aerial1313
Posted : 8/1/2008 1:42:05 PM
denise m
I may have to stand corrected but as I understand, the ban on off shore drilling was to cease in 2002. But due to environmental concerns (especially oil spills - remember Valdez) and near record low gas prices, Clinton extended the ban until 2012 in 1998
I don't know the exact timetable, but Clinton could only have lifted or extended the executive order on the ban, which is what Bush did a week or so ago (lifted it, not extended it). But Congress has to lift the legislative ban. The executive ban was more of a "non-binding" thing, with no legal merits. Only Congress can actually allow exploration and drilling to go forward.
Wow. Just read this online. Obama's new plan to stimulate the economy (relates to the oil discussion):
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12237.html
Fascism at its finest!!! See why this man scares me??? BTW, Hillary said something similar during her campaign about "taking those profits" from the oil companies. Sorry, guys, but I don't want to live in a fascist country.
And I don't want to get into this again, because I believe it was snownose who already covered this in a previous thread, but profits mean nothing to a company. It is the profit margin that is important, and Exxon's profit margin has dipped below 8%, which is pretty sad for a major corporation. Ya'll know who benefits from these record profits, don't you? Stockholders. Most of the stock in oil companies is held in retirement plans (IRAs, 401Ks, etc). In fact, I believe the teacher's unions retirement plans hold a whole lot of stock in oil companies. Just trying to show everyone how this all really works. You're not gonna hear about it on your nightly new program.