Video: Schumer opposes SPR release … for now
posted at 11:35 am on February 28, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
Via the Free Beacon, Sen. Chuck Schumer gives us a measure of Democratic support for an attempt to game the gasoline market through the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Schumer appeared on CNBC’s Squawk Box, where the host noted that former GOP presidential hopeful Jon Huntsman wants a release from the SPR when prices rise above … $108 a barrel? The host notes that we’ve had $150 per barrel pricing without attempting to manipulate the markets, and Schumer responds that there is a better solution. Guess what it is:
KERNEN: What is the number for the SPR, senator? We had Huntsman saying we should do the SPR $108. I was like, $108? We didn’t do it at 150, did we?
SCHUMER: No, the SPR is not as good a solution as the Saudi solution for a couple of reasons. First, it’s limited. The Saudis could produce an additional 2.8 million barrels of oil, way on into the future. The SPR is somewhat limited and the SPR works better when there’s an immediate crisis caused by a natural disaster, a Katrina or something like that. It’s something that I would look at if the Saudis absolutely said no, but it’s not close to as good a solution as this.
Hey, you know who could also produce a few million barrels of oil a day more? We could … if the Obama administration took the shackles off of exploration and production in the US. We have plenty of oil on land, in the Gulf of Mexico, and on both continental shelves as well as in ANWR. We could also have approved the Keystone XL pipeline in order to bring more Canadian oil to market in the US as gasoline at the pumps through our refineries in the Gulf.
Instead of looking at truly long-term solutions, Schumer and Democrats instead set this up as a choice between having the White House spend the SPR — which is held for true emergencies that result in disruptions to the distribution chain — or begging the Saudis to sell us more of their crude. That’s how far reasonable Democrats will go in attempting to create more energy independence for the US.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air


Bobby Jindal: Paternalistic, big-government liberalism is the biggest loser here

Super Nannies: EU bans olive oils, Germany ponders Autobahn speed limit






Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
As I just posted HotairLib has their whole head up their six o clock.
hamradio on May 24, 2013 at 2:43 PM
Who wrote the speech? Or are you just praising the messenger?
mixplix on May 24, 2013 at 2:57 PM
Connect the dots: journolist meeting by invitation only at the White House on, what Tuesday?, “big”speech by Obama on Thursday, lame stream media fawning over speech on Friday. Who would have seen that coming, huh?
parke on May 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM
They need the “war on terror” in order to further erode our Constitutional freedoms and to deflect criticism from the administration’s and Federal government’s ongoing corruption.
They are just trying to massage it so that they don’t offend the Muslims, international Libtards and their own sensibilities anymore than necessary.
A few Muslim terrorists here and there are quite expendable to this Administration despite their sympathies for them. These drone attacks also do much deflect any potential criticism that the Administration is weak in dealing with such matters.
Dr. ZhivBlago on May 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM
MSNBC is nothing but a left wing propaganda machine serving their master, Obama.
rplat on May 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM
I believe that he was officially nominated 10 days after he was sworn in. Wow! The WON really worked long hours that week and a half to earn that POS medal. During those ten days he ordered NO DRONE STRIKES to keep his peaceful record clean.
fred5678 on May 24, 2013 at 3:22 PM
Obama: Don’t worry about that Ben Ghazi guy. I killed Bin Laden, and Bush didn’t!
And Obummer still wants to close Gitmo? Good luck with that–not even Upchuck Schumer was willing to hold trials in New York!
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:24 PM
They just changed the definition of terrorist. They used to be jihadis from the Middle East–now they’re Minutemen in Arizona and Tea Partiers in Ohio.
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:29 PM
Erika, sometimes your writing shows signs of rivaling even the Master of Snark himself, Allahpundit. Good work!
KS Rex on May 24, 2013 at 3:45 PM
I love how crazy Al invoked the Nobel Peace Prize in praise of a speech that spoke about dropping bombs on people’s head. Maybe it was the “fewer” bombs than before that raised this to historic levels.
Do they even know or care that they are morons.
marnes on May 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM
His speech made less sense than Bluto’s Animal House Speech and was far less entertaining. Nothing less than base rallying time. Never thought I would say this, but Code Pink was the best part.
DDay on May 24, 2013 at 4:01 PM
Sperling posted this at the Examiner on May 23 about this “historic speech of Obysmal’s:
You see, we are just not working hard enough to “work with the Muslim American community” who are a “fundamental part of the American family.” Watch out, too, because Obysmal is again trying to limit the impact of the Internet.
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:22 PM
That Chris Hayes is a bit of a twink, isn’t he?
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM
Obama apparently gave two speeches yesterday and I watched the other one.
myiq2xu on May 24, 2013 at 5:03 PM
Nah. I’d detest the little pissant s.o.b. if he was white…or Asian…or any one of the myriad of made-up racial divisions.
Solaratov on May 24, 2013 at 11:00 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2