The two sides of the debate are just not going to cooperate on the energy issue. Okay, so they both concede that lifting the ban on drilling and energy exploration in A.N.W.R. is a bad idea; that’s one thing settled. They both agree that we should invest heavily in not only the research and development of renewable energy sources, but also the effective use of those sources; both candidates saying that we should put more nuclear reactors online to supply the country’s electricity needs. That’s two issues down.

Then the conflict starts back up when it comes to drilling, taxes, and market speculators. Granted, I do not know nearly as much about the whole process of producing, refining, transporting, and selling oil products, but I think I know enough to determine where the problems come in that are spurring gas prices on a steadily upward climb.

Obama is pushing a windfall tax on big oil and is promising some sort of refund program based on those taxes. Meanwhile, big oil representatives are saying that the majority of their profits, which have set new records for annual profits by an American corporation, are not from the U.S.

That does make sense really, if you think about the most expensive and high-risk part of the oil business, drilling. As is clear from the constant debates of late over whether or not to open up more property for drilling on American soil and coasts, big oil doesn’t do a lot of drilling here, so how could we be providing them with record-breaking profits?

Sure, gas is $4 a gallon, but do we really believe that the oil companies are collecting enough profit from that $4 a gallon to make upwards of sixty billion dollars in profit, like one company did last year? Of course we don’t, not if we apply the math.

That $4 is reached by several factors, from the drilling costs, to packaging and transportation, to refining and distribution. Then the stock market gets a hold of it and does it’s own damage, that’s how the gas gets to be so expensive for you and me.

So the windfall tax will tax the oil companies for exceeding preset profits margins, and in return, do we not think that the oil companies will try to find another way of collecting on their investments? That’s really what they are claiming, and as has been the case for many decades, that’s what we believe oil is from the drilling aspect of it, an investment.

That is the high-risk oil company spokespeople were talking about recently, they put up a bunch of money to develop a new drilling site without any way to be completely certain that it will produce oil, or at least enough to break even. In the early twentieth century, oilmen would seek out investors to fund oil exploration and drilling, and then when they struck oil, the investors would receive their initial investment plus a return; in my mind that is how our current stock market began.

If we begin taxing them on some of their investments, what will happen? Likely, the risky business of finding new sites from which to produce oil will slow, which will ultimately result in a decline in oil production. I think both the Democratic and Republican parties still agree that the demand for oil is currently exceeding the supply of oil, which is contributing greatly to our highest on record fuel prices.

Okay, so Obama has a bad idea, it’s not like he will be able to make the windfall tax policy. Just in the last week or so a similar tax was voted on, and rejected. The next point is McCain’s proposal to suspend temporarily the federal tax on gasoline; it’s an 18.4-cent tax and he believes that by lifting the tax for the summer, that people will save money and drive more.

Okay, I don’t know what he’s smoking, but apparently he isn’t the only one smoking it. Some people are actually thinking this is a good idea, enough so that it has been getting press for some time now, although no real action has been taken on it.

Making gas 18-cents a gallon cheaper is a nice thought considering that in some places it would put the price of a gallon of regular unleaded fuel back around $3.50, but how much of a break could it be, really? Some where in the proposals for both of the primary candidates it has been mentioned that we also need to reduce harmful emissions, and yet a tax break that will encourage people to drive more is a good idea. Last I checked, while admittedly a long time ago, automobiles were still considered to be one the largest polluting sources in the world.

So driving more isn’t the answer, but it sure sounds good, doesn’t it? Secondly, what is the 18-cent tax for? Senator Obama has a good theory; it’s for various state and federal government run sectors that deal with things like road construction and maintenance. McCain’s plan is to rob those needy divisions of funds to give us a two or three month break of 18 cents per gallon. Personally, I’d rather pay the extra 18 cents and not pay the repair costs of driving on roads and highways that haven’t been properly cared for. Maybe not a big concern, but a concern none the less.

Then what happens when the tax is reinstated after the summer season? The price goes back up, and thanks to the end of summer, at a time when it will hurt even more. But the universal fact still remains, summer is the driving season and businesses and government agencies stand to make more money by giving the tax break during the times of highest demand.

The summer is also a great tourism season with theme parks and special events taking place all over the country, taking advantage of summer whether. That means jobs will be created for the summer, which will help the economy. However, just when that gas tax relief goes away, those summer tourism jobs will be lost, leaving not only higher gas prices, but higher unemployment rates as well. The two just don’t mix very well.

Now let’s take a look at speculators, and to be totally honest with you, I have little to no clue about the process of speculating oil futures. I know what I’ve been hearing and what I’ve heard is a little disturbing. Speculators have the ability to make an impact on the price per barrel of oil. Hmm, maybe I’m wrong and there are hundreds of thousands of speculators working everyday to make those affects on oil prices, but just maybe, a select group of people have a little too much control over something as powerful and vital to our economy? Just maybe.

Again, I know very, very little about the speculators, and if someone here would like to enlighten me you can choose to use the contact form on this site, or just leave a comment on this post; I’d appreciate it greatly.

What occurs to me when I hear talk about speculators, and the Obama camp seems to agree with me on this, is that when it comes to money and power, man is just naturally flawed. Look at the whole Martha Stewart insider trading scandal, anyone who has an opportunity to make money without killing someone to do it, will do it most of the time.

Who is to say that these speculators aren’t being offered bribes to send the market one way or the other each week? Who is to say that they don’t have investments of their own that would stand to gain substantial amounts of money if the price of gas were to rise? Who’s to say? At first glance it would seem as though any affect they would have on the price would be nominal at best, but if the same price increasing action was to be taken every week over a period of, let’s say two months, how much would that affect the price of oil? Would anyone notice enough to put a stop to it?

The McCain camp, along with the Bush administration, has said that they have found no evidence to support claims made by Saudi Arabia’s King over the weekend. But what evidence would there actually be? It’s not like a speculator is going to write a memo about it.

Overall, it seems like the Democrats want to hide behind taxes, while the Republicans want to … well … hide behind taxes. The only difference is that one wants to enforce more taxes while the other wants to suspend taxes. I don’t know which of the two, if either, is right.

I know this though:

· The world demand for oil has increased, and the production to quell those demands is still at less than 100%, even with so many people paying so much attention to the issue.

· Speculators are free to make small adjustments based on personal agendas that are not scrutinized carefully enough for effective prevention.

· The price of oil has toppled the record books, just as profits for oil companies have.

· The introduction of alternative energy sources on a mass scale is too little, too late, and will not provide any short-term relief for struggling American families.

· The looming Presidential election is making more of a spectacle of gas prices than a problem solving effort.

It seems clear to me that both parties have something to offer this crisis, while neither will agree to come together long enough to make a difference. They keep looking at for their party while slamming the opposition against a wall whenever possible. I don’t like Obama’s policies very much, but I do think he has a solid idea; we need to unify our government like never before, before the country falls apart in its wake.