One wonders what certain people were thinking…

…when they went to the polls 51 weeks ago tomorrow:

Without question, hiking the tax burden on America’s oil and gas companies will mean less, not more, domestic energy production. In exchange for at best a small reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, thousands of jobs will be destroyed, billions of potential investment dollars will flow overseas, imports of fossil fuels will increase, energy prices will rise, and many states and localities who derive revenue from oil and natural gas production will witness further declines in their tax receipts. What’s more, the tax plan is at odds with the administration’s own carbon reduction goals since it would discourage production of natural gas, the cleanest fossil fuel.

Earlier in the piece the author observes that the Obama administration argued that elimination of certain tax breaks would “stimulate greater energy efficiency while providing funding for ‘green’ energy alternatives.” One wonders where the administration came up with such a convoluted line of reasoning, as allowing those companies to keep their money would be a better way of providing funding for alternative fuel development. And it’s also worth asking why the administration doesn’t seem to think the energy companies have a vested interest in the development of alternative energy sources, especially when one takes the environmental and supply considerations into account. If nothing else these alternative energy sources wouldn’t be held hostage to the Mother Gaia worshippers, which to me would seem to be by itself worth whatever amount of investment it would take to develop said sources.
As for the title of this post — well, a good 20 percent of the nation’s oil refining capacity is located here on the Texas Gulf Coast, with the majority of it located in Jefferson and Harris counties. The ExxonMobil refinery in Baytown (Harris County) is the largest in the country at about 557,000 barrels per day capacity, and it will be overtaken by the Motiva refinery in Port Arthur (Jefferson County) as that facility is expanded to an estimated 600,000 barrel-per-day capacity. Yet the majority of residents of both Jefferson and Harris counties effectively voted for this burden on the industry by casting their votes for Obama in the last presidential election. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Considering all of this, somebody needs to ask Thomas Frank and his ilk just who’s voting against his or her own economic interests here. It sure as hell isn’t who they think it is.


One Response to “One wonders what certain people were thinking…”

  1. southtexaspistolero Says:

    Mattexian (
    Ya know, I think it’s funny that the refineries have such high numbers of labor unions, which threw their support behind That One, and now the refineries are gonna get punished for their success. Kinda like the Catholics being very anti-abortion, yet they as a bloc support overwhelmingly Democrats, who have a pro-abortion platform.
    November 2, 2009, 10:50:05 AM CST – Like – Reply – Edit – Moderate

    Sabra (
    Your post reminds me of something they were talking about on the radio this morning:

    Long story short, increases in vehicles’ fuel efficiency has decreased the amount of money collected from the gas tax, and increasing reliance on alternate fuels will do the same…The law of unintended consequences in action!
    November 2, 2009, 4:25:37 PM CST – Like – Reply – Edit – Moderate

    Kelly (
    Assuming the purest of motives behind such a thing, I’d say the idea that taxing the crap out of companies will stimulate better production is more of the “treat adults like children” mindset. Throw all the things that need to be taken into consideration when looking at how viable a certain way of doing things currently is out the window, and what you’re left with is, “You must be doing it this way simply because nobody is making you change. We’ll punish you if you keep doing it like this, so we know you’ll want to change now.”

    It’s the same mindset that leads people to support all the other ridiculous laws and punishments for them. Don’t want people to hate? Create “hate crime legislation”, even though things like assault, destruction of property, murder, etc are already illegal. Don’t want people to smoke weed? Then forget all about what happened during Prohibition and just keep it illegal. Nevermind that the vast majority of people not committing murder aren’t sitting at home saying, “You know what? I’d kill three or four people tonight if it just wasn’t illegal!” And most people I’ve known who have never smoked marajuana still wouldn’t do it if it were legal.
    November 2, 2009, 6:35:08 PM CST – Like – Reply – Edit – Moderate

    the pistolero (
    Kinda like the Catholics being very anti-abortion, yet they as a bloc support overwhelmingly Democrats, who have a pro-abortion platform.
    Indeed they do, on what I guess is the premise that the Democrats do more to help folks once they make it out of the womb. It’s gonna be fun to see what happens. Fun like watching a car wreck, that is.

    The law of unintended consequences in action!
    Yep. Way too many people have no concept of that. And, of course, the lion’s share of them vote Democrat.

    Assuming the purest of motives behind such a thing…
    Which I would never do (and I’m sure you don’t either)…I am just cynical that way.
    November 3, 2009, 8:10:43 AM CST

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: