Follow this blog:
RSS

Obama to Congress: fight oil speculation harder

By | April 17, 2012, 4:00 PM PDT

With his reelection bid reeling from rising gas prices, U.S. president Barack Obama has placed Wall Street oil speculators in his sights, asking Congress to broaden government oversight. It’s smart politics, but is it sincere?

Obama addressed oil speculation from the White House rose garden today with a proposal to add US$52 million in funding to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, raise civil and criminal penalties for bad actors, and giving the Consumer Financial Product Safety Administration (CFTC) broader regulatory powers.

“We can’t afford a situation where some speculators can reap millions while millions of American families get the short end of the stick,” Obama said. Today’s proposal is a follow-up the administration’s Justice Department investigation of speculation that began last April.

Obama is correct is stating that the price you pay at the pump isn’t only determined by supply and demand or what your gas station decides to charge. Wall Street plays some role in how much consumers ultimately pay. Last May, former Exxon Mobil chairman and CEO Rex Tillerson said that oil prices would be significantly lower if normal economic forces dictated prices.

Investment bankers make bets on oil futures, which are contracts between buyers and sellers where the buyer is speculating on whether the price of a barrel of crude oil is going to rise. The buyer receives the barrel at a fixed price, which can be bought on leverage. Obama’s plan would require bankers to pay with more cash.

Massive oil storage facilities cater exclusively to investment banks, which purchase the oil at the price established in the futures contract. If the price of oil rises, the bankers can make a quick and handsome profit.

This practice has drawn the scorn of businesses, consumer advocates, politicians, and unions alike. Critics claim that bankers are making a quick profit at the expense of national interests. House Democrats held a hearing earlier this month where Michael Greenberger, a University of Maryland Law School professor, testified that speculation is what is keeping oil prices above $4 per gallon.

“It is obsessive speculation, which is a fancy word for saying that gamblers wearing Wall Street suits are taken these markets over and are controlling the price and creating investment vehicles that are designed to push the price of oil up,” Greenberger said. There’s also the new reality that oil demand has shifted to Asia.

Oil demand has shifted from West to East, and developed countries use more energy. (Image Credit: Source: Samuel Foucher/Logi Energy LLC)

Oil demand has shifted from West to East, and developed countries use more energy. (Image Credit: Source: Samuel Foucher/Logi Energy LLC)

Not everyone agrees with the White House assessment. House Republicans accused Obama of feigning outrage and questioned the effectiveness of his administration’s DOJ task force over the past year. Presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney defended bankers and deemed the President’s proposal a “gimmick” to “dramatically increase federal regulation.”

I find it very peculiar that the CFTC has not excised that rule making power that it already has. The 2010 Dodd-Frank Financial Reform bill mandated that it create rules to reign in speculation. If the President wanted it done, wouldn’t it have been done already? This is how Obama makes political progressives want to pull their hair out.

The reason could be that the CFTC seems to be unable to do its job. Part of Obama’s request is for data analytics tools to help the CFTC find patterns in its data that might uncover bad behavior - if it does exist. CFTC also lacks the authority to raise margin requirements on traders.

It’s easy to accept that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and CFTC are outgunned, ill equipped (Obama is asking for new computers), and need adequate resources to do their jobs. Regulators are always swimming against the current. If that’s the case, increasing funding is justified, but why not first have the CFTC draft its rules before piling on additional regulation?

This is an election year. It would behoove the president to produce results on gas prices (if possible), but political posturing is a known side effect of campaigning. Do you think Obama is sincere?

Photo: Chuck Kennedy/White House

Related on SmartPlanet:

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

David Worthington

About David Worthington

David Worthington is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

David Worthington

David Worthington

Contributing Editor

David Worthington has written for BetaNews, eWeek, PC World, Technologizer and ZDNet. Formerly, he was a senior editor at SD Times. He holds a degree from Temple University. He is based in New York.

Follow him on Twitter.

David Worthington

David Worthington

David does not have financial holdings that would influence how or what he covers. Occasionally he consults for other companies; should David cover a topic in which a client is involved, he will disclose this fact in his writing. His views do not represent those of ScaleOut Software.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
28
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+7 Votes
+ -
I'm confused
I used to think oil speculation was a big driving force in the price of gasoline. However, there was an article on SmartPlanet earlier this year explaining the causes of high gas prices and that article said that oil speculation had little impact. Given that, I'd say this sounds like political posturing.

Here is a quote from the February article: "So forget about blaming high gasoline and oil prices on speculators, and remember that headline risks are temporary. "
Posted by giagejoe
Updated - 18th Apr 2012
+3 Votes
+ -
Simple answer to a silly qusestion
The very end of the article asks: ' Do you think Obama is sincere?'
You are asking if a politician is sincere. I haven't believed in the sincerity of politicians since I was born. Personally, ever since politics became a job-goal, the system had begun falling apart, and we're reaping the benefits now. Unless there is revolution, or the system is somehow revamped, as a country we're heading down a nasty spiral.
Posted by jonrosen
18th Apr 2012
+3 Votes
+ -
His reelection bid reeling from rising gas prices
And now in an election year he finally cares for the millions of Americans who suffer from the high price of gas. Too little - Too late for this president to care about the American people!
Posted by geofer50
18th Apr 2012
-1 Votes
+ -
You're Right
In February, all I ever read was that the President had absolutely no control over the price of gas. Coincidentally, as the gas prices continued to rise, the polls showed Obama losing ground in the next election.
Now all of a sudden (coincidentally), Obama has a "plan" to bring the price down...
Posted by Jeffp77
20th Apr 2012
+2 Votes
+ -
Complicated
Chris Nelder wrote an article that said that most of the increase in oil prices is mostly due to the increase in oil sales to India and China; the speculators are involved but at the boom and bust phases of pricing. Politically, the rise in energy prices hurts the party in power and the opposition party will take advantage of higher prices even though neither party has the real power to do anything to keep energy prices low for long period of time.

What makes oil prices worse is that political finger pointing and posturing only makes people more aware of the increased prices but does nothing to help. The president could release some oil from the strategic oil reserves to help lower fuel prices but later those reserves would need to be replenished. The real answer to the rise of energy cost is not going to be found in partisan politics.
Posted by sboverie
18th Apr 2012
-1 Votes
+ -
Then how do you explain this?
"Obama addressed oil speculation from the White House rose garden today with a proposal to add US$52 million in funding to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, raise civil and criminal penalties for bad actors, and giving the Consumer Financial Product Safety Administration (CFTC) broader regulatory powers."

Sounds like Obama finally stepped up. If you are saying the president has no power to lower gas prices, then what is this? Just a plain outright lie from Obama?
Posted by Jeffp77
20th Apr 2012
0 Votes
+ -
Oil Speculation
I have watched the debate on this issue for a long time. I have seen how much money the oil companies have made on a $60.00 barrel of oil. I think that is a happy medium where the margin made on a $60.00 barrel of oil is the maximum amount of money that can be made on a barrel of oil and all other money should go to pay down the deet.
Posted by oldwoodenone
18th Apr 2012
+1 Vote
+ -
Considering that high energy prices have always been the stated goal...
....of this administration, it's very difficult to take him the least bit seriously now that he's pandering to those who are forced to pay for his relatively successful agenda. But I can't give Obama all the credit for high gas prices; cheap money policy from the Fed for the last decade and neo-Keynesian fiscal policy of both the Democrats and Republicans can take at least half the blame. Current gas prices as well as the surge in the stock market are more about our inflated dollars than about speculators or real economic growth.

The whole "speculator" thing is a charade. After all, nobody's crying about the natural gas speculators who have recently taken a bath.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
18th Apr 2012
0 Votes
+ -
gasoline prices
The high price of gasoline... well, actually the relatively high price for Americans, is not driven by "speculators". The price of oil is being driven upwards by the increasingly higher demand in the rest of the world, especially in China and India. Gasoline consumption in the U.S. has actually gone down in recent years.

Mr. Obama's statement that the U.S. has 2% of the world's supply but uses 25% of world oil is just plain incorrect. Mr. Obama is posturing for the votes of the "soak the rich" crowd.
Posted by bb_apptix
18th Apr 2012
+3 Votes
+ -
Story not complete.
The Dodd Frank rules for commodity speculation have been frozen by more than one federal judge.Lawsuits were filed not long after the bill was signed and I am sure it will remain in the courts for years because that is where the traders want it.

The facts are, American usage is at 1997 levels and oil production is up all over the world. Our president has decided to drill baby drill, probably to try to help the economy. We had government agency's that have not been expected to do anything for years and I will give this president credit for putting some of them back to work.

Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sak's own 80% of the commodity's market. There is no supply and demand problem. There is a gambling problem.
Posted by TTCW
18th Apr 2012
+2 Votes
+ -
Oil Speculation vs Obama
It was made very clear very early in the Obama White House that he was going to wage a war on the oil and coal industries. He wants a million electric cars on the highway completely not understanding that a huge amount of the electricity in this country comes from coal or from gas fueled generators. And on top of that, do we really need to add more to the trash dumps by placing gas vehicles and spent batteries into the mix? Should we wean ourselves off of fossil fuels? Yes, but only after the technology and the infrastructure permits it. Right now we can increase searching for oil on this half of the world, build the pipelines, etc. This may not solve the immediate problem as we don't have a supply problem - our demand is low. What it will do is scare the speculators into realizing their commodity isn't as precious as they would make us think. All Wall Street markets are vulnerable by simple things. Prices are up and down based on seemingly inconsequential things that are unrelated to you and me. Obama may or may not need the price of gas to come down to get re-elected - that is more up to how people see Mr. Romney as a solution to the perceived problems of this country over what Mr. Obama is currently doing. Personally, I would prefer Donald Trump be in charge of the economy and maybe Mr. Romney may put him in a position to help out. In the end, Bill O'Reilly had a great solution - make the speculators pay for what they buy with real money and make them take delivery of what they buy. That would stop this right now.
Posted by adlab@...
18th Apr 2012
+3 Votes
+ -
Bogus Oil Prices World Wide...
Come on people. Rex Tillerson, Exxon Mobil CEO, said last year that the cost of producing a barrel of oil was around 11 dollars US, at the time a barrel was selling just north of 70 bucks. There's a nasty mix of conditions that currently cause high prices in the "market place"... supply/demand, speculation, greed and profit.

Obama, or any of the candidates running for president for that matter, will do little to change this, because record profits fund record resistance for any changes in the system. It has become impossible to fight that kind of money. We are drilling more oil in the US now than we have in decades, yet oil prices continue to stay at high levels. If we drilled every possible oil field, prices would not come down substantially, if at all.

There are no simple solutions. Many people have suggested that speculators who buy oil should actually pay and hold the oil they help bid up, not just O'Reilly. But how do you get that kind of common sense rule enacted. Good luck getting the GOP to vote for it. I'm sure you would also find plenty of recalcitrant Democrats who would not be in favor of such a rule as well. Big money is a very powerful substance.

No matter who is President or which group has a majority in Congress, it's the dollar that rules supreme. Money interests have been gaining government favor for a long time, and now, we definitely have the best government that money can buy, so good luck bringing oil prices down.
Posted by MaineBikah
18th Apr 2012
+2 Votes
+ -
Not sure on oil, but gasoline used to have that rule.
Prior to 1990 the only people who could buy gas from refineries were people who had the storage capacity for what they were buying. The only people who bought gasoline from the refineries were large industrial users and distributors.

The dirty secret now is that about 60 percent of all the gasoline sold in the US passes ownership through the hands of a speculator between the refinery and the pump.

Depending on the state you live in, as much as 20 cents on the dollar in the price you see at the pump is pure profit to these speculators. They have little or no overhead because they own no trucks or storage tanks and can run their business with a handful of staff. They are simply shuffling ownership paperwork and making money. An act that was illegal prior to 1990.

With gas hitting $5.19 per gallon today at the gas station near the Watergate hotel, this fact is right in the President and Congresses faces.

The answer is simple. Go back to the pre 1990 laws. Gas prices would drop by up to 60 cents a gallon over night.
Posted by Hates Idiots
18th Apr 2012
-1 Votes
+ -
Bogus prices...
There are two things I know - gas prices were this high before the last election and they were about half as much after Obama got elected. Gas prices most likely had a major influence in the housing market and the loss of so many jobs. When you have to decide whether you can put gas in your car to get to work or pay the mortgage, the house lost. When virtually ALL commodities are driven, flown or shipped by fuel engines, the cost of shipping sometimes exceeded the cost of goods and it is happening all over. When gas prices rise - everything rises. When it is more expensive to drive to work to get off welfare or unemployment than to stay on it - it's a major problem. They figured it out over three years ago -they can do it again. It becomes more and more obvious we shouldn't have bailed out Wall Street. I don't see how much worse, if at all, our situation would be if we hadn't.

Secondly, there are 42 gallons of oil in a barrel. They say the cost of gas is what it costs for one gallon plus one dollar. So, to get to $2 a gallon of gas, the cost of a barrel of oil has to be $42. I think $50 is reasonable for the oil producers and to hell with the speculators.
Posted by adlab@...
18th Apr 2012
0 Votes
+ -
Typo?
"Michael Greenberger...testified that speculation is what is keeping oil prices above $4 per gallon" should have a much bigger number & "per barrel" or "gasoline prices" rather than "oil prices"
Posted by theotherwill
18th Apr 2012
0 Votes
+ -
The big problem is the price of Gas not Oil
Even at $126 a barrel, the price of gas should be $4 per gallon ($126 / 42gallons) + $1 for processing.

the Oil companies collude by selling the gas into a pool that they all then buy from, the pool established level but high prices. The only other industries that work like this are all governmetn run services. Except health care and look how that works. If you have money no problem, if you don't then you get screwed.
Posted by CharlesG1970
18th Apr 2012
-1 Votes
+ -
$4 gas
The "golden rule of gas prices" probably doesn't include state and local taxes. From one source I just saw - and it may differ drastically from your area... in Houston $3.85 is about right for regular. In Chicago it is closer to $4.25 or more. Cheapest is in Oklahoma, most expensive is Hawaii - how much do they love Obama now?
Posted by adlab@...
18th Apr 2012
0 Votes
+ -
Downtown DC follows that trend.
Gas hit $5.19 a gallon yesterday. In part driven by local taxes.
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 19th Apr 2012
0 Votes
+ -
All I know is
gas won't go back down past 3$. As gas prices started rising - people kept buying. It wasn't until about 4$/gallon that the govt. heard the cry of the people and started getting involved. As long oil companies think we will settle for 3$Gal of gas - the price will never get lower.

We all talk so much about alternate fuels. Bio-fuels for instance. Soon as we started seeing such items made from corn and soybeans - many started complaining about the how the cost of Corn and soybeans "could" rise in the supermarkets. Some talk of how expensive such fuel will be. The cost of the fuel itself is NOT expensive. What IS costly is the changing of the factory lines to produce engines that can run on such fuels. What is costly (so says the oil industry) is the cost of synthesizing it compared to Oil Based fuels. OF COURSE THEY SAY THAT. The facilities for dealing with oil are already built and in use. What IS expensive to the Oil producers will be building the plants to turn the corn/soybean products into bio-fuel. They would pass the entire cost of every penny to the customers instead of using profit from Oil/Gasoline to pay for it themselves. That is the biggest part of the lie. The car manufacturers and oil industry doesn't want to pay for any of the research and development it will take to produce the bio-fuels and vehicles that will use it.
Even so------
Isn't it interesting that all Indy 500 race cars will have bio- fuel engines starting this year? The technology is out there and already in use folks. Don't be fooled by those that tell you price is too high for bio-fuels or that they won't power high performance vehicles.
Posted by llandau@...
Updated - 18th Apr 2012
-1 Votes
+ -
All you know is... beans
Using a natural food source for fuel is the most ignorant thing someone has come up - oh wait, maybe it is the representatives of the states that grow corn and soybeans. A) it not only raises the price of food (including the feeding of the cows, chickens, pigs they go to, plus all the corn syrup, cereal and other products humans eat. 2) it means manufacturer have to build resistant engines because of the damage the slop does to them and iii) whatever difference you see in the cost per gallon of pure gas vs adulterated corn fed gas is lost in the loss of mileage. It's like cigarettes - everyone thought making them "light" with less tar and nicotine would save lives, but those addicted just smoke more. The Indy cars and whomever sanctions this kind of stuff just go along to make sure they keep their industry alive. The cars won't perform as well, but they don't need to as the cars can go much faster than the track will allow as it is. They have electric cars that are pretty darned fast, the problem is you have to charge them every 60 miles - for about 4 - 12 hours depending on the current/amps/ or whatever. Nothing on this planet is as powerful and as efficient as gasoline for producing power - at least that is safe to use in a car. Someday, they will probably slice off some chips from leftover uranium rods from the nuclear power plants to use in cars. Then we won't have to worry which state has to bury it.
Posted by adlab@...
18th Apr 2012
+1 Vote
+ -
You're forgetting something
Over the last few decades, and still today, the GOVERNMENT is paying farmers to NOT produce crops. Farms have been all but going under due to some of this kind of thing. Now not all farms are set to harvest all types of produce, BUT, a decent if not large chunk of biofuels from corn and such, could easily be produced by these farmers, and easily not cause any depletion in foodstuffs either for animals, or for humans.
Posted by jonrosen
19th Apr 2012
0 Votes
+ -
well what choice some of us have?
manny, and I mean manny people work at places where you can get to only by car. I am one of this people.
sure I can get to my work using other means, but compare
20-25 min of driving in the morning OR 1.5-2 hours getting there by public transportation (and this is not an overstatement)
here is the numbers for me to get to and from work:
DATA: I start work @ 7:00AM
end it @ 4:30PM

method 1 (driving)
I am lazy a bity so to be ontime I get up @ 5:45AM and get out of house 6:20 the latest. (get up / get dressed / eat breackfast etc.)
get in my car and drive for 20-30 min 40 min the most I have ever did in last 2 years.

method 2 (public transport)
based on where I leave and PT schedule I nned to take 2(two) trains and a bus and then wolk to get to my work
average time around 1.5+ hours under best condition.
so I have to leave home @5AM and will get back @7PM

so what choice do I have?
Posted by vbp1
Updated - 19th Apr 2012
0 Votes
+ -
You're lucky
With my work, it's ~48 mile commute and there IS no public transportation between the two. The drive tends to be between 45-60 min each way, and that's going against the flow of traffic. I could cut it down to maybe a 40 mile commute, WITH traffic, and that would take even longer, and waste more fuel with the stop-and-go of rush-hour traffic.
Posted by jonrosen
19th Apr 2012
-1 Votes
+ -
Food for fuel is dumb.
Look at the spike in food prices since the ethanol mandate was put in place by Bush.

Obama could have helped the average American by not renewing the mandate a few years ago, but he extended and expanded it. Further making corn and corn related food products more expensive.
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 19th Apr 2012
0 Votes
+ -
Speculation
Isn't is surprising that Mr. Worthington says in his article "If the price of oil rises, the bankers can make a quick and handsome profit." He forgets to mention that if the price of oil declines, and it certainly has had its ups and downs, the bankers will make a quick and devistating LOSS.
Posted by jimofil
18th Apr 2012
0 Votes
+ -
Story Not Complete?
Oil production is in major decline in the North Sea, North Slope, Cantarell, and Ghawar fields, the biggest conventional producers in the world.

So Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs (not Sak's - that is a clothing store) own 80% of the "commodity's market"? The total storage capacity at Cushing OK is a little over 40m bbls, less than half of one day's world consumption. Where are those evil Wall Streeters stashing their oil?
Posted by lexchis
19th Apr 2012
-1 Votes
+ -
Speculators
I have yet to see more innovation, a new product, a better product, more jobs, a happier customer, more community benefit created by speculators.
All I see are uncertainty and higher costs.
Perhaps the correct spelling for speculators should be:
p-a-r-a-s-i-t-e-s.
Interesting times .......
Posted by da philster
20th Apr 2012
-1 Votes
+ -
Do tell me then why natural gas is so cheap right now...
...since there are just as many "speculators" in that market as well. How can that be?
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
21st Apr 2012
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!