Not every missing $2 billion raises fuss in Congress

Bob Tippee
Editor

Ever vigilant where public money is concerned, congressional leaders think the US government is missing $2 billion and want to know why.

They're calling the Department of Interior to task for deepwater Outer Continental Shelf leases issued in 1998-99 that didn't limit royalty relief with oil and gas price thresholds (OGJ Online, Aug. 4, 2006).

"This is a matter of paramount importance not only for this committee but for the American people," wrote House Reform Committee Chairman Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) and Energy and Resources Subcommittee Chairman Darrell E. Issa (R-Calif.) in a letter to Interior Sec. Dirk A. Kempthorne.

The fiscal concern is admirable. But it's selective.

Nobody in Congress is fussing about another $2 billion of tax revenue that the government won't collect this year alone because of the 51¢/gal income tax credit for ethanol blended into gasoline. And that tax-revenue sacrifice will grow in later years with phase-up of the renewable fuels mandate enacted with the Energy Policy Act of 2005.

The ethanol subsidy took a blistering last month in a study from the National Taxpayers Union.

Written by Policy Analyst Jeff Dircksen, the study said ethanol raises retail prices of gasoline, costs taxpayers at least $2 billion/year, and lowers fuel efficiency.

"Despite federal and state subsidies, a guaranteed market that is protected from international competitors, and millions of dollars from private investors," Dircksen wrote, "it is abundantly clear that ethanol is not and may never be a truly competitive energy alternative."

The American Coalition for Ethanol didn't like Dircksen's work.

"The only thing abundantly clear is that NTU's 'study' is nothing more than a deceptive piece of propaganda with no basis in reality," said coalition Executive Vice-Pres. Brian Jennings.

Then he lost all authority on matters pertaining to reality by calling ethanol's tax subsidy, market mandate, and trade protection "modest support from the federal government."

That's at least $2 billion/year and rising for a substance that would have no market as a fuel without the help. In other contexts, lawmakers call mistakes of that size matters "of paramount importance."

(Online Aug. 4, 2006; author's e-mail: bobt@ogjonline.com)

Related Articles

Judge bars Anadarko e-mails as evidence in Macondo blowout hearing

03/21/2014 A federal district judge in New Orleans refused to accept e-mails between Anadarko Petroleum Corp. and BP PLC as evidence in a hearing to determine...

Industry group welcomes most UK budget moves

03/21/2014 Oil & Gas UK voiced support for all but one of several measures affecting the offshore producing industry announced in the UK government’s annu...

Analyst urges broader look at Amazon oil resources’ local impacts

03/21/2014 Increasingly disruptive protests are likely if oil, gas, and mining companies and national governments don’t pay closer attention to indigenous pop...

BOEM extends proposed higher offshore liability limit comment period

03/20/2014 The US Bureau of Ocean Energy Management added 30 days to the public comment period for its proposed higher liability limit for offshore oil and ga...

Careers at TOTAL

Careers at TOTAL - Videos

More than 600 job openings are now online, watch videos and learn more!

 

Click Here to Watch

Other Oil & Gas Industry Jobs

Search More Job Listings >>
Stay Connected