Big Oil, drilling and supply and demand
To the editor:
In her Saturday letter, “Evil Big Oil,” Annemarie B. Kubicek writes, “Contrary to popular belief, I submit that additional drilling will not decrease the cost of oil in the United States.” I beg to differ.
When gas prices went to $4.11 during the Bush administration, the price came down rapidly after the president used executive privilege to remove the moratorium on offshore drilling.
Ms. Kubicek also writes that some politician should bring up the idea of nationalizing the oil industry. Well, in a May 2008 U.S. House investigation into high gasoline prices, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., made that very threat to then-Shell Oil President John Hofmeister.
Mr. Hofmeister had said gasoline could go to more than $5 per gallon if Congress continued to stop oil companies from drilling. Rep. Waters replied, “And guess what this member would be all about? This member would be all about socializing — er, uh . would be about basically taking over, and the government running all of your companies.” You should have seen the faces on those in attendance. It was, as the commercial says, priceless.
Ms. Kubicek wants people to quit blaming Mr. Obama for high gasoline prices. But I seem to remember Democrats blaming Vice President Dick Cheney and President George W. Bush for gasoline prices because they were evil oilmen.
If, as Ms. Kubicek says, added supply won’t bring down gasoline prices, why did President Obama loan Brazil $2 billion to increase its oil production and then tell the country’s officials, “And when you start selling, we want to be one of your best customers”?
If added supply has no effect on price, why do some experts believe natural gas (supplies increased to more than 42 billion cubic feet last week) will dip below $2 per 1,000 cubic feet for the first time since September 2001?
Robert Gardner
Henderson
Economic forces
To the editor:
Annemarie Kubicek’s Saturday letter clearly shows a lack of understanding of the supply-and-demand economic principles that govern the prices of commodities.
In our global economy, an increase in the supply of a commodity will result in a decrease in the price. Commodity prices are even influenced by the anticipated change in supply and demand. If speculators anticipate an increase in the supply of oil, they will sell their futures to lock in their gains even before the oil supply actually increases.
The last thing this country needs is to have President Obama take over the oil industry. Big government, with all of its uncontrolled corruption, is a larger threat to our lifestyle than Big Oil. One need only look at the history of Cuba to see what happens when the government nationalizes industries.
Brian Aiken
Las Vegas
Court appointments
To the editor:
The current review of the health care law by the U.S. Supreme Court demonstrates that the most critical thing which occurs over a succession of presidential administrations is their various appointments to the high court. These appointments frequently serve long tenures and can have a significant impact in determining the constitutionality of laws and major legislative initiatives long after a particular president is gone.
This is why it is critical who we ultimately elect president in the 2012 election.
Given the liberal-progressive orientation of the current administration, it might take years to undo and overturn this legislative legacy, especially if President Obama gets to appoint additional liberal justices who would presumably tilt the court in a liberal direction to guard against a conservative counter-revolution under subsequent Republican presidents or congressional majorities.
Douglas Bell
Las Vegas
Goes free
To the editor:
Clark Country District Attorney Steve Wolfson has for the second time refused to seek charges against the Henderson police sergeant who was seen kicking a motorist who suffered a medical episode (“Officer again avoids charges,” Saturday Review-Journal).
This time, Mr. Wolfson tells us that he will not prosecute Sgt. Brett Seekatz for oppression under color of office, which is a felony in Nevada. Mr. Wolfson claims that Henderson police are trained to kick suspects who are resisting arrest and that nine assistant DAs concurred they would not be able to successfully prosecute Sgt. Seekatz for his actions.
What kind of a message do Sgt. Seekatz and Mr. Wolfson send to the public? That law enforcement officers can purposefully harm citizens whom they think might have broken the law?
Most of those who have seen the dash-cam video of Sgt. Seekatz’s apparently unnecessary brutalization of a man who was in diabetic shock are shocked and appalled. It is time to hold Sgt. Seekatz accountable for his actions and not continue to sweep this egregious abuse of authority under the proverbial rug.
Doing so will restore the public’s faith and trust in our police officers, whose duty is to serve and protect us.
William H. Fullerton
Las Vegas