Oil for war? Don't tax oil profits to finance a warFindlay Courier Editorial U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who's been battling the war on terrorism ever since the focus turned to Iraq, would like to remove what he sees as a major incentive for the war: the potential for profit. On Monday Kucinich, D-Cleveland, introduced a bill to impose a windfall profits tax on oil companies, who could benefit from higher oil prices if the United States attacks Iraq. "Why should the American people pay for a war that is going to benefit the oil companies?" Kucinich asked. Why indeed? Everybody loves to hate Big Oil, especially when they go to the gas pump and find that prices have jumped 20 cents overnight. We agree that in the interest of the U.S. economy and their own public relations, oil companies should keep prices as stable as possible. When gasoline prices spiked 20 cents within hours of the terrorist attack on Sept. 11, 2001, it caused a lot of anger and resentment by American consumers. But we as consumers need to be aware that oil prices are largely a function of supply and demand. When supplies are cut -- due to a war, a decision by OPEC, the current strike in Venezuela or some other reason -- the worldwide cost of oil rises. Like all businesses, the oil companies generally pass those cost increases on to their consumers. Prices drop in response to larger supplies and lessening demand. So why not tax the excess oil profits that are a direct result of a war with Iraq, and use them to help pay for the war, as Kucinich has proposed? It's not even a certainty that oil prices will rise all that much as a result of war with Iraq. The Bush administration could decide to release some of our oil reserves to keep prices down. Venezuela could start producing at full strength again. Other OPEC nations could decide to produce more. It would be very difficult to determine just what portion of oil profits were due to the war in Iraq. The long-term result of regime change in Iraq should be some leveling off or even dropping of world oil prices. That would benefit both the oil companies and us as consumers, as well as the Iraqi people. Nobody should be taxed as punishment for something that's beyond their control. The oil companies are not starting this war. Any benefits to them will be incidental, and may not materialize at all. The armaments manufacturers, uniform makers and other military suppliers also benefit from war. Should they be hit with a similar tax? Kucinich and others of like mind should keep their issues straight. A stable oil supply is not only beneficial to Big Oil, it's necessary to our national security. But oil is not the cause of this war -- Saddam Hussein's refusal to disarm is the cause. This war is about disarming a power-hungry tyrant who rules by terrorism and is developing and stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. The sooner we get in there and get the job done, the better for us all. |