Obama – Heir to Jimmy Carter


“Unless we tax the oil companies, they will reap huge and undeserved windfall profits.”
Jimmy Carter, 1980

“[L]egislators who sit by idly while oil profits soar will have to answer to the voters.”
New York Time, 1980

“I’ll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we’ll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills.”
Sen. Barack Obama, 6/9/08

With Democrats controlling Congress in 1980, Jimmy Carter got the windfall profits tax passed and as if on cue, oil production — fell. To the tune of 1.6 billion fewer barrels. America’s dependence on foreign oil rose.

Eventually even the Times was agreeing the tax had to be repealed, and by 1988 Reagan, who campaigned against it, signed the repeal (by a Democrat Congress no less) into law. And Obama wants to do this all over again?

Yep folks, this is the Change Obama wants — a fulfillment of Carter’s Second Term that he fortunately did not obtain thanks to the Gipper.

It was funny today on the Today Show when they asked the folks on the NYSE on what the next president could do to help bring oil prices down. Both of them yelled at her and said … 1st thing is to drill drill drill ….

So hey Bama — so are you going to drill in ANWR? are you going to explore for more oil? The silence is deafening.


John Breaux: “Well a windfall profits tax is not going to produce a single barrel of oil. When we had a windfall profits tax back in the 1980s, we produced less energy than before we had the tax. A windfall profits tax may make you feel good as a punitive measure against the energy companies, but until we get the guys and women who produce the energy working with those that consume it, we are never going to solve the problem. A windfall profits tax will produce less energy and not more.” (MSNBC’s “MSNBC Live,” 6/9/08)

1 thought on “Obama – Heir to Jimmy Carter”

  1. The central problem is that the Left does not want us to produce more energy. Their policy amounts to 1) saying that they favor wonderful new technologies that just happen to unavailable, 2) opposing any action that would expand availability of practical sources of energy and 3) telling the rest of us that we should reduce our energy consumption as a matter of principle. The talk about new technologies is mostly spin to get gullible voters to accept reduced energy availability.

Comments are closed.