Excerpt from Bloomberg:
U.S. in Contempt Over Gulf Drill Ban, Judge Rules
By Laurel Brubaker Calkins – Feb 3, 2011 11:53 AM PT
The Obama Administration acted in contempt by continuing its deepwater-drilling moratorium after the policy was struck down, a New Orleans judge ruled.
Interior Department regulators acted with “determined disregard” by lifting and reinstituting a series of policy changes that restricted offshore drilling, following the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history, U.S. District Judge, Martin Feldman of New Orleans ruled yesterday.
“Each step the government took following the court’s imposition of a preliminary injunction showcases its defiance,” Feldman said in the ruling.
“Such dismissive conduct, viewed in tandem with the re-imposition of a second blanket and substantively identical moratorium, and in light of the national importance of this case, provide this court with clear and convincing evidence of the government’s contempt,” Feldman said.
President Barack Obama’s administration first halted offshore exploration in waters deeper than 500 feet in May, after the explosion and sinking of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig off the Louisiana coast led to a subsea blowout of a BP Plc well that spewed more than 4.1 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.
full story here: U.S. in Contempt Over Gulf Drill Ban, Judge Rules
h/t to WUWT reader paddylol
So the judge holds the Obama Administration in contempt?
Take a number and get in line, judge.
It is difficult to understand why the media does not let the public know the economic impact of the administration’s negative policy toward oil and natural gas production. The policy of choking off US production not only increases our oil imports with the corresponding flow of dollars to foreign countries, it ignores the huge taxes and royalties that the treasury collects from our oil companies. I guess they don’t care about the deficit.
Since Obama took office and removed rich oil/gas sources off the table and essentially stopped lease sales, the treasury collection has fallen dramatically. Gulf coast offshore production has fallen 20%.
Some recent facts:
“The deficit? The oil industry already pays the US treasury more than $95 million a day in taxes, rent, royalties and the like. If you expand exploration, you expand revenues. ”
“If America unlocked its oil and gas reserves, the government could take in an estimated $1 trillion to $2 trillion more revenue over the coming years. That’s not counting the revenues from the stimulus of lower fuel and energy costs.”
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/drill_obama_drill_SSKeRpmku3HEDRb4mjujmN#ixzz1CxSUTp7j
Furthermore:
“According to the MMS, annual revenues from federal onshore and offshore (OCS) mineral leases are one of the federal government’s largest sources of non-tax income. In 2000, the MMS collected $5 billion in oil and gas royalties. The bulk of this ($4 billion) came from offshore production, with natural gas production generating 60 percent of the royalty revenue. For federal onshore lands, gas production generated over 70 percent of the almost $1 billion in royalties. The MMS also collected over $1 billion in bonus bids and rental payments to bring the total federal revenue collected by MMS from oil and gas leasing to approximately $6.3 billion”
In addition:
“CLAIM: The American people aren’t getting their fair share from oil and gas companies drilling and producing on federal lands in and in federal waters.
FACT: The U.S. government’s revenues from federal oil and gas production and leasing is on par with the rest of the world when bonus bids – the upfront fees paid by oil and natural gas companies to purchase leases – are factored in. In 2008, the U.S. collected almost $23 billion in revenues from federal oil and gas production and leases: $13 billion in royalties and $10 billion in bonus bids.”
http://www.api.org/aboutoilgas/sectors/explore/oilandnaturalgas.cfm
Think this revenue continues when oil/gas leasing is curtailed? When our politicians talk about subsidies to the oil companies they mean that the lease and royalty deals don’t extract enough (their definition of a subsidy). They don’t like the agreements Clinton made when oil prices were $18/bbl and royalties were reduced for deep offshore drilling to incentivize costly production, and they call it a subsidy.
Finally, if the health of the environment was the inspiration behind the drilling moratoriums, why did the Obama administration transfer $2 billion in American borrowed dollars to help fund the Brazilian oil company Petrobras so that the company can continue to drill in nearly 3,000 meters of water, nearly twice the depth of the Gulf? Is it a mere coincidence that Petrobras is heavily supported by Obama’s associate George Soros, who also invested millions into the Brazilian oil company.
Can it get any worse?
Ed Scott: The EPA can be faulted for a number of tyrannical actions and regulations, but they are acting on the scientifically ignorant decision by the SCOTUS in Massachusetts v. EPA, which decision declared carbon dioxide to be a pollutant.
Don’t think so, Ed. I believe the SCOTUS
merely passed the decision to EPA, saying they had authority to make the call. So, it was the EPA that showed scientific ignorance. Check if I’m wrong. (Apologies for the split message. Not sure how that happened.)
Does anyone know how rare/not rare it is for a judge to make such a ruling about a branch of the US government?
How many times has this happened during the past 20 years? During the past 100?
Who are we to question The One we have been waiting for?
[yes, of course, sarc]
Danj, thanks for the Andy Jackson reference which is about the Marshall court’s ruling that the ethnic cleansing of the SE tribes was unconstitutional.
Now perhaps 0 is no AJ as previously pointed out, but his following such precedent is quite interesting coming from a liberal. I’d love to see the opposition use that analogy.
I should also note that AJ succeeded and thousands died as they traveled west to what is now Oklahoma. Sixty years later most of the land given to the tribes was taken (stolen) back.
“L’Etat c’est moi.”
You do know Nazi Germany fell in 1945 and the USSR lasted a good 55 years after that? And Communism spread across most of Eurasia in those years? While the Soviets and ChiComs did murder more people than Hitler, they had a lot more time to work with. They were all a little too good at killing people.
—
The only reason fascism beat communism in Europe in the last century was the fascists were better at the street fighting and fought dirtier than the commies. They also murdered way less people than the communists. The only ones to beat the Russian communists at murder were the Chinese communists.
“Pull My Finger says:
February 4, 2011 at 5:37 am
You do know Nazi Germany fell in 1945 and the USSR lasted a good 55 years after that? And Communism spread across most of Eurasia in those years? While the Soviets and ChiComs did murder more people than Hitler, they had a lot more time to work with. They were all a little too good at killing people.”
Most estimates are that the Russian Commies killed about 35 mm, mostly by starving them to death, mostly Ukranians, mostly during the war years, to feed their war machine, Nazis 12 to 15 mm. Chicoms 60 to 65 mm, yes, over a longer period of time. You are right, there are no good guys here but we never hear much about the communists’ record compared to all we hear about the Nazis maybe because the commies were our “allies”. Also, many if not most, of those killed by the Nazis were communists or communist sympathizers. Stalin killed anyone who could even potentially be a future threat to his personal power, much more ruthless than was Hitler. Proabaly why he was on the winning side. They were both evil in the truest sense of the word but there is a scorecard even for evil and people fear fascism more than they fear “socialism” and that is the danger of not reporting all the facts.
—
rob m. says:
February 3, 2011 at 1:45 pm
I see, even better.
a very naughty comment ,
Nostradamus mistook hister for hitler
Did he also mistake Obama for Mabuse ?
Anyway nostradamus had particular problems with the s !
Section. 4.
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors
Let me see…The Government bans Drilling in all US waters by America Companies because a Foreign Owned Oil Company and one of their own Inspectors Breaks the Safety rules? The result of this is a massive spill that is could have been brought under control well before it was so bad if Obama had of allowed skimmers from other Countries into the area This Blow out also would have been easier to cap if this Drilling was allowed in shallower waters of the Gulf!!!
Oh Yes…If Deep water drilling is so dangerous then Why did the Obama Administration send 2 Billion of our tax dollars to help fund even Deeper Water Drilling off the Brazilian Coast???
Strange way to run a country.
It is obvious that this administration will do anything legal or illegal to choke off the supply of conventional fuels to our industry and us commoners.
Below is another example of stopping drilling and production at sites already leased.
Sooner or later the government will be required to return the Millions of dollars companies paid the purchase the lease.
Even Democratic Senators are blaming Obama and the administration.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Shell-No-Beaufort-Sea-apf-844337881.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=
“ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — Shell Alaska has dropped plans to drill in the Arctic waters of the Beaufort Sea this year and will concentrate on obtaining permits for the 2012 season, company Vice President Pete Slaiby said Thursday.
The recent remand of air permits issued by the Environmental Protection Agency was the final driver behind the decision, Slaiby said at a news conference.
Alaska receives upward of 90 percent of its general fund revenue from the petroleum industry, and top state officials reacted strongly to the decision. U.S. Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, blamed the Obama administration and the EPA.
“Their foot dragging means the loss of another exploration season in Alaska, the loss of nearly 800 direct jobs and many more indirect jobs,” Begich said. “That doesn’t count the millions of dollars in contracting that won’t happen either at a time when our economy needs the investment.”
The EPA issued Shell an air permit, but the agency’s review board granted an appeal because of limited agency analysis regarding the effect of emissions from drilling ships and support vessels.
Slaiby said the issue is not with the environment but with the process not being satisfied. He said Shell has no air issues with Alaska villages.
“That’s coupled with $15 million in improvements we made on these assets to put together what’s really a world-class program,” he said.”
Indeed, Ian H., unless running it into the ground is really their objective.
Mark
Not what I meant Mark T.
Democracy is electing people to run the country yes? If you don’t like the way they do the job, well that is what elections are for. What I find bizarre is trying to run a country by court case case.
Ian,
I think you are confused as to a Democracy that has a Constitution and laws that are passed by the Congress that must be followed and enforced.
The court case that the Administration lost declared that there was no legal bases for the Administration action. According to the court the action was arbitrary and not based on any existing law or regulation. In the US system, the rulling of the court must be followed or appealed. The edict from the administratio was not legal according to the court case. The contempt occured since the Administration declared a second order similar to the first after losing in court.
Since we are not under a dictatorship the administration must follow the laws of the land and the Constitution. If they thought they were on legal grounds, they should have appealed to a higher court rather than issuing another edict in contempt of the Court.
The President does not have the power to do anything he wants, there is a balance of power between the President, Congress, and the Judiciary to avoid the President acting as a dictator.
The same issue exists re Obama care and the 2 Judges have already declared that it violates the powers of the federal government . The Administration needs to appeal this, and the determination will ultimately be determined by the Supreme Court. According to the US system they have final say, not the President.
“Ian H says: February 5, 2011 at 1:25 amNot what I meant Mark T.
Democracy is electing people to run the country yes? If you don’t like the way they do the job, well that is what elections are for. What I find bizarre is trying to run a country by court case case.”
We are not a democracy here in the US of A, we are a constitutional republic with checks and balances among our branches of government to protect our God given rights from the tyrany of the few or the majority, whichever the case may be.
Mark T says:
February 4, 2011 at 6:12 pm
Indeed, Ian H., unless running it into the ground is really their objective.
Mark, Ever read “confessions of an economic hit man” written by John Perkins. The objective is great riches, the result is running a country into the ground.
Don Shaw says:
Don,
Excellent summary but I said it in significantly fewer words. The key is that the majority in a democracy can also be tyranical. I assume that Ian is a Brit or from a “more direct democracy” type of system though there are many here in the US that think we are a democracy. Good comment!
Jim
Isn’t the USA in a state of war? Seem to recall that Bush used this to override your Constitutional rights. I could be mis-remembering this, but I think the tyrranical few have won again. You already gave up all your money supply to a coterie of bankers, they’re the ones ruling your govt. and so you. Welcome to the club.
http://consumercal.blogspot.com/2011/01/4th-amendment-takes-another-hit-phone.html
Lots more nibbling away at this since the Patriot Act. At least you haven’t yet given away your sovereignty to another. Ireland simply gave it all away to the EU, second time around after being forced to have another referendum and after ballot papers were ‘taken into custody’ for a while by the police before being returned..
“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face”, Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bush_administration_vs._the_U.S._Constitution
It will be interesting to see how Obama responds to this.
[As an aside, I think the US Constitution an amazing doc., a blueprint which could have been spread as an ideal rather than the failed ‘democracy’ model.]