Big Oil Subsidies Continue As Senate Blocks Bill

to the five biggest U.S. oil companies despite their just having posted over $35 billion in profits in the first quarter. The vote was 52 to 48 with 3 Democrats from energy-producing states joining a near solid phalanx of Republicans to strike down the bill, which would have ended a $21 billion handout across 10 years.

The vote ran directly counter to public wishes. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed 74% favored the end of oil company subsidies. But the public was no match for the $41 million paid to the campaign funds of the 48 Republican senators who voted to block the bill. They had no qualms about sticking us taxpayers with the $21 billion bill in return for that payoff.

The CEOs of the five companies had said in a Congressional hearing last week that they would be willing to give up their subsidies only if handouts to all industries were cancelled as well. If that meant those never-ending giveaways to cotton, sugar, big corporate farms and the latest addition, ethanol, were to be eliminated, we would be all for that. With the United States deep in trillions of debt, ongoing corporate welfare is a travesty.

But note the attitude. The CEOs would be “willing”. That tells us that Big Oil, so-called, views the subsidies as an entitlement — theirs to keep unless concessions are made elsewhere.

Of course, it was merely a cynical maneuver. There is no chance that the kept members of Congress would give up taxpayer handouts to their home state industries.

Republicans on the war path to cut spending forced a deal with the Obama administration to cut $38.5 billion from the current year budget, and the House voted approval of Paul Ryan’s plan to make deep budget cuts and entirely slash Medicare payouts. Yet, other than a two defections, Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, both of Maine, all Senate Republicans voted to continue the giveaway of public money to keep those campaign contributions coming.

The question is, how can Republicans in Congress so blatantly violate their own campaign to reduce spending and at the same time succeed in selling the handout rationale to the party faithful? In particular, how could Tea Party members cave in for this duplicity? The sales pitch is that it will reduce the cost of $4.00 a gallon gasoline. Are there truly people who walk among us who believe that the $21 billion will pass through to the consumer?