Key Vote NO on H.R. 7688

The American Energy Alliance urges all members to oppose H.R. 7688, the Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act. This legislation claims to address an imaginary problem by giving the President of the United States unilateral power to set prices and harass small businesses based on a vague idea of “unconscionably excessive” gas prices.

While there are many factors that affect gas prices, most especially the price and supply of crude oil, so-called price gouging is not one of them. Over 90% of gas stations in the United States are independently owned. These small businesses set prices individually, they are not directed or controlled by whatever oil company’s brand they have on their sign. This legislation would target these small business for investigation and harassment, while ignoring real factors that affect gas prices, like regulation and administration policy actions to prevent domestic oil production.

For decades now the Federal Trade Commission has repeatedly searched for evidence of “price gouging” or collusion in price setting in the gasoline market. No evidence has ever been found. It is an imaginary problem, a false talking point used to deflect attention.

Both the supposed target of this legislation and the sweeping, unchecked power it would grant the president, are misguided. The AEA urges all members to support free markets and affordable energy by voting NO on H.R. 7688. AEA will include this vote in its American Energy Scorecard.

American Energy Alliance Strongly Opposes Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act

WASHINGTON D.C. (May 19, 2022) This week, Democrats in the House of Representatives will try to misdirect voters about the source of high energy prices. Rather than taking on the policies of the Biden administration, which are the actual cause of more expensive energy, the House will take up legislation about a phantom cause: “price gouging.” The bill, H.R. 7688, is named the “Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act,” and it would give the President vast powers to set price controls by executive fiat. If passed, this legislation will cause even more harm to American energy consumers. Price controls don’t work, and our experience during the gas lines of the 1970s should remind us that price controls will lead to shortages.

Thomas Pyle, President of the American Energy Alliance, issued the following statement:

“This legislation is a cynical attempt to deflect blame. The Biden administration, supported and encouraged by Democrats in Congress, has taken repeated action to suppress and prevent domestic oil and gas production. Now, these chickens are coming home to roost, as American families face rising energy prices and prices at the pump. These prices are a direct result of the Biden administration’s war on domestic energy production.

Instead of challenging the president on the policy actions, he’s taken to cause higher energy prices, Democrats in Congress are now pretending that energy inflation is being caused by supposed price gouging. This is asserted without evidence because there is no evidence. Over 90 percent of gas stations in America are independently owned. They set their prices individually based on market factors that reflect supply and demand. Pretending that these tens of thousands of small businesses are somehow coordinating to raise gas prices is preposterous, and unsurprisingly despite 20 years of investigating the Federal Trade Commission has never found any evidence of price gouging or coordinated price setting.

Democrats in Congress know all this, but there are elections this November and they are looking for someone else to blame for the energy inflation that they have caused. They should be ashamed of trying to blame hard-pressed small businesses for their own errors. This legislation is not serious governing, it is cynical politics, and Americans will see right through it.”

Additional Resources:


For media inquiries please contact:
[email protected]

Biden Caused Higher Energy Prices, Congress Hopes You Won’t Notice

This week, Democrats in the House of Representatives will try to misdirect voters about the source of high energy prices. Rather than taking on the policies of the Biden administration which are the actual cause of more expensive energy, the House will take up legislation about a phantom cause: “price gouging.” The bill, H.R. 7688, is named the “Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act,” and it would give the President vast powers to set price controls to combat this imaginary crisis of price gouging that is alleged to be sweeping the nation. The legislation is transparent politics, with politicians hoping to save themselves in the November elections, even though they have stood shoulder-to-shoulder with President Biden in his crusade to shut off American energy and even green energy mineral development in the U.S. 

President Biden has been one of the worst presidents for America’s energy fortunes in history. From shutting down pipelines, to shutting down leasing, to illegally ignoring his duty to hold timely leases, to covering private enterprise with the green tape extreme environmental groups demand, he has done everything in his power to shut down, impede and destroy American jobs and energy. Now that his actions are showing up at the pump, he wants to blame someone else. This bill gives him a green light to do so. Apparently, the “Putin Price Hike” messaging isn’t working, so the administration is looking for a new scapegoat. But Americans know this administration has been shutting down domestic energy production. 

Beyond the imaginary premise of price gouging, the bill itself is dangerously ridiculous. It allows the president to declare an “Energy Emergency” and then sic DOJ investigators on anyone of whom they decide to target in their snipe hunt. The bill is full of terms like “unconscionable pricing,” and “unconscionably excessive,” which would never stand up in any court but make for nice press releases for those who want to distance themselves from the absurdly high energy prices they are in fact responsible for. 

The legislation would also allow President Biden to order the Federal Trade Commission into action in search of supposed unfair or deceptive practices, presumably as soon as they get finished looking into the “price gouging” for baby formula that President Biden claims is happening. But like high energy prices, the baby formula shortage it actually a government-created problem, since it was the FDA that shut down one of the largest formula makers in the country and federal command and control of the dairy industry that limits alternative producers. Apparently, President Biden’s answer to the baby formula shortage is the same as his answer to energy prices: allege price gouging and call for more imports.

Ultimately, though, this bill isn’t a price-gouging bill; it’s a price control bill. It’s an attempt to give the President the power to set the price of fuels. This bill is an attempt to blame oil companies for the Biden administration’s policies. Just this last week he canceled offshore lease sales in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. He somehow thinks that voters will not notice the hypocrisy. 

Everyone should read this bill.  It’s pretty short and easy to understand. At the President’s total discretion, he can declare that the gasoline or diesel fuel price is unconscionably high and he thinks gas stations are exploiting an “energy emergency.” None of these terms are defined so they can mean whatever the President says they mean. And these price controls can be continued indefinitely.  Congress should be ashamed of itself for delegating this kind of unlimited power to the executive, to be used at his sole discretion. 

And this power is being handed to the President to combat an entirely fictitious issue. The Federal Trade Commission has studied price gouging for more than 20 years and they have failed repeatedly to find nefarious actions. Which should be no surprise. Despite the brand logos we see on gas stations, more than 90% of the gas stations in America are owned by independent owners. Each station determines its own pricing, it is not dictated by whatever large oil company might be named on the sign. If there were systematic efforts to gouge consumers or set prices, it would require a vast conspiracy of tens of thousands of participants. And the conspiracy would have long since been found out by now. 

The reality is that President Biden has taken action, and the actions he took drove up the price of fuel. He has illegally canceled lease sale after lease sale. He canceled the Keystone XL pipeline.  He has shut down oil leasing in Alaska. He has proposed additional taxes and additional regulations on oil producers. After all this, he claims he wants lower prices at the pump, but he is either lying, or he doesn’t know what his administration is up to. 

In fact, there are people in the Biden administration who want higher fuel prices, both to make electric vehicles look more competitive and to try to get people to use less oil (which they think is intrinsically bad). And those are the policies we are getting.  Both the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Transportation have repeatedly mentioned it in media interviews. High energy prices are not an accident, this has always been the plan.

If Congress wants to do something useful, they would pass a bill reversing everything energy action President Biden has taken. They could move to open up the baby formula factory the FDA closed at the same time. The “gouging” isn’t being done by your neighborhood gas station owner; Americans are being gouged by their government.

The Unregulated Podcast #83: The Senator from Europe

On this episode of The Unregulated Podcast, Tom Pyle and Mike McKenna commemorate the service of outgoing White House Press Secretary Jen “Circle Back” Psaki, and discuss Senator Kevin Cramer’s (R-EU) efforts to implement a national energy tax in the United States to “catch-up” to Europe.

Links:

Senators Seek Higher Energy Prices

Is now the right time to increase energy prices with a new tax on energy?

Despite the fact that inflation is the highest it’s been in forty years and the U.S. economy contracted in the first quarter of 2022, Republican Senators Kevin Cramer, Lindsey Graham, and Bill Cassidy apparently think so.  They’re plotting with Democrat Senators Joe Manchin, Chris Coons, and Sheldon Whitehouse (who’s never met an energy tax he didn’t like) to push for a new “carbon border adjustment”.

That’s bad news for household budgets.  This so-called “adjustment” is a tax on energy – like oil, gas, and coal – and imports, like fertilizer, steel, aluminum, and concrete.  It will drive up the cost of pretty much everything made or transported, including household goods, cars, and food.

The theory behind this tax is that we should make countries like China and India put strict limits on their emissions.  The reality is, people in the U.S. are going to pay in the end.

Senator Cramer’s argument for the new energy tax might be the most bizarre of all.  Here’s what he told E&E News:  “To me, one of the bigger challenges is that Europe is so far out in front on the whole concept.  And it’s hard to tell them to slow down, but at the same time, I’d like to reconcile with them first, and then I think we all move forward better.” 

Has Senator Cramer looked at Europe’s energy situation recently?  Half the continent is hoping Russia doesn’t cut off its oil and gas after years patting themselves on the back for switching to wind and solar.  Following a Europe First strategy is the worst possible approach for America.

A better strategy would be to liberate American industry from the jumble of regulations and restrictions that drive up costs here at home.  Increased energy production at home is a win for the economy and the environment.

They can call it what they want, but the carbon border adjustment is still a tax on energy.  It will eat into the wallets of all Americans, especially the poor, the elderly, and local institutions like schools and hospitals.

Yes, the U.S. is the world’s biggest producer of oil, but we still bring in plenty of crude each year from abroad to supply our world-class refineries.  Taxing imports, especially oil imports, means the costs for these refineries goes up.  That means the costs for the rest of us go up on all of the critical petroleum products that power our economy.

Furthermore, knowing the history of Senator Whitehouse and Senator Coons, is there any chance they’ll stop there?  Absolutely not.  This plan is phase one for the Democrats in their larger agenda of appeasing Big Green, Inc.  Anyone who thinks this is about helping the U.S. economy or American consumers is deluded.

We know the Democrats’ end goal is to stop every one of us from using affordable oil, gas, and coal. They don’t care where it comes from and they don’t care about pushing us into energy poverty like the Europeans are now facing.  We expect better from Senators Cramer, Cassidy, and Graham.

When President Carter presided over the destruction of our economy in the 1970s he tried to blame stagflation on the Arab oil embargo.  Similarly, President Biden is trying to blame Putin for his runaway inflation.

If the Republicans help impose an energy tax on top of the mess we are already in, they will have no one to blame but themselves.

The Unregulated Podcast #82: Jamie Dimon Sees the Light

On this episode of the Unregulated Podcast, Tom Pyle and Mike McKenna discuss the latest headlines out of Washington.

Links:

Key Votes: Motions to Instruct

The American Energy Alliance urges all Senators to support the following motions to instruct conferees to the H.R. 4521 conference committee.

YES on Barrasso motion requiring the development of a new offshore leasing plan. The administration has taken no action to begin a new five-year leasing plan as required by law.

YES on Lee motion to discard extraneous green provisions passed by the House. These provisions are not relevant to a China competition bill and should not have been included.

YES on Sullivan motion to prevent taxpayer dollars from subsidizing products from China or Russia. China competition legislation should not subsidize Chinese products.

YES on Daines motion to prevent provisions that would undermine US energy production. A strong domestic energy industry is an indispensable element of the US successfully competing with China.

YES on Capito motion to clarify the President’s emergency declarations authority. Efforts to invoke “emergency” authorities to harm domestic energy producers would undermine the US competitive position versus China.

YES on Scott (SC) motion to prevent new greenhouse gas mandates in the US unless equaled by China. Imposing harmful measures on American firms without reciprocal Chinese actions would undermine US competition with China.

The AEA urges all members to support free markets and affordable energy by voting YES on these six motions to instruct conferees.  

Should votes on these motions occur, AEA will include them in its American Energy Scorecard.

The Unregulated Podcast #81: Semper Fidelis

On this episode of The Unregulated Podcast, Tom Pyle and Mike McKenna discuss the latest headlines in Washington.

Links:

The Unregulated Podcast #80: Special K Strikes Again

On this episode of The Unregulated Podcast Podcast Tom Pyle and Mike McKenna discuss the latest adventures and follies of “Special” Envoy John Kerry.

Costly Mandates From Biden Spiking Electricity Prices

Americans can expect higher energy prices as U.S. electric utilities plan their biggest spending increases in decades to upgrade electric grids, preparing for increased demand from electric vehicles and making the transition to renewable energy. Utilities plan to spend tens of billions of dollars in the coming years to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, partly in response to state and federal mandates, and to replace infrastructure that cannot meet the needs of President Joe Biden’s energy transition. The Edison Electric Institute, an industry trade group, expects that utilities will invest about $140 billion each year in 2022 and 2023—substantially more than any year since 2000. The investments are needed to meet renewable-energy goals set by President Biden and some states and to bolster the reliability of the grid as outages become longer and more frequent mainly due to intermittent renewables that cannot always meet demand when required and aging infrastructure. Changing the grid and the generation sources from on-demand to intermittent sources with backup will be expensive. Europe is already experiencing this price spike.

Utilities must also prepare for higher electricity demand because of electric vehicle sales goals, homeowners needing the grid to charge them, and replacement of traditional furnaces and gas appliances with electric alternatives. The movement toward electrification is driven by cities, towns, and some states as part of a campaign led by the environmental group the Rocky Mountain Institute, to phase out natural gas for cooking and heating. Because utilities are allowed to recoup the cost of capital investments, and obtain a rate of return on them, Americans can expect higher electric bills.

This occurs as U.S. electricity customers face some of the largest bills in years as President Biden’s policies move the United States to renewable energy and electric vehicle adoption. Average retail electricity prices for residential customers increased 4.3 percent last year to 13.72 cents per kilowatt-hour, the largest annual increase since 2008, according to the Energy Information Administration. Biden is following in the shoes of California whose electricity prices have increased to record highs (70 percent higher than the national average) as it implements its renewable agenda and its electric vehicle goals. Recently, California has mandated 35 percent of new passenger vehicles sold in the state by 2026 to be powered by batteries or hydrogen.

California’s Dilemma

Southern California Edison, a unit of Edison International that serves about five million electricity customers, is planning to invest as much as $30 billion in its system between 2021 and 2025 to implement wildfire control methods and equipment, prepare the grid for greater electricity demand, and build large batteries to store wind and solar power and discharge it as needed. That equates to $6,000 per customer before return on capital investment. California plans to decarbonize its power grid by 2045, which will require the state’s utilities to procure an unprecedented amount of new renewable generation and battery storage. Electrification of California’s largest-in-the-nation vehicle fleet will exacerbate these problems.

The California Public Utilities Commission has ordered utilities to buy renewable energy and battery storage as the state phases out four natural-gas-fired power plants and retires Diablo Canyon, the state’s last two nuclear reactors, with a combined capacity of 2,250 megawatts, in 2024 and 2025, respectively. The order requires companies to bring more than 14,000 megawatts of power generation and storage capacity online in the coming years—an amount equal to about a third of the state’s forecast for peak summer demand.

The California Energy Commission and the state’s grid operator are concerned that the purchases may not be enough to prevent electricity shortages in coming summers. A drought has constrained the output of some of California’s most significant generating facilities, including the Hoover Dam. Neighboring states are closing their coal-fired power plants, reducing the amount of electricity California can import when high temperatures increase electricity demand. California’s closure of four gas-fired power plants on its southern coast will exasperate the problem as they supply more than 3,700 megawatts. Regulators moved to keep three of them on-line through 2023 because the state could face electricity shortages on hot days in the evening, when solar power production declines.

California’s grid operator called on residents to conserve power several times in the past and took emergency measures to buy additional supplies from regional producers to reduce the risk of blackouts. The state also added four temporary natural-gas generators at power plants to help alleviate shortages.

The California utilities commission in late 2019 ordered the state’s power companies to contract for 3,300 megawatts of new generation by 2023. The utilities commission last year ordered them to bring more than three times as much capacity online between 2023 and 2026. The procurement order, the largest the agency has ever issued, calls for 11,500 megawatts of wind and solar generation, battery storage and other carbon-free resources. It is expected to cost billions of dollars, much of which the state’s utilities will recoup from customers.

In 2019, Southern California Edison estimated that California’s goal to reach carbon neutrality by 2045 could require up to $250 billion in statewide investments in renewables and storage and grid enhancements. That pre-COVID number, however, may be well short of what it will take. According to a new report from LevelTen Energy, North American renewable energy developers are struggling to build solar and wind projects fast enough to keep up with demand because of the extremely difficult development landscape, which is leading to a shortage of power purchase agreements for corporations and other large energy buyers. This rapidly growing imbalance between supply and demand combined with skyrocketing development costs raised renewable costs by 28.5 percent in one year.

Moreover, minerals necessary for a green transition have skyrocketed in price recently, with 500+ percent increases in the price for lithium carbonate used in batteries, with price spikes for copper and aluminum, along with other minerals. The price and availability of these will affect the prices of these new investments, and in turn, utility bills.

Conclusion

California’s energy dilemma underscores the difficulties of rapidly transitioning to renewable energy resources, as the leaders of the United States and many countries are now pledging to do. The transition will require large investments by electric utility companies in infrastructure, which will be tacked onto electric utility energy bills consumers pay. More renewable energy added to the grid means more transmission lines will be needed to reach wind and solar resources located farther and farther from demand centers. Greater demand for electricity from electric vehicles will require more solar and wind energy and battery storage requirements to discharge power when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining. The energy transition demanded by President Biden will cost Americans through much higher energy bills, as Americans are already seeing from his anti-oil and gas policies. It is just not clear how much the total package will be.


*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research.