to disagree with you no matter how much name calling you do.


RE: Want to save some money?
By Reclaimer77 on 3/1/2012 7:34:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you think that we can open our spouts all of the sudden and have an effect on the global market, sorry. We can't.


We've already proved the inverse is true. So sorry, can't agree. You're flat out wrong.

quote:
I'll continue to disagree with you no matter how much name calling you do.


I haven't called you a single name.


RE: Want to save some money?
By thurston2 on 3/1/2012 11:52:52 PM , Rating: 1
He did list two specific insults you said, I figured you were at least intelligent enough to realize that's what he meant by name calling. Maybe I give you too much credit.

(see others can do it too)


RE: Want to save some money?
By Reclaimer77 on 3/2/2012 1:52:51 PM , Rating: 2
I don't consider it an "insult" if you're pointing out to somebody that they are wrong, or are not focusing on the key issue of a topic of discussion.

Now yes, I have a reputation of being rude. I have been known to call people "idiots" for simply having a different opinion. That's wrong, and I'm going to start working on that.

However I honestly didn't insult the man yesterday, or at least, did not intend to.


RE: Want to save some money?
By EnzoFX on 3/1/2012 7:43:10 PM , Rating: 2
Don't bother with lost causes.


RE: Want to save some money?
By thurston2 on 3/1/2012 11:56:00 PM , Rating: 2
jimcubed do you work in commodity or oil trading? Just wondering.


RE: Want to save some money?
By nick2000 on 3/2/2012 12:07:10 AM , Rating: 2
Small matters like the number of years needed to actually setup a well are conveniently forgotten by some.not to mention that *we* do not own the oil on our land. We only lease the land to oil companies who have absolutely no interest in prices going down...

Killing speculation somehow would have a faster impact and might decrease oil prices by up to 30% according to some figures.


RE: Want to save some money?
By Reclaimer77 on 3/2/2012 2:18:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
We only lease the land to oil companies who have absolutely no interest in prices going down...


Higher gas prices equal people cutting back, buying hybrids, etc etc. So the idea that we're being gouged by oil companies isn't responsible for our high fuel costs. Oil companies do not set the prices on crude oil. But they DO have an interest in profits. If a commodity like oil becomes prohibitively expensive you end up losing profit margins. Which is what's been happening to oil companies over the past few years. While the media and the left focus on profits a more in-depth look shows oil profit margins are getting slimmer. Believe me, oil companies have a BIG interest in seeing their margins go up.

Speculators are a convenient scapegoat, but they aren't part of the problem. In fact by going after speculators, all you're really doing is helping crude prices go up. Speculators actually help the price on commodities to remain more stable than they would be without. I would really love to see your source who can prove killing speculation would cause a whopping 30% drop in oil prices. That's almost impossible to believe.

A lot of people don't really understand what a speculator does. By taking big risks in good times and buying commodities, they are able to making a profit by selling their investment when prices go up. Speculating is risky and they can, and DO, lose LOTS of money. But this practice has an overall affect of stabilizing prices. Because by their very nature, they are increasing the supply of a commodity (oil) just when the market needs it most.

Without speculation we would see wild and alarming increases in oil prices.


RE: Want to save some money?
By Keeir on 3/2/2012 7:34:26 PM , Rating: 2
A few additional notes.

A quick trip to Google Finance will show you that most Oil and Gas companies make around 8% net profit margin and around 8% return on assests.

Apple and Microsoft are both in the 20%+ range for each of these categories.

Gap and American Eagle also both beat 8%.

General Mills and Kellog average around 10%.

Dish and DirectTV average around 12%.

Despite the price at the pump or the amount of profits, Oil and Gas companies are not significantly more profitable or better uses of Capital than the underlying US economy.

On speculation. Its true that Speculators can create artifically bubbles or troughs in pricing for a commodity. But bubble life is usually proportional to the lifecycle of a product. Oil and Gas contracts typically have a lifecycle less than a few years. Its unlikely that a long term bubble can be created by oil speculation. Consider the housing bubble in the US? It lasted around 5-6 years. Which incidently is right about the lifetime of a typical home purchase (large numbers of people live in a home for only 5-10 years)


"What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders." -- Michael Dell, after being asked what to do with Apple Computer in 1997














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki