The Next Chapter in our Immigration Story

Have the immigrants changed or have we? There is the part in us that, having edged our way into this society, wants to close the door firmly behind us.

Reports  are trickling in now, via a leak to Politico, that the right is now ready to compromise and come together to pass immigration reform.  It seems divisiveness is a thing of the past and this new Congress is ready to roll up its sleeves and get shit done or as James Wolcott of Vanity Fair put it: stop “legislative constipation.”

Or…

During the RNC Presidential election post mortem—you know, the one where they sat around looking at each other, at the ground, then at each other again, knowing full well that something’s gotta give if they don’t want to remain losers from this point forward—Republicans realized it was time for “Operation Woo the Latinos”.  Marco Rubio will offer up his face as the beacon that sheds light on the Hispanic population, saying “See? We’re with you.”

The Hispanic share of the electorate grew to 10% in 2012. The hard truth that the right had to face, undoubtedly accompanied with some aged and very strong scotch, was that while Romney shored up the white vote just as Reagan did before him, it wasn’t nearly enough.  The Hispanic vote is now five times what it was in Reagan’s time.

And so – immigration reform. Turning a kindly eye to the brown people. Extending a hand.  The main objective behind this bipartisan Senate deal put together by the self-proclaimed “Gang of Eight,” led by Chuck Schumer, would be to offer undocumented workers a path to citizenship.  But will their constituents on the right follow or will they use their votes to slap back Republican candidates in the midterms? If gun control is a hot button issue with right-wing Americans, try selling them on ingratiating themselves to the Hispanic community.  And watch gun sales skyrocket even more, if that’s even possible considering the spike we’ve seen in the weeks following the Newtown tragedy. Americans are arming themselves at a historic pace in anticipation of stricter guns laws.

But expect the gun debate to take a back seat as Facebook memes are undoubtedly being created to vilify the lowest class of non-Americans.  Prepare for talk of more welfare recipients, those “taking advantage” of our system, and well-paying jobs being whisked away right under our noses.  Pay no mind to the fact that these are counter-arguments to each other. One cannot be a lazy freeloader while simultaneously working so hard as to steal work from others.  Watch for this: the folks who decried Obamacare as socialist and unconstitutional  might start looking at it differently in this context.  Might “illegals” be here to take advantage of our healthcare system?  It doesn’t matter – this is an emotional issue, much like gun control, and the arguments are rarely based in thought and sense and has its roots, like so much else, in our collective American culture.

When we broach the subject of immigration, I find that what infuriates us the most is the lack of assimilation. You know the story. Our grandparents worked hard to come here and adopt American customs and spoke quietly and seldomly for shame of their accents.  They taught our parents English and wished for them to be above all else, the picture of white American success. Business owners, college graduates, home owners. Yet, somewhere along the line, we separated into groups with distinctly drawn boundaries and identities.  These lines are drawn along socio-economic and racial lines. And they are etched ever deeper now, instead of dissolving into the melting pot of this country.

It might serve us all well to question why.  Have the immigrants changed or have we?  We talk about American exceptionalism, sometimes as a boon to our nation and sometimes as a scourge.  There is the part in us that, having edged our way into this society, wants to close the door firmly behind us. The part that believes to let others in might dilute what makes us stand out among the world as strong, singular, unique. Have we lost the distinct pride of country and if so, when?  Or is it that because the country is colored differently from our grandparents’ generation, we fail to recognize it as our own? Could the strides that we made in civil rights have opened the floodgates of criticism by giving a microphone to people who said things we did not want to hear?

The voices of the smallest among us are growing louder.  They are issuing demands and asking for consideration.  And it just might be too much. Equal rights and opportunities are to be earned, we chastise.  I picture in my mind the high school bully holding the head of his victim in the bathroom toilet, where he cannot breathe but for foul-stench water.  When he is let up for air, the bully expects profuse thankfulness and deference and is shocked, utterly shocked – to receive that toilet water spit into his own face.  Now the anger is multiplied and the blurry random victim is given a face to direct it to.  Now it’s personal.

Where is the roadmap back?

Could it start with a gang of eight senators, each with an agenda of his own, whether it is a hungry ego that needs his name front and center on a bill, or the strategy of one party that knows it must sacrifice some of its “sure thing” voters in lieu of a growing population?

I’ll wait for the memes to let me know.

 

 

Time to Chuck Schumer

Chuck Schumer is the honey badger of legislators. He devours campaign cash, microphones and anything else to advance his vainglorious cause. Or, as the narrator in the now-infamous badger video says, “Honey badger don’t give a shit, it just takes what it wants.”

As Long Island Press readers may have gathered by now, brevity is not my strength. And, admittedly, my more interminable diatribes have been known to prompt eye rolling, even from those who love me. Therefore I shall be as efficient as possible in conveying this important political message:

It’s time for Sen. Chuck Schumer to move on.

Chuck Schumer is the honey badger of legislators. He devours campaign cash, microphones and anything else to advance his vainglorious cause. Or, as the narrator in the now-infamous badger video says, “Honey badger don’t give a shit, it just takes what it wants.”

Schumer’s patented move of holding a Sunday press conference in order to glom Monday morning headlines has become a long-running joke in Washington, and yet the media continue to cover every one of his self-serving events. Frankly, starting the week by opening up the daily newspaper only to see Chuck’s mug has become tiresome and insulting. Rarely, if ever, do these photo opportunities translate into anything tangible. Don’t get me wrong, there is frequently a bill or resolution spawned from Chuck’s press conference of the week, but most are dead on arrival with a pitiful few ever being referred to committee.

Those that do get there are largely perfunctory resolutions naming things like post offices or commemorating individuals. More importantly, not one of the bills proposed by Chuck since the financial collapse in 2008 had any effect on the financial services industry to which he answers. In fact, since the implosion of the financial sector he has successfully guided only seven pieces of legislation through Congress. Three of them were to re-name buildings and one had to do with the handling and archiving of FDR’s memorabilia. Not one of the three remaining resolutions was tied to the financial industry in any way, shape or form.

Yet Schumer has reaped historic donations from Wall Street firms in large part by providing the most important service to them that he possibly can: nothing. Chuck Schumer has done nothing to stand in the way of the reckless deregulation that brought the economy to its knees; nor has he authored any reasonable solution to fix things. But behind the scenes he is the go-to guy for Wall Street and his campaign coffers are undeniable proof of his effectiveness at stymieing anything that would negatively impact the ill-gotten gains of the financial mafia.

His transition from representative to senator seems to mark the precise moment of Schumer’s Faustian bargain that now has him serving at the pleasure of many Wall Street wizards, all of whom offer their allegiance to the almighty dollar. Through this compact with the devil Schumer has emerged as the ultimate Washington insider and the head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee from 2005 to ’09, a powerful fundraising arm of the Democratic Party, where he thrived. His tenure oversaw a record number of donations funneled to the committee, most notably from – you guessed it – the financial industry.

The past few months Chuckles has been uncharacteristically quiet given the raucous events taking place down on Wall Street. In fact, the man who has made his career occupying Wall Street himself and benefitting from its largesse has precious little to say to, or about, those in Occupy Wall Street. One has to search diligently for the senator’s reaction to a phenomenon so big Time Magazine just named “the protestor” as its Person of the Year only to discover that while he defends the rights of protestors, they should “make sure they don’t get in the way of every day New Yorkers getting to and from work and going about their daily business.”

Actually, Sen. Honey Badger, that’s the point. If we continue to do nothing—the art of which you have perfected—there won’t be any daily business. This is a crisis, Chuck. One you had a pretty big hand in creating, for the record. How so? By being the world’s greatest accomplice as a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs.

Chuck was there when Congress repealed the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act, thus allowing investment banks and commercial banks to merge. He was there for the creation of the Enron Loophole in the Commodities Futures Modernization Act. And he was there when President George W. Bush allowed the Intercontinental Exchange to trade oil futures, and later swaps and derivatives, as a foreign exchange outside of the purview of U.S. regulators. Lastly, Schumer is widely credited as the guiding force behind the controversial bank bailouts. In each case, what Schumer said publicly was very different from how he acted and voted. Every scenario saw “public Chuck” peering over his spectacles and haranguing officials over minute details when in reality he was helping to turn the screw behind the scenes.

But it’s his utter silence since the banking crisis began and to a greater extent since the Occupy movement took off like a rocket that Schumer’s true colors have shown. Protestors flooded the streets of New York beginning in September, chanting phrases that have spread across the nation. Phrases such as “Banks got bailed out, we got sold out” and “Whose street? Our street!” But who sold us out exactly and who really “owns” the street? Chuck.
In between authoring legislation that never goes anywhere accompanied by a carnival sideshow of Sunday press conferences, Chuck is busy doing what he does best. In the past five years alone he has raised more than $19 million in personal campaign donations, the majority of which came from the following industries: 1) Securities & Investment, 2) Lawyers/Law Firms, 3) Real Estate, 4) Lobbyists, and 5) Miscellaneous Finance. There you have it. Chuck Schumer—man of the people.

There are only 100 of these clowns in the Senate. How did we get Bozo? This is the Empire State. Can’t we do better? Is it too late to try and convince Elizabeth Warren to move here instead?

#OWS WK4: Kaptur and Gramm and Schumer, Oh My.

Tying the tubes of banks that have been, ahem, fornicating with the global economy and impregnating speculative bubbles only to watch them burst, will only hasten the inevitable seismic crash that looms around the corner. Breaking up the banks will happen one way or another…either by the law of the land or the law of nature.

The only phrase in connection with Occupy Wall Street repeated more often than “We are the 99%” is “What do they want?” The former is, of course, the rallying cry inviting citizens to join the movement against plutocracy in America—a show of strength against corporate greed and government corruption. The latter is the response to the growing number of dissenters in the “American Autumn”—criticism for their lacking a coherent list of specific demands. Personally, the only thing I find lacking is the imagination embodied by this mindless question.

The communal process of exploration and debate taking place in Zuccotti Park is like nothing I’ve ever seen. There are plenty of cogent, specific demands to be heard, but only by those who are willing to listen. A good deal of patience and a pinch of intellect are helpful because this isn’t a bumper-sticker movement and the occupiers don’t suffer fools (Geraldo) gladly.

There is no substitute for visiting the park and absorbing democracy, grassroots style. This past weekend my wife and I brought our two children with us to witness history unfolding in Manhattan, as it will someday grace the pages of a textbook, or a tablet, during their college years. With that said, allow me to indulge the frothing masses with a chunk of raw meat by examining one of the cornerstone issues behind OWS: Glass-Steagall.

Breaking the Bank: A Brief History of Glass-Steagall

In short, this was the name of the Act that prohibited commercial banks from engaging in investment-banking activities, among other things. It was established in 1933 to tame the harmful speculative behavior of an industry run amok in the early part of the 20th century; behavior largely credited for the market crash that precipitated the Great Depression. Fast forward to the waning days of the Clinton administration when the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act repealed the meat of Glass-Steagall and cleared the way for the greatest, most rapid consolidation of banking interests and wealth in recorded history.

Reinstating Glass-Steagall is, of course, easier said than done. Technically, the mechanics of doing it are fairly simple from a structural perspective, though it would cause massive upheaval in the banking world for several years to come. What is almost beyond comprehension are the circumstances that allow banks to continue gambling promiscuously in the world markets, which is a direct result of complementary deregulatory measures, globalization and an extraordinarily loose monetary policy.

These three factors have allowed banks to engage in worldwide investment schemes using cheap, borrowed money in a manner that is both irresponsible and opaque. In other words, be careful what you wish for. Tying the tubes of banks that have been, ahem, fornicating with the global economy and impregnating speculative bubbles only to watch them burst, will only hasten the inevitable seismic crash that looms around the corner. Breaking up the banks will happen one way or another…either by the law of the land or the law of nature.

Protestors from Zuccotti Park to San Francisco are keenly aware of this reality. They have an extremely sophisticated view of the world that goes beyond what we have seen in other movements both here and abroad. It’s their appreciation for complexity and nuance that makes it impossible to translate demands into bite-sized morsels for the media to gobble up and regurgitate into the mouths of shrieking birds in the nest that many television viewers have become.

To make matters worse, our elected federal representatives have no idea how to respond appropriately to a leaderless, populist movement. Apart from some platitudinous, mealy-mouthed responses from ranking Democrats like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi or truculent, dismissive statements from the likes of Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford), the upper echelon of American politics is collectively clicking its heels and hoping to wake up on the farm after the storm.

But there is hope for us yet–from someplace you might not expect.

A Buckeye Bulls Eye

Ohio’s 9th Congressional District cradles the southernmost tier of Lake Erie and has been steadfastly represented by Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D) for the three decades. Despite the presence of rollicking Toledo in the westernmost part of her district, things have been pretty quiet in the ninth. Until now.

Ohio’s much ballyhooed loss of two Congressional seats due to redistricting has resulted in a mash up of Kaptur’s 9th district and the neighboring 10th represented by fellow Democratic Congressman, Dennis Kucinich. Kucinich, who has long-represented the most progressive wing of the Democratic caucus, ran back-to-back failed campaigns for the presidential nomination, but he gained more notoriety when he famously called for the impeachment of co-Presidents George W. Bush and Dick Cheney for manufacturing evidence that pushed us into war with Iraq at a cost of nearly $2 trillion, thousands of U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands of  civilians. Somehow, this effort lacked the same traction and enthusiasm as the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton for, well, you know.

The combination of the 9th and 10th districts has given new life to Kucinich, who might otherwise have been homeless after Ohio’s redistricting plan, as he is planning to primary Kaptur for the seat. Not to be outdone, the GOP has recruited newcomer Samuel Wurzelbacher to run on the Republican ticket. This development would be of little moment, however, if Wurzelbacher wasn’t none other than “Joe The Plumber,” who made headlines during the McCain-Obama race. Although it was later revealed that he was neither “Joe” nor a licensed plumber, Wurzelbacher became an oft-abused example of the disenfranchised workingman in America. Not content to be a footnote in American political history, Wurzelbacher now seeks to extend his 15 minutes of fame by attempting to join the ranks of hundreds of other talentless slobs who also have no business running the country.

This entire hubbub overshadows one of the most interesting things to come out of this part of Ohio. Earlier this year Kaptur revived a failed effort during the previous Congress to reinstate regulations repealed under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. Kaptur’s bill, H.R. 1489, is appropriately titled “Return to Prudent Banking Act of 2011,” and it has the support of 45 sponsors, one of whom is Dennis Kucinich.

The men behind the original bill in question—Gramm, Leach and Bliley—are an interesting lot; notable because not one of them remains in government today though their impact is felt every day. Phil Gramm, one of the most loathsome scoundrels ever to hold office, is the reprobate who brought us the Enron Loophole, disastrous tax cuts that destabilized the first part of the Reagan era, and this horrendous bill that bears his name. His darling wife, Wendy, was at the helm of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission when her husband was shepherding through the bill that would castrate the agency and lead to the collapse of Enron and the birth of energy speculation. She went on to head the conservative think-tank, Mercatus Center, which is funded by the Koch brothers.

Thomas J. Bliley, former representative from Virginia, was himself a serial deregulator. Before handing America this pile of legislative crap, he authored the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which paved the way for massive consolidation in the media industry and gave us Orwellian juggernauts like News Corp. that control the airwaves today.  Jim Leach, also no longer in office, is more of a curiosity. Brilliant, progressive and, at times, defiant, Leach of Iowa often stood in opposition to the increasingly conservative members of his party and was eventually ousted by a Democrat write-in candidate. Although Leach was a noted fiscal conservative, his true expertise was in foreign affairs. By attaching his name to one of the most destructive economic bills ever written, an otherwise brilliant career has been sullied in a way only Bill Buckner could understand.

Going Forward

So, Marcy Kaptur “gets it.” The protestors on Wall Street also “get it.” And believe it or not, many of us in the media also “get it.” If the banking system is going to collapse under its own weight and hubris because of the sheer volume of horrible investments still filtering through the economy with zero oversight, what’s the next logical play?

Apart from the obvious, which is to enact H.R. 1489, I think it’s time to grant subpoena authority to the protestors on Wall Street so they can hold those responsible for the economic crisis accountable at a people’s tribunal. Since our judicial system has failed to do that, perhaps it should be left to the people in Zuccotti Park. And just to bring things full circle to New York politics, the first star witness to be called should be Sen. Charles Schumer, poster boy for Wall Street and the senior Democratic elected representative of our state.

Time’s up, Chuck. Your silence on the Occupy Wall Street movement is deafening and incriminating.

Chuck Pumps It Up

Obviously emboldened by the fact that either no one cares about his role in this disaster or no one understands how deep his involvement is, Schumer and his PR machine have continued to push the envelope of denial while pointing a crooked finger in the direction of everything but himself and the robber barons on Wall Street he has been protecting since taking office.

Charles Schumer Oil Shell Game
This fancy chart is another great way for me not to tell you why gas is so high at the pump

A couple of weeks ago Sen. Charles Schumer responded to a piece I had written claiming that he alone was responsible for the high price of oil. The point of the column was to illustrate the responsibility inherent in his position as the one senator who sits on the committees with oversight and authority to investigate and recommend legislation that would restore prudent checks and balances to the wildly unregulated commodity exchanges at the root of skyrocketing gasoline prices.

Because I was hoping to provoke a legitimate response from New York’s Democratic senator, I stopped short of detailing how intimately involved Schumer was in creating and subsequently covering for the irresponsible deregulation that allowed investment banks and oil companies to trade oil futures contracts without any oversight of a completely opaque and shadowy marketplace.

I was being polite.

As a result, the senator’s minions clearly viewed my rebuke as somewhat tongue-in-cheek, answering with the exact type of benign platitudinous response Americans have been conditioned to accept from our public officials. Schumer’s letter to the editor, which we published in its entirety the following week, ran sans snarky commentary from yours truly. (Those comments were left for my website.) Obviously emboldened by the fact that either no one cares about his role in this disaster or no one understands how deep his involvement is, Schumer and his PR machine have continued to push the envelope of denial while pointing a crooked finger in the direction of everything but himself and the robber barons on Wall Street he has been protecting since taking office.

His most recent diversion was to send a letter to Jon Leibowitz, chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, asking him to investigate U.S. oil refineries in connection with price fixing. Sounds logical, right? That’s our Chuck. Man of the people. But this is the perfect example of “gorilla dust” whereby two gorillas face off against one another in a spectacle of chest-thumping and screaming, throwing dirt in the air to create a commotion for the purpose of actually avoiding an altercation. The problem is that Schumer equivocates so often on this issue that his face and words have become wallpaper to Americans. He’s beating our collective will into submission by the sheer volume of deceptive statements.

To highlight the senator’s subterfuge, I have taken the liberty of explaining or translating his statements. Hopefully you will find this helpful.

Schumer: “Recent reports have indicated that U.S. refiners are cutting back on U.S. gasoline stockpiles in order to artificially keep prices high and inflate their bottom line… while gasoline use is declining, U.S. gasoline inventories remain below average and refining margins continue to rise.”
Planet Earth: The truth is that we have an over-supply of oil right now because, as Schumer admits, we are using less gasoline. The refiner doesn’t choose how much oil to refine, the market does. The market also determines how much the refinery is paid, and the oil companies such as Exxon Mobil and investment banks such as Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs are the market. All Chuckles is trying to do here is shoot the messenger and create a distraction from his beloved Wall Street funding sources.

Schumer: “I’ve called for the elimination of (oil) subsidies to help reduce our deficit and stop wasting taxpayer money subsidizing oil companies that don’t need any help.”
Planet Earth: Talk of eliminating oil subsidies is politically sexy and practically worthless unless we put an end to Big Oil’s ability to manipulate the market by simultaneously setting prices and driving the volume of trading. Eliminating the subsidies without fixing the fundamental market problem will bring in, or retain, more revenue for the government but the oil companies would have already taken it out of the consumer’s pocket to achieve the same bottom line margin by jacking prices at the pump.

Schumer: “I helped to protect a $100 million loan guarantee to build the Taylor Biomass Energy facility in Orange County that uses a process called gasification to convert over 95 percent of the waste received at its facility into cleaner energy.”
Planet Earth. Gasification, indeed. There’s only one thing spouting hot gas right now, and it ain’t the Taylor Biomass Energy facility. For the record, these projects are great for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But let’s be clear about the energy potential. The energy captured from the average landfill is enough to power approximately 7,200 homes annually. That’s the equivalent of two on-shore GE wind turbines. Two, yes, two.

The well-documented back-room maneuverings done by Schumer to repeal Glass-Steagal in 1999, his assistance in creating the Enron Loophole in the Commodities Futures Modernization Act in 2000 and his silence as a member of the banking committee when the Bush administration obliterated all transparency in the commodities and derivatives market in 2006 makes him a central accomplice in the dirty dealings that precipitated the global financial meltdown and today’s spike in oil prices. His chicanery in addressing a fearful public represents the true nadir of the crisis.

So let me be absolutely clear this time in addressing our fair senator and be assured, sir, that my tongue is neither planted in my cheek nor forked as yours appears to be. Rather, it speaks a truth some part of you understands but no part of you wants to acknowledge. Save your minions the time and effort of responding as there is no more room in this paper for your spurious replies. As you are funded by the oil and bank oligarchy you helped to create, I hardly expect you to continue this conversation anyway. Regardless, for every dishonest press release you issue or diversionary press conference you hold, a growing number of informed citizens will know to offer this refrain:

Chuck Schumer is responsible for the price of gas.
Chuck Schumer is responsible for the price of gas.
Chuck Schumer is responsible for the price of gas.

Now, go forth and spread this word. If you made it all the way to the end of this column and have connected the dots that draw a picture of corruption please forward, digg, like, stumble, reddit, send it to everyone you know who is watching their savings flow from their wallets and into the coffers of Wall Street and Big Oil.

Senator Schumer Responds (and so do I…)

Senator Charles Schumer responds to last week’s column in which I claim he is responsible for the high price of oil. This is his full response along with some helpful commentary that illustrates the fact that he never actually answers the question. Welcome to Washington.

I'm not done. I have 400 other ways to not answer your question.

Last week I authored a rebuke of the financial regulatory system in the United States, particularly with respect to the rising cost of fossil fuels. Americans, and in fact all citizens of the world, are being fed what I consider to be utter nonsense from our elected officials, and the Wall Street puppeteers who control them, about the reasons behind the high oil prices.

My findings were published in my regular column, Off The Reservation in the Long Island Press and archived exclusively here, as always, on JedMorey.com. In it I concluded that because irresponsible deregulation spanning two decades is the most dominant factor in the price of oil, a responsible regulatory correction is the only solution to mitigate the current crisis. Further, because Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) sits on every governing body with the ability to restore accountability in the markets, he is therefore quite logically the one man on the planet responsible for the price of oil. This is not to say that he was responsible thus far, but that because control is within his ability and purview, it is therefore incumbent upon him to reverse this horrendous trend.

You are welcome to review my assertions and follow my logic in arriving at this conclusion by clicking here. Then, you can read the Senator’s response below. Here is my take (spoiler alert) on his rebuttal: It is exactly the type of benign platitudinous response Americans have been conditioned to accept from the people who occupy the highest offices in the land.  748 words of nothing designed to throw us all off the scent. This is what we refer to in the newsroom as “gorilla dust” whereby two gorillas face off against one another in a spectacle of chest-thumping and screaming, throwing dirt in the air to create a commotion for the purpose of actually avoiding an altercation.

With that said, below is Senator Schumer’s response to my column that appeared in the Letters section of the Press this week. You be the judge. (Oh, and I’ll help a little along the way…)

Dear Editor,

I know that with oil prices surging day after day, Americans are being squeezed at the pump and paying more for everything from groceries to plane tickets. The bottom line is, Americans need relief from soaring gas prices. (Yes we are. Thank you for acknowledging that.)

That’s why, as a short term solution, I’ve called on the administration to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). Established by the U.S. government in the wake of the 1970s Arab oil embargo, the reserve has been used since then to deal with crises that disrupt oil production. And it’s worked. When President Bill Clinton released 30 million barrels in 2000, in part because of my constant prodding, gasoline prices fell 10%. When President Bush released oil from the SPR in 2005 following Hurricane Katrina, oil prices fell more than 9 percent. If accessed today, the reserve would not only provide much needed relief to New Yorkers and Americans across the country – but also help ensure that our economy doesn’t slip back into a decline. (Wait, what? The 70’s embargo was a forced supply crisis and Katrina was a natural disaster. Supply is at an all-time high and experts agree supply has nothing to do with prices.)

But we cannot rely on the SPR alone. We must do more over the long-term so we are not constantly at the whim of what happens in places like Libya, Iraq or Venezuela. The way to do that is by reducing our dependence on foreign oil and investing in clean energy. We can do that by: (Golly, I hate to be rude but Libya doesn’t supply the U.S., we pretty much took care of the whole Iraq thing – wouldn’t you say? – and Venezuela owns Citgo… Can’t force them out of business in America, can you?)

1)      Passing NOPEC, the No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act. This legislation would prevent future price increases of gasoline by permitting the Department of Justice to bring actions against foreign states – such as members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) – for collusive practices in setting the price or limiting the production of oil.  (But I think it’s been established that they’re not setting the prices, the investment banks on our own commodities exchanges are. Sounds like gorilla dust to me… )

2)      Ending subsidies for oil companies and putting the money into renewable energy sources. We need to make sure that oil companies, that are currently making record profits, aren’t receiving billions of billions of dollars in subsidies. Astonishingly, that’s what’s happening. I’ve called for the elimination of these subsidizes to help reduce our deficit and stop wasting taxpayer money subsidizing oil companies that don’t need any help. This week, House Speaker John Boehner stated his openness to ending some taxpayer subsidies for oil and gas companies, and I am urging my Republican colleagues in the senate to follow his example. (Again, this has NOTHING to do with why prices are so high given the extraordinary supply. Fostering renewable energy is a great idea, but it’s a way to create an additional supply of energy, not mitigate the current price. Of course the subsidies are ridiculous but given that logic shouldn’t prices be lower because we’re subsidizing part of the cost of production through tax breaks Senator? Hmmm. Something doesn’t quite add up here.)

3)      Passing the Use It or Lose It legislation. Under current law, oil companies can lease possible oil reserves on Federal land regardless of whether they are producing oil on that land or have plans to produce oil there. In some cases, oil companies are leasing – but failing to develop – federal land in order to book more reserves on their balance sheet and inflate their stock price. This legislation would force companies to report how they plan to use millions of federal acres already under lease for energy exploration and innovation. (Um, okay. We’re not talking about land use or stock prices here. We’re talking about the price of oil TODAY. Hey, are you trying to change the subject?)

4)      Promoting renewable energy sources.  This month, I helped secure over $57 million dollars to support solar photovoltaic technologies at Albany University that will produce clean power from domestic renewable energy. Additionally, in 2008 I supported a two billion dollar investment in wind power for New York. We must build off these successes and continue to promote clean and renewable energy investments. (Wow. $57 million dollars. Here’s a fun fact… Did you know that ExxonMobil just released their first quarter earnings of more than $10billion in profit?! This section doesn’t fall under the category of gorilla dust. This is what we call ‘pissing in the ocean to warm it up’.)

5)      Promoting cleaner energy sources. Also this month, I helped to protect a $100 million loan guarantee to build the Taylor Biomass Energy facility in Orange County that uses a process called gasification to convert over 95% of the waste received at its facility into cleaner energy.  We must also promote and fund similar projects across the country. (“Gasification” I see. There’s only one thing spouting hot gas right now and it ain’t the Taylor Biomass Energy facility.) 

6)      Using new sources of oil in the US where we can and it is safe to do so. I was one of 6 Democrats to support expanding a portion of the east Gulf to oil exploration, so long as it’s safe, with the greatest environmental protections, and small businesses and workers are not put at a financial risk. (Ahhh. Drill baby drill. Where have I heard this before?)

In this still-recovering economy it is vital that we do everything we possibly can to help middle class families stretch their paychecks. Every additional dollar spent on filling the gas tank is a dollar that could go toward paying for college, a much-needed family vacation, or paying the grocery bill.  By focusing on long-term fixes to our dependence on foreign oil and immediate short-term relief at the pump, we can bring down the costs of gasoline now and finally end the stranglehold that oil producing countries have on the New York and Long Island economies.  

Sincerely,

U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer

Well, there you have it. Hope my helpful cues along the way illustrated what an absolute load of “gasification” this response was. Pity. Like I said, I guess Chuck Schumer is responsible for the price of oil.