In President Obama’s weekly address, one of the solutions he proposes to lower gasoline prices is:

…to finally end the $4 billion in taxpayer subsidies we give to the oil and gas companies each year.

If you take away the subsidies from oil and gas companies, then wouldn’t they respond by increasing prices to make up for the lost revenue? There’s good moral and pragmatic reasons to raise taxes on oil and gas companies, but lowering the price of gasoline in the short-term isn’t really one of them.  Am I missing something?

Here’s the video:

James Fallows provides a skeptic’s perspective to the military engagement in Libya.  I agree with him that it would’ve been useful to have had a more thorough public debate.  But I disagree with him (and Dennis Kucinich) that it’s wrong that President Obama acted without explicit Congressional approval.  Per the War Powers Resolution, the President can commit troops for up to 60 days before he legally needs an Authorization of the Use of Military Force from Congress.

Also, in modern times Congress’ constitutional power to declare war is mostly a superficial power considering most of our military engagements are fought against non-state actors.  Congress’ real power stems from their ability to refuse to fund certain military actions.  They could do that today if they wanted to.  Congress’ non-action signals an implicit approval of the President’s actions.

For a few days, I’ve been struggling to understand precisely why the United States has taken a leading role in the internationally sanctioned attacks against Libya.  Muammar Gaddafi’s forces have killed some of the rebels who are attempting to overthrow his government, but similarly deadly force has been used by the governments of Yemen and Bahrain against their respective insurgencies. 

The killings perpetrated by Gaddafi are even arguably defensible; his semi-legitimate government is protecting itself from rebels who are openly and feverishly plotting a revolution.  The Libyans who are demanding an end to dictatorship and the implementation of democracy are surely justified, but when the Gaddafi government is legitimized by international organizations such as the United Nations, it seems odd for the international community to then tell Gaddafi that he can’t defend his government against a violent rebellion.  Additionally, Gaddafi doesn’t pose any sort of threat to the people of the United States.

President Obama’s statement this Friday illuminated exactly why it is so important that we use military force to stop Gaddafi’s attacks against the rebels.

Read More