Kucinich Will Introduce Legislation To Ban U.S. Oil Companies From Iraq

[babylonsister]

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/27673

Kucinich Will Introduce Legislation To Ban U.S. Oil Companies From Iraq
Submitted by davidswanson on Sat, 2007-10-13 04:09. Congress

Kucinich: New Revelations on Hunt Oil Deal Raise More Questions
Will Introduce Legislation To Ban U.S. Oil Companies From Iraq

WASHINGTON, D.C. (October 12, 2007) — Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) said today’s United Press International (UPI) report on Hunt Oil raises more questions worthy of Congressional investigations and that he will introduce legislation to ban U.S. oil companies from operating in Iraq.

“The Bush Administration has been pressing for the privatization of Iraq’s oil. This move by Hunt Oil, with its numerous connections to the President, would seem to advance that goal. The deal would seem to pressure the central Iraq government to capitulate, since the Hunt Oil deal with the Kurdistan Regional Government would be a precedent that the Iraq government could hardly ignore.

“I’m concerned that if we don’t reverse the “war for oil” policy, many negative consequences for the United States could follow. I think it would prevent any hope of an emerging peace process in the Middle East,” Kucinich said.

Earlier this year Congress passed and the President signed the supplemental Iraq funding bill that included a limitation on the U.S. government controlling Iraqi oil, which leaves private control of Iraq’s oil resources by U.S. oil companies on the table. Sec. 3301 states no funds can be expended by the United States Government “To exercise United States control over any oil resource of Iraq.” There is no similar prohibition on oil companies.

“This Congress failed to prohibit oil companies from taking advantage of the U.S. invasion. I intend to close this major loophole by introducing legislation to prohibit U.S oil companies from gaining financial interests or financial control of Iraq’s oil resources,” Kucinich said.

On September 18, 2007, Kucinich sent a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urging an immediate investigation into Hunt Oil Company’s recent production sharing agreement for petroleum exploration with Kurdistan.

“The war in Iraq is a stain on American history. Let us not further besmirch our nation by participating in an outrageous exploitation of a nation, which is in shambles due to the U.S. intervention,” Kucinich said in an hour-long speech on the floor of the House of Representatives on May 23, 2007.

[dkofos]

1. While he's at it, can he add mercenaries to the list??

[PeaceNikki]

23. And Saudi Arabin oil, too?

[salib]

34. Dennis has been on that one for years

Here is one from almost a year ago:
http://www.pdamerica.org/articles/news/2007-01-09-20-38-23-news.php

[Sparkly]

2. Excellent!!

And if they make the usual argument of "we need to help them with their oil," he's got it covered:

"I intend to close this major loophole by introducing legislation to prohibit U.S oil companies from gaining financial interests or financial control of Iraq’s oil resources,”

They should make NO profit, either privately or at taxpayers' expense; if they insist they're providing a 'needed' service, they can stay and "help" voluntarily without a cent above breaking even -- although that'd require a LOT of oversight, which is grossly lacking...

[cali]

6. It's only excellent if he's worked with other reps on this

legislation and built a coalition. That's a painful and painstaking process.

Who are the co-sponsors? Is this legislation that has a prayer of being passed?

[Sparkly]

True!

An excellent idea isn't worth much if it's not put into action. I get your point. :hi:

[bahrbearian]

26. You know nobody is going to work with him on this

all the rest of them are in their Pockets already.

[cali]

33. Please. What bull.

I know for damn sure that my rep isn't. And I doubt very many of the rest of the Congressional Progressive Caucus is either. Are you suggesting that Bernie Sanders is in the pocket of the oil companies that he's actually done more about than practically anyone?

Give me a break. (And yes, of course I know that Bernie's no longer in the House)

[bvar22]

29. I think that is more a criticism of the Democratic Party Leadership,

and not a criticism of Kucinich. DK is LEADING in the proper direction. It is not his fault if the Democratic Leadership is too cowardly or venal to follow.

Why is Dennis Kucinich the ONLY candidate who will even dare to mention the "Oil Law Benchmark" (a baltant warcrime)?

Hillary has actually criticized the Iraqis for NOT passing the benchmarks that give 80% of the Iraqi Oil Reserves to American Oil Corporations.


The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[superkia]

32. I cant believe I am not the only one that sees that.

I love when I see someone standing up for what is right instead of what is right in politics. Someone has to stand up and speak for the people and I am proud that Dennis Kucinich is once again the one doing that. He is the most electable candidate to represent the people of the United States of America, he stands alone for the people way too often and no one gives him credit, instead they support the candidates that wont stand up for us. What exactly could be better than an elected official of the people actually representing the people. This is what our country needs in a President, someone to revitalize Americans and make us all believe in the political system again so more people will stand and make a difference.

Go DK!

[clarence swinney]

46. SUPERKIA THANKS

Someone who will do what they KNOW is in the best interests of the MAJORITY of Americans and the World.

We need to kick most out of Washington-Cut off Corporate Influence.

FINANCE CAMPAIGNS AND ELECTIONS LIKE INTELLIGENT PEOPLE.

Stop these two year vicious campaigns.

Get people who are-- PRO CHRIST--PRO AMERICA-PRO WORLD

The Reagan administration, especially
foreign advisers, said Dictators were Ok as long as they could say Anti-Communism.

Why not get leaders who will demand
EQUITY IN WEALTH AND INCOME.

The GOOD years were after WWII until Reagan
when income and wealth were called a picket fence distribution.

Each quintile increased about the same percentage wise.

Reagan=Bush II have made it into a step ladder distribution.

Each step moves up some but top steps go into outer space.

If you think it is bad wait till 79 Million Seniors scream for Social Security and Medicare.

[bjobotts]

41. Kucinich IS the only real change. He IS truth to power. He IS the truth we've been seeking

[LWolf]

3. Kucinich will not back down, and will

address every issue that comes forward.

A Congress full of Democrats like this would be a beautiful thing.

I'd like to see him as president. If not, then definitely speaker of the house.

[cali]

21. I'd rather have a congress with a couple of

Dennises and many more Bernies. What's the difference? Dennis has great sweeping ideas, but rarely gets anything remotely close to being passed. Bernie settles for less grand ideas when it comes to legislating, and got an amazing amount passed, even under a repuke House.

[John Q. Citizen]

35. I like Bernie, even if he['s not a Dem. Do you have a link or list of what he got passed

from 2000 up until the end of 2006?

[cali]

36. Here's a start:

From an article in RS. Yes, I know it's not a list, but you can get that from THOMAS.

<snip>

Sanders is the amendment king of the current House of Representatives. Since the Republicans took over Congress in 1995, no other lawmaker -- not Tom DeLay, not Nancy Pelosi -- has passed more roll-call amendments (amendments that actually went to a vote on the floor) than Bernie Sanders. He accomplishes this on the one hand by being relentlessly active, and on the other by using his status as an Independent to form left-right coalitions


<snip
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/7539869/four_amendments__a_funeral

[John Q. Citizen]

49. That doesn't say that his amendments were successful, just that he got

votes on his amendments.

I'm wondering what he actually got passed and signed into law.

This paragraph from the linked article would suggest that both Sanders and Kucinich have enjoyed a simular level of effectiveness in getting their legislation into law...

It was an impressive run, with some in his office calling it the best winning streak of his career. Except for one thing.

By my last week in Washington, all of his victories had been rolled back, each carefully nurtured amendment perishing in the grossly corrupt and absurd vortex of political dysfunction that is today's U.S. Congress. What began as a tale of political valor ended as a grotesque object lesson in the ugly realities of American politics -- the pitfalls of digging for hope in a shit mountain.

It seems to me you are quite unfair and either deceptive or uniformed when you attempt to portray Kucinich as ineffective.

Kucinich entered congress when the Repos held power, and I would suggest that he has been as effective as any other progressive in actually passing legislation. To single out Kucinich as somehow less effective than. all the other progressives who couldn't get their stuff passed. either, seems to be what your agenda is here.

[rodeodance]

4. wish he would get to the Cheney impeachment

[babylonsister]

5. He already has, but needs backing, which he's not getting. nt

[cali]

8. Why did he announce publicly that he was "seriously thinking"

of introducing Articles of Impeachment via a privileged resolution, if he knew he didn't have the backing. Ordinarily, Reps don't make such an announcement unless they have that backing.

[babylonsister]

10. He has introduced them; maybe he thought he'd get more support.

http://kucinich.house.gov/SpotlightIssues/documents.htm

[cali]

13. It was my understanding that

he said he'd bring it to the floor via a privileged resolution. And it's also my understanding that he hasn't done that, as of this date.

[babylonsister]

15. According to this article, he introduced the resolution in April:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/24/AR2007042401542.html

snip//

Let me cite from the articles of impeachment that were introduced this afternoon, Article I, that Richard Cheney had purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States armed forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security.

That despite all evidence to the contrary, the vice president actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

That preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the vice president was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The vice president pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and the Congress of the United States.

more...

As for a privileged resolution, I have no idea.

[cali]

17. Actually, it's something you posted.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1922790

[babylonsister]

18. Well blow me down; I didn't remember that. OK, so I now have

no clue at all what's going on. I'm assuming a privileged resolution is different than a regular old resolution.

[cali]

19. I believe it bypasses the

committee process.

[babylonsister]

20. Thanks for that clarification. nt

[shanti]

7. heh

i applaud his cojones, but it will never happen. the oil companies are a major reason why we are IN iraq!

[Richard Steele]

9. Now THERE'S someone worthy of sitting in the Oval Office! recommended

[bluedog]

11. I'll believe it when it happens n/t

[WinkyDink]

12. DK speaks the truth, suggests rational and equitable solutions to our problems,

and HE gets labeled "fringe".
What an awful time we live in.

[cali]

16. He should not be labeled as fringe

but I stand by what I wrote upthread:

"It's only excellent if he's worked with other reps on this
legislation and built a coalition. That's a painful and painstaking process.

Who are the co-sponsors? Is this legislation that has a prayer of being passed?"

Great ideas are great, but it takes a lot of leg work to build coalitions to get legislation enacted. Otherwise it's just talk. and sorry, that's what this is.

I'm glad he's pushing things like this, but he knows damn well he can't get this enacted.

I'm more interested in politicians like Bernie who actually do get legislation through, even if it's not as sweeping, or in my other Senator, who also is more of an incrementalist and wrote and sponsored the Habeas Restoration Act and the War Profiteering Prevention Act. The former didn't pass this time, but it will, and so will the WPPA.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

14. WOW!!! Stay away from small planes and large windows, Congressman!

That man has some backbone taking on big oil!!! :applause:

[robinlynne]

22. The man is fantastic!

[Yael]

24. Tack on a ban on 'no-bid contracts' and he has a winner!

[Joanne98]

25. YAY!

[Individualist]

27. K&R

[Kurovski]

28. K&R. (nt)

[L. Coyote]

30. K & R & Impeach two too

[OneBlueSky]

31. great idea, but I'm afraid it will be DOA . . . n/t

.

[april]

37. Dennis is one of the good ones! Not sugar coated B. S he is a man of principal

[stimbox]

38. K&R

:bounce:

[fenriswolf]

39. kucinich is the man

....and to those of you who keep saying its a publicity stunt, he does it cause he knows nothing will happen, etc, etc. stop bashing him at least he is putting legislation out their, why not get on your reps to sign onto his bills instead of bashing him?

[SergeyDovlatov]

40. that is a good start

though unfortunately it won't do much good.

Enterprising companies will find a way to subvert the intent of the law while complaing with the letter of it.

[JFN1]

42. Meaningless, 'feel-good' lesgistlation

Oil companies are global, for the most part, so barring 'American' companies from Iraq is merely an exercise in futility...

[Ricki]

43. Yes but at least he is drawing attention to the issue

as a US congressperson, he can only affect American companies

[clarence swinney]

44. MIDDLE EAST OIL NOT NEEDED

Small decrease in consumption and cut off Saudi Arabia Get out of Middle East Affairs. Go home Yankees.

Imports--M bbls per day

canada-1.9
saudi--1.6 (Only significant one in ME)
mexico-1.4
nigeria--1.4
venezuela-1.0
angola-0.6
algiers-0.5
iraq-0.5 (current prod 1.86 was 2.6 in 2003
can do 4--usa oil companies lick chops here)
Ecuador-0.3
brazil-0.2

[clarence swinney]

45. Gulf War Expense

58 Billion and we paid 8 Billion.
Why did others like Japan pay so much?
We saved their oil.

[Terri S]

47. Dennis was the only one talking about the Hydrocarbon Law

and how *'s benchmark for splitting Iraqi oil among the Kurds, Shia and Sunni was actually a disguised plan for multinational corporations to get their hands on most of it ...

link

[everydayis911]

48. We Should

Bombard our Rep's office's with e-mails for impeachment everyday before they take away our internetS.
What are we going to do if they do that. Write letters YUCK! Then they'll come up with an Anthrax scare so no letters will be received. We are losing our voice and they control the voices. So when they shut us up they win again. We should fight like everyday is the last day on the internetS. Just think that Dennis is able to get his voice heard no matter how "fringe" it sounds. And where has that gotton us.
NOWHERE. But at least he's trying and if we don't get off our asses we'll be out in the streets marching with men with guns and being told it's ok just get in line.