|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
US Congress proposes allowing antitrust suits against OPEC
By Naomi Spencer
22 May 2008
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
In a demagogic display before the travel-heavy Memorial Day
holiday, the US House of Representatives adopted legislation Tuesday
that would allow an antitrust prosecution of the Organization
of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). On Wednesday, the Senate
called in top oil executives for theatrical grilling on price
increases as oil surpassed $133 per barrel and gasoline at the
pump averaged $3.79 per gallon for the week.
The so-called No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels
Act (NOPEC) would amend current law on cartels under the
Sherman Antitrust Act to allow the Justice Department to prosecute
sovereign nations for acting collectively to set prices. The Sherman
Act is the oldest federal law dealing with price-setting by market
monopolies and industrial cartels. The bill passed late Tuesday
by a vote of 324 to 84, with the White House threatening to veto.
US politicians, including President Bush during his recent
visit to Saudi Arabia, have asserted that the price of oil is
spiking primarily because OPEC countries are deliberately under-producing.
However, the Saudi government and other OPEC members have insisted
that world supply is adequate. Reuters news agency reported industry
estimates Wednesday that OPECs oil output in May had risen
by 700,000 barrels per day over April.
Specifically, the bill calls for making punishable by under
US law any foreign state or instrumentality thereof to act
collectively or in combination with any other foreign state ...
when such action has a direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable
effect on the market, supply, price, or distribution of petroleum
in the United States by limiting supply or setting prices.
OPEC members would be denied sovereign immunity from the jurisdiction
of US courts, making US law extra-territorial.
The legislation would establish a Petroleum Industry
Antitrust Task Force in the Justice Department to pursue
enforcement of the antitrust stipulations of the bill.
The bills supporters, most prominently the Democrats,
are repeating last years performance, when a nearly identical
bill was approved by both the House and Senate. The antitrust
measure was later stripped from the text of the legislation by
a Senate committee, after Bush threatened a veto.
The entire procedure is an exercise in nationalist posturing.
The NOPEC Act contains no measures to curb the super-profits of
the oil companies or the wild speculation of Wall Street on commodities.
Instead, the political establishment, nervous in the face of rising
inflation, is attempting to deflect public dissatisfaction at
high oil prices away from US firms and policies toward the ruling
elites agenda in the Middle East, especially as regards
Iran and Saudi Arabia.
OPEC members would not be without means to retaliate, in the
event the bill is enacted. Were a country to be sued in the US
court system and informed that under the Sherman Act its assets
were to be seized, the country could pull investment from the
US. More likely, the weight of OPEC members production and
trade relations would be brought to bear as a deterrent against
Justice Department prosecution.
Some OPEC countries have already indicated that they may stop
pegging their currencies to the dollar, a move that could be accelerated
in the face of threatened US sanctions. In an interview with Reuters
Tuesday, OPEC Secretary-general Abdullah al-Badri insisted that
high oil costs were not due to price or output manipulations,
but rather to financial speculation and the decline in the value
of the dollar. The weakening US currency has driven investors
from dollar-denominated assets into commodities markets, including
oil, metal ores, and grains over the past few months, fueling
speculation and inflation.
In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday,
multi-millionaire executives of oil giants BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips,
Shell, and Exxon Mobil denied that speculation and corporate gouging
were jacking up oil prices and resulting in record-breaking profits.
While expressing their displeasure at the House bill, the executives
one after another insisted that exporting countries were largely
to blame for rising gasoline prices. The fundamental laws
of supply and demand are at work, Shell chairman John Hofmeister
told the committee.
The major oil companies have raked in hundreds of billions
of dollars in profits over the past year. Shell turned more than
$9 billion in profit for the first quarter of 2008 alone, and
BP made $7.6 billion. A substantial portion of the recent profits
are attributable to rising oil and retail gasoline prices. As
the World Socialist Web Site noted after Shell and BPs
first quarter earnings were announced, These figures include
earnings attributed to the rise in oil prices. If this rise is
factored out (as is done in the so-called current cost of supplies
figures), Shells profits were $7.8 billion and BPs
were $6.6 billion. That is, at least $2 billion in profit for
the two companies can be attributed solely to the recent rise
in oil prices. (See As
gas prices and oil profits soar, Bush promotes giveaways to corporations)
On Wednesday Chevron vice-chairman Peter Robertson called for
increased government handouts to oil companies for research
in alternative energy sources and investment in new refineries.
In April, oil executives called on Congress to award companies
$18 billion in federal subsidies.
Other executives repeated the argument and yet again demanded
the opening up of Alaskas Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
and untapped off-shore regions to oil drilling. Americans
need companies that can effectively compete for access to new
resources, Robertson said. Punitive measures that
weakened us in the face of international competition are the wrong
measures.
These punitive measures, according to ConocoPhillips
vice president John Lowe, include bans on drilling, taxation,
and environmental regulations on refinery pollution.
For their part, Senators on the committee limited their opposition
to the corporate profiteering to irrational, moralizing rebukes
and nationalist appeals. Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin, a staunch
supporter of fellow Illinois Senator Barack Obamas presidential
campaign, laid his complaints on with particularly heavy strokes.
It strikes me that this is the right situation for a president
to step in, for a president of the United States to step in,
he said. The president of the United States goes to Saudi
Arabia and begs the sheiks, Please release more oil, you
are killing the American economy. They told him to take
a hike. They sent him home empty-handed.
To the executives, Durbin said, I think the president
should be calling you all before his little meeting place, the
White House, and talking about what you are doing to the American
economy. Does it trouble any of you when you see what you are
doing to us, the profits that you are taking the costs the you
are imposing on working families, small businesses, truckers,
farmers?
According to a business brief on Wednesdays New York
Times website, Judiciary Committee chair Patrick Leahy (Democrat,
Vermont) demanded that the executives tell him the amount
of their pay packages and then ridiculed those who said they did
not know exactly how much they made. Yet, epitomizing the
handwringing over appearancesand essential lack of opposition
to the profiteeringLeahy told the executives, The
people we represent are hurting, while your companies are profiting.
We need to get some balance.
See Also:
Gas prices rise as oil companies take
in record profits
[15 May 2008]
As gas prices and oil profits
soar, Bush promotes giveaways to corporations
[30 April 2008]
US truck drivers squeezed
by soaring diesel prices
[18 March 2008]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |