Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Union Members Rally in Indiana, Launching Nationwide Gas Rallies

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Labor Donate to DU
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 06:16 PM
Original message
Union Members Rally in Indiana, Launching Nationwide Gas Rallies

http://blog.aflcio.org/2008/06/10/union-members-rally-in-indiana-launching-nationwide-gas-rallies/

by Seth Michaels, Jun 10, 2008

Charles Clark, Labor 2008 state director for Indiana, reports on gas price actions in Indianapolis.

As gas prices reached the national average of $4, union and community members rallied on the steps of the state Capitol in Indianapolis today to protest Sen. John McCain’s proposals for tax breaks for Big Oil and Gov. Mitch Daniels’ increase on the sales tax for gas.



Participants like Brenda Smith from the AFT, Bret Voorhies from United Steelworkers (USW) and Danny Ernestes from UAW waved signs and handed out information to the public, despite pouring rain and even lightning, as gubernatorial candidate Jill Long Thompson spoke to the crowd about her proposal for placing a cap on the sales tax for gas.



Garland Stovall, a member of USW Local 1999 in Indianapolis, explained how skyrocketing gas prices have affected him:

I can’t afford to take as many trips to the grocery store as I used to with the price of gas being so high. I want President Bush and Sen. John McCain to stop proposing tax breaks for the oil giants and recognize that working families are the ones who need a break!

Nancy Holle, from Office and Professional Employees (OPEIU) Local 1 in Indianapolis, described how skyrocketing gas prices have affected her family.

My son is looking for work and can’t afford to drive to and from employers to drop off his resume. He has to decide which bills to not pay this month because gas has become such an expense. As parents, we’ve tried to help out as much as we can, but the high gas prices have been hurting us, too.

This action in Indianapolis is the first of dozens of events union members are holding to protest skyrocketing gas prices this week. Union members in Indiana prove not even torrential downpours will prevent them from ensuring working families get a break at the pump.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. So what do the members propose
to reduce gas prices?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Union members nationwide will demand that McCain listen to working families, not the oil industry

http://blog.aflcio.org/2008/06/09/gas-prices-hit-4-a-gallon-workers-set-for-week-of-action/

At the bottom.

Union members nationwide will demand that McCain listen to working families, not the oil industry and its lobbyists.


AFL-CIO President John Sweeney says that the issue of gas prices is central to the struggles of working families.


Working people are getting battered in today’s economy, and they’re fed up with business as usual. It’s more than the gas prices. The economy is bleeding jobs and people’s stagnant paychecks can’t cover the grocery and housing bills. Record gas prices are part of a much larger problem – leaders like Bush and McCain have handed the reins of the economy over to Big Oil and other corporate interests whose only concern is maximizing their profit margins.


At McCain Revealed, we’ve posted a fact sheet detailing the Bush/McCain record on oil and gas, as well as a flier about McCain’s connections to the oil industry and his plans to give tax breaks to oil companies. Check back to find out about the events that will take place around the country.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. OK, McCain listens to them.
What do they say. What do they suggest. What do they propose as the solution? You didn't answer the question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. My suggestion would be reinstate the oil taxes Bush repealed unless...
Edited on Tue Jun-10-08 07:10 PM by Omaha Steve

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=228&topic_id=33844

Heavy investment in alternate energy. The link above is a story on burning water. It is new. But early research says a working water engine of a rotary design in less than 10 years could be done. Also beefing up the oil infrastructure. No new refineries in how many decades now? Let the people of Iraq decide how their oil goes where. Remember Fox network owner Murdock saying oil would be $20 a barrel IF we invade?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. OK, if we reinstate the taxes
that money could be used for alternative fuels. But, who's going to build the refineries? If I'm not mistaken, Iraq has mostly signed agreements with non US companies. To me, many union members are all about bluster and not about substance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Oil Companies in Iraq: A Century of Rivalry and War By James A. Paul


Still think I'm wrong on Iraq? Yes there are plenty of union members that don't keep up on current events. I'm not one of them. I'm out to blast the Republicans out of office. We need 65 D's in the Senate. Congress will be picking up in more in November. Then we as a party have to get our act together. It can be done. Do you have a plan?

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2003/2003companiesiniraq.htm

New Iraq Contracts and Moves toward War

The big US-UK companies made no secret of their strong desire for Iraqi oil. BP and Shell conducted secret negotiations with Saddam Hussein, while Exxon and Chevron took a harder line and waited for Washington to eliminate Saddam covertly. In 1997, as the sanctions lost international support, Russia’s Lukoil, France’s Total, China National and other companies struck deals with the government of Iraq for production sharing in some of Iraq’s biggest and most lucrative fields. Lukoil reached an agreement for West Qurna, Total got Majnoun, while China National signed on for North Rumaila, near the Kuwaiti border.44 Paris, Moscow and Beijing, as Permanent Members in the UN Security Council pressed for an easing of the sanctions, with support from a growing number of other countries. Grassroots movements, concerned about Iraq’s humanitarian crisis, called on the UN Security Council to end the sanctions forthwith.

In 1997-98, the US companies saw the writing on the wall. With Iranian fields already slipping into the hands of competitors, such losses in Iraq threatened to reduce them to second rank and confront them with fierce international competition and downward profit pressure. The companies stepped up their lobbying in Washington and made their wishes for Iraq oil crystal clear. “Iraq possesses huge reserves of oil and gas – reserves I’d love Chevron to have access to,” enthused Chevron CEO Kenneth T. Derr in a speech at the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco.45

Almost as soon as Iraq signed the new oil agreements, Washington began to deploy military forces near the country’s borders in a very threatening forward posture. Operation Phoenix Scorpion and Operation Desert Thunder in various phases lasted almost continuously from November 1997 through December 1998. In Washington, the rhetoric grew increasingly hard-line and threatening. On January 26, 1998 members of the right-wing Project for a New American Century sent a letter to President Bill Clinton warning that the containment policy “has been steadily eroding over the past several month” and calling for “removing Saddam Hussein from power.”46 CIA sources told journalists and members of Congress that Saddam was hiding large stocks of deadly weapons. Congress held hearings and began drafting legislation. The President asked the Pentagon to plan a variety of military options, ranging from limited strikes (later designated Operation Desert Fox) to full-scale war (Operation Desert Lion).

On May 1, President Clinton signed a law that provided $5 million in funding for the Iraqi opposition and set up “Radio Free Iraq.” That was only the beginning. On May 29, the Project for a New American Century sent an open letter to Congress on Iraq, insisting that the US government was not sufficiently firm with Saddam, attacking what it called the President’s “capitulation” and warning of severe “consequence” to US interests. Among the signatories of this high-profile letter were Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Elliot Abrams, John Bolton and others who would later take high posts in the Bush administration.47 The Clinton White House was ready to oblige. On August 14, the President signed another law (PL 105-235) that accused Iraq of building weapons of mass destruction and failing to cooperate with UN inspectors, declaring ominously: “Iraq is in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations.” Finally, on October 31, the President signed the “Iraq Liberation Act of 1998” (PL 105-338), a text still more bellicose. “It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq,” read the key sentence. In London, government leaders made similar expressions of determination and a UK Strategic Defence Review of July 1998 affirmed readiness to use force. “Outside Europe,” the Review concluded, “the greatest risks to our national economic and political interests . . . will remain in the Gulf.”48

On December 16-19, 1998, the US-UK launched Operation Desert Fox. Hundreds of strike aircraft and cruise missiles hit Baghdad and other major Iraqi targets, including an oil refinery. The attacks ended the UN arms inspection program, pre-empting any declaration that Iraq was nearly free of mass destruction weapons. Following Desert Fox, US-UK air forces patrolled the “no-fly” zones with new, more aggressive rules of engagement and regular attacks on Iraqi targets.

This increasingly aggressive policy towards Iraq expressed a hardening conviction among leaders in the US and the UK that Saddam Hussein could not be ousted by covert means, and that invasion and direct control over Iraq’s oil would now be required.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. If oil companies don't want to build, research, etc...

Take away leases they have on US land. Penalize them for lack of action. Get my drift?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Were not most of the
oil contracts awarded to Asian companies. And as far as build, make the process more streamlined. And I know it's not popular here, but we need to drill ANWR, Bakken, and offshore while we work on alternative energy. We also should look to the French as an example of how to use nuclear energy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Labor Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC