Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Key Dem says higher gas tax should be on the table for highways
The Hill ^ | May 25, 2011 | Keith Laing

Posted on 05/25/2011 12:52:54 PM PDT by Kaslin

Increasing the federal gas tax should be considered to pay for a new transportation bill, a key Democrat said Tuesday.

Rep. Nick Rahall (W.Va.), the ranking Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said President Obama should be more specific about how he plans to fund a long-term transportation spending bill, and that raising the gas tax should be one of the options.

"We've not had an increase in the gas tax since 1993," Rahall said Tuesday during a speech at the Transportation Construction Coalition's 10th annual Washington fly-in.

"Cars are more efficient," Rahall said. "They get better mileage."

But with gas prices near $4 a gallon, Rahall also acknowledged the unlikelihood that the political will exists in Washington for any proposal to raise the gas tax to get serious traction.

"I know the political suicide, bludgeoning, any other other bad word you want to use" that would come from the proposal, he said to laughter at the Transportation Construction Coalition meeting.

Congress is gearing up to begin work on the so-called Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, or SAFETEA-LU. A current short-term version of the bill, which funds highways and public transportation, is in place until September, but transportation advocates want a longer six-year bill.

The Obama administration has proposed spending $556 billion on transportation over that period, but hasn't yet said how it expects to pay for that spending.

The GOP has criticized the Obama administration for not suggesting how it would pay for its proposed version of the SAFETEA-LU bill, and Rahall on Tuesday said he agreed the president should be more specific.

"We need the administration to come on board to help us with the financing issue," he said.

Republicans in both chambers have indicated that they do not want to spend as much as President Obama has proposed on the new transportation bill, regardless of how it's paid for.

One possibility, Rahall said, is indexing the gas tax to the inflation rate.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: democrats; energy; gasoline; gasprices; gastax; govtabuse; liberalfascism; liberals; progressives; tax; taxcheatparty; taxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

1 posted on 05/25/2011 12:52:55 PM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

All Dems are mentally ill. Look at this great clip of O’Reilly owning Barney Flank for that famous quote about FNM and FRE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bijtBkKQwY8&feature=related

Everyone spews about how O’Reilly interrupts, but with Blamey Flank, he sputters on and on and on and you HAVE to interrupt him once he gets started.


2 posted on 05/25/2011 12:55:22 PM PDT by AlanGreenSpam (Obama: The First 'American IDOL' President - sponsored by Chicago NeoCom Thugs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
raising the gas tax should be one of the options

I am okay with it being considered as an option. Let us make a national referendum vote with the sponsors names clearly displayed during the next election.

3 posted on 05/25/2011 12:56:36 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Yeah, that should go over like a ton of bricks with $4+ gas. Typical dem solution though, raise taxes to pay for more spending...
4 posted on 05/25/2011 12:56:38 PM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I just wonder if gas has kept up with inflation. I remember that in 1995, I could put 10 bucks into the gas tank for 1/2 a tank. Today I pay 20 bucks for the same 1/2 tank. But in 1995, I was paying a buck for milk and today I am paying 2 dollars for milk. So is gas really that much more expensive as anything else. I think gas is just an easy thing to complain about.


5 posted on 05/25/2011 12:57:29 PM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlanGreenSpam

So... Let’s see... Exxon gets ten cents a gallon, is said to be raping the public and should have their tax breaks pulled since they’re reaping the profits. The Federal Government gets 18 cents a gallon, and it’s a crisis since it’s not gone up since 1993.

So the ‘liberal true’ part is that Exxon shouldn’t be making a profit and the feds should get at least an extra dime for each gallon of gas... Love liberal thinking.


6 posted on 05/25/2011 12:59:02 PM PDT by kingu (Legislators should read what they write!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Then they’ll just spend it!


7 posted on 05/25/2011 1:00:01 PM PDT by b4its2late (Ignorance allows liberalism to prosper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If we increase the federal gas tax AND refuse to drill for oil, no one will be driving.

Dunce.


8 posted on 05/25/2011 1:00:37 PM PDT by RexBeach (If two people know, it's not a secret.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Inflation is certainly the core problem. However, we’ve done several things to reduce the supply of oil with our own dumb policies.


9 posted on 05/25/2011 1:01:37 PM PDT by CommieCutter (Promote Liberal Extinction: Support gay marriage and abortion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Since when do they use the gas tax money for highways?


10 posted on 05/25/2011 1:02:46 PM PDT by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

How ‘bout a tax on every bill put forward by the politicians on Capitol Hill. I know the politicians wouldn’t mind putting out a little of their own money for that. Kind of a “sponsor” tax.


11 posted on 05/25/2011 1:02:51 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer ("...that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,..")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

That is a fine idea.


12 posted on 05/25/2011 1:03:05 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
"We've not had an increase in the gas tax since 1993," Rahall said Tuesday during a speech at the Transportation Construction Coalition's 10th annual Washington fly-in.

True. But this week in may 1993 the gas price was $1.106 average across the U.S. This week in 2011 it's $3.849. That's an increase of 248%. An an annualized basis that's an increase of 7.2% which is easily double the rate of inflation. and this is all thanks you you democratic morons policy of no new oil exploration/drilling/pumping. You've done quite enough damage already.

13 posted on 05/25/2011 1:03:27 PM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The Dems are nothing but a one trick pony. Raise taxes is all they know. How bout this: CUT SPENDING, CUT SPENDING, CUT SPENDING, CUT SPENDING. And if that doesn’t work CUT SPENDING.


14 posted on 05/25/2011 1:03:37 PM PDT by Graneros ("Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Here’s a crazy idea. We could stop forcing drivers to pay for mass transportation and other crap.


15 posted on 05/25/2011 1:04:34 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Inflation is certainly the core problem. However, we’ve done several things to reduce the supply of oil with our own dumb policies.


16 posted on 05/25/2011 1:05:40 PM PDT by CommieCutter (Promote Liberal Extinction: Support gay marriage and abortion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Well if the Feds actually spent gas tax on roads instead of spending it on rail and other things then they would not have to raise gas taxes.


17 posted on 05/25/2011 1:07:03 PM PDT by Rogle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Nick (“I am also a supporter of Hezbollah.”) Rahall? While nominally a Presbyterian, Nicky is of Lebanese descent and chaired the vile “Arab Americans for Obama Campaign” in 2008.


18 posted on 05/25/2011 1:07:03 PM PDT by re_nortex (DP...that's what I like about Texas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The old bait and switch. Just pay a little more tax and we’ll build you some really nice roads they promise. What they deliver is another department of bureaucrats passing regulations for tire companies to make their products more pot hole proof.


19 posted on 05/25/2011 1:07:28 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

You make Willie Green sad.


20 posted on 05/25/2011 1:08:33 PM PDT by WOBBLY BOB ( "I don't want the majority if we don't stand for something"- Jim Demint)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

To a Democrat, the solution to every problem is a tax increase.

Bad weather? (raise taxes)

Bad economy? (raise taxes)

Good economy? (raise taxes)

A Comet headed for Earth? (raise taxes)


21 posted on 05/25/2011 1:08:45 PM PDT by KoRn (Department of Homeland Security, Certified - "Right Wing Extremist")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlanGreenSpam

I’ve seen that when it happens. O’Reilly really lit into Barney Frank, and rightly so


22 posted on 05/25/2011 1:09:17 PM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I’d say yes IF:

1. New judges and lawyers are hired to prosecute all house and senate sleazebags, along with the scum-bag-in-chief for possible felonies.
2. New prisons are constructed (really ugly and uncomfortable ones) are constructed to house them until their execution.
3. I am hired to run the guillotine.


23 posted on 05/25/2011 1:09:41 PM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Hmmm, please allow me sufficient time to thoroughly and carefully consider this proposal before giving a response. OK, I’m ready. NO!


24 posted on 05/25/2011 1:11:26 PM PDT by savedbygrace (But God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The problem with all this is Congress is irresponsible when it comes to financial matters. They’ve had the money and could have made the repairs/upgrades. Instead they spent it on entitlements. Now they want to force us to pay again. I just don’t think so. Too bad this fact is missed by 99% of the voters and 100% of the media.


25 posted on 05/25/2011 1:11:48 PM PDT by 556x45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If this is the case, they should show - TO THE PENNY - how the existing gas taxes have been spent, in order to justify that they are being good stewards of our money.


26 posted on 05/25/2011 1:12:49 PM PDT by MortMan (What disease did cured ham used to have?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WOBBLY BOB

The people mover in Detroit is rider funded at a rate of about 7% and mass transit systems are considered successful if they’re rider funded at 25% or more.

Transportation money pays $20 million for a system of sensors in San Fransisco parking lots so drivers can find parking with a phone ap. Seattle likes the SF system so much that they’re now asking for funds.


27 posted on 05/25/2011 1:14:57 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Rogle
Well if the Feds actually spent gas tax on roads instead of spending it on rail and other things then they would not have to raise gas taxes.

It would be interesting to remove all substitutive "assistance" (taxpayer money) from train, local light rail and bus service so everyone had to pay full price for a ticket.

Ten bucks says "racism" would be in the first sentence of the resulting wails and moans.

.

28 posted on 05/25/2011 1:17:38 PM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The Federal transportation expenses from the gasoline tax should be reduced to expenses for the “U.S.” designated highways (they are “interstate”), the Interstate Highway System highways, and bridges and tunnels that span state borders along those highways.

Use of Federal gasoline taxes for any other purpose should be eliminated. Most likely that would mean it should be possible to lower Federal gasoline taxes.

The states will complain, but if they address their own state’s priorities, they can improve the priorities of how their own gasoline taxes are spent, and, if it is truly needed, raise them.

The state parties, Democrat and GOP, run this fiction on their state’s taxpayers. They campaign on keeping the state taxes low and getting gifts from Uncle Sam to help do that; as if, in the end, the money is not coming out of their own taxpayers pockets anyway. It’s a scam.


29 posted on 05/25/2011 1:19:49 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLI
It would be interesting to remove all substitutive "assistance" (taxpayer money) from train, local light rail and bus service so everyone had to pay full price for a ticket.

I've tried to argue that with liberals who then complain that their taxes shouldn't have to pay for roads and freight rail. Apparently consumer goods are delivered to their local stores by magical elves.
30 posted on 05/25/2011 1:25:01 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: kingu
Exxon gets ten cents a gallon, is said to be raping the public and should have their tax breaks pulled since they’re reaping the profits. The Federal Government gets 18 cents a gallon, and it’s a crisis since it’s not gone up since 1993.

Actually, Exxon's take - it's net profit - is more like 8.75 cents on a dollar; or at $4.00 a gallon, more like 35 cents a gallon.

But, your point is still a good one, in as much as the total state and federal tax take on a gallon is, on average, over 35 cents a gallon. It averages 49.5 cents nationally, between a high of 61.3 cents in the West to a low of 38.5 cents in the South.

Download the May 2011 Summary at:

http://www.api.org/statistics/fueltaxes/

31 posted on 05/25/2011 1:36:40 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Baraq and several members of his cabinet are on record as saying European levels of fuel prices are desireable.

If Republicans can’t hammer them with this, we deserve 4 more years of Obama.


32 posted on 05/25/2011 1:40:57 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Stop siphoning our gas tax to pay for crap that has nothing to do with roads and there will be plenty of money to pay for highways.

Come to think of it, why IS there a federal gas tax anyway? Shouldn't highways be a state responsiblity?

33 posted on 05/25/2011 1:49:10 PM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Last couple of years, they dug up all the major roads in Chicago, even roads that were in good condition, supposedly to spend the stimulus money on infrastructure. They even dug out concrete roads that were in excellent condition in my sub-division and replaced them with tar that will need heavy maintenance every few years. You couldn’t go anywhere in Chicago without hitting road constructions. I thought we were done with infrastructure spending in Chicago. Apparently not.


34 posted on 05/25/2011 2:03:48 PM PDT by kp2hot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch
True. But this week in may 1993 the gas price was $1.106 average across the U.S. This week in 2011 it's $3.849. That's an increase of 248%. An an annualized basis that's an increase of 7.2% which is easily double the rate of inflation. and this is all thanks you you democratic morons policy of no new oil exploration/drilling/pumping. You've done quite enough damage already.

I get you point, however:

The recent uptick in gasoline prices began around 2008-2009, when the oil markets started boosting prices above $100 a barrel. Those market changes had a number of causes, but the biggest among them were "world" demand - China, India, Brazil etc - vs world supply, and monetary - a cheaper dollar tends to raise the world price of globally sold commodities priced in dollars.

That still leaves your point about greater U.S. exploration and production. And yes, on that point you are right. The U.S. has identifiable additional reserves that investment in exploration and production could bring to market. The question is - at what cost?

The Saudi's sell as much oil as they do for two reasons - they have a lot and most of what is in production now is not expensive to get to.

As much as the U.S. has reserves it has not tapped, they will not come to market at the cost that Saudi light crude does.

I think the U.S. can get more oil products from domestic resources than it does today. The cost of doing that and world energy markets at the time that material comes to market will determine whether or not gasoline prices will have any downward pressure from that, in addition to the domestic economic benefit of more energy dollars staying in the domestic economy, instead of paying for imports (as much).

Someone smarter than you and I could make economic predictions about the price of gasoline based on what is known today. I can't, and I don't assume that if we just get more domestic oil production we will necessarily get a lower price in gasoline. I think getting more domestic production is worth doing regardless of the price of gasoline; if only to reduce imports and be more secure with regard to our energy sources.

35 posted on 05/25/2011 2:04:17 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch
True. But this week in may 1993 the gas price was $1.106 average across the U.S. This week in 2011 it's $3.849. That's an increase of 248%. An an annualized basis that's an increase of 7.2% which is easily double the rate of inflation. and this is all thanks you you democratic morons policy of no new oil exploration/drilling/pumping. You've done quite enough damage already.

I get you point, however:

The recent uptick in gasoline prices began around 2008-2009, when the oil markets started boosting prices above $100 a barrel. Those market changes had a number of causes, but the biggest among them were "world" demand - China, India, Brazil etc - vs world supply, and monetary - a cheaper dollar tends to raise the world price of globally sold commodities priced in dollars.

That still leaves your point about greater U.S. exploration and production. And yes, on that point you are right. The U.S. has identifiable additional reserves that investment in exploration and production could bring to market. The question is - at what cost?

The Saudi's sell as much oil as they do for two reasons - they have a lot and most of what is in production now is not expensive to get to.

As much as the U.S. has reserves it has not tapped, they will not come to market at the cost that Saudi light crude does.

I think the U.S. can get more oil products from domestic resources than it does today. The cost of doing that and world energy markets at the time that material comes to market will determine whether or not gasoline prices will have any downward pressure from that, in addition to the domestic economic benefit of more energy dollars staying in the domestic economy, instead of paying for imports (as much).

I think that greater domestic exploration and production would be a good thing, regardless of what would happen to domestic gasoline prices; if only to reduce imports and be more secure in our energy sources.

I think the Dims attacks on our own oil companies is rooted in the anti-capitalist indoctrination so many of them have been infused with by America's Marxists and the Libs the Marxists "educated".

36 posted on 05/25/2011 2:19:31 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
They don't need a higher gas tax. They need to quit wasting money by forcing "prevailing wages" to drive the cost of labor up. They need to stop diverting gas tax to pay for BS like "light rail" that does nothing to maintain the roads traveled by the people who paid the tax on the fuel.
37 posted on 05/25/2011 2:28:00 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

So, the Dems say our REWARD for reducing gasoline consumption is PUNISHMENT??


38 posted on 05/25/2011 2:33:24 PM PDT by 2harddrive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boomop1
That was the original purpose of the motor fuel taxes, to pay for the roads and bridges they used and it worked well for a while...until it was diverted to pay for every wet dream social engineering idea that was dreamed up.

We don't need an increase in the gas tax, we just need to use it to finance road and bridge maintenance and construction, not mass transit, not bike paths, not demonstration projects, not to help balance the budget, JUST ON ROADS AND BRIDGES.

39 posted on 05/25/2011 2:34:40 PM PDT by Rumplemeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Taxes, taxes, taxes.

You make it, we take it.

Pay up - someone has too. :D


40 posted on 05/25/2011 2:46:53 PM PDT by Tzimisce (Never forget that the American Revolution began when the British tried to disarm the colonists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin

Repeal of Davis Bacon (pork for unions) won’t happen unless/until we have a conservative house,senate and prez.


41 posted on 05/25/2011 2:47:39 PM PDT by WOBBLY BOB ( "I don't want the majority if we don't stand for something"- Jim Demint)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Rumplemeyer

considering the massive taxes paid by just the transportation industry themselves our infrastructure should all be high tech.
2290, Universal Carrier Fees, Commercial Activity Taxes, license fees, 12% excise taxes on new equipment/tires/parts etc. The Fed puts Enron to shame.


42 posted on 05/25/2011 2:52:38 PM PDT by griswold3 (Character is destiny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; Clintonfatigued

What’s Rahall smoking? He’s one of the top GOP targets in 2012. What could be his advantage in advocating this?

Contrast this with Joe Manchin who put a bullet through a copy of the Dem’s Cap and Tax bill last election cycle.

I guess without Byrd’s seniority anymore, WV’s not getting the lion’s share of federal transportation funds any longer. The roads must be getting pretty rough down there.


43 posted on 05/25/2011 2:56:16 PM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin


44 posted on 05/25/2011 3:04:53 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Hey, come on - haven’t Americans yet realized that EVERYTHING they thought belonged to them in fact belongs to the Marxists in Washington?

Let’s get with the program, America!


45 posted on 05/25/2011 3:16:54 PM PDT by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

Their biggest profit centers are in lubricants; does the 8% number come from a extrapolation of a quarterly report? Chevron was extremely solid for a number of years for profit on gasoline - 2.5% net margin (or 10 cents at 4.00)


46 posted on 05/25/2011 4:00:53 PM PDT by kingu (Legislators should read what they write!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: KoRn

Hines Ward winning DWTS? (raise taxes)


47 posted on 05/25/2011 4:41:09 PM PDT by getarope (I came here to chew bubble gum and kick ass, and I am all out of bubble gum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: kingu

Well you are correct.

My figure represented their corporate net profit, not the net profit on gasoline by itself. I have never dug, as you did, deeper into their net income by the different lines of business. Thanks for setting that straight.

And, as correct as you are about that, it shows that even if they produced and sold LESS gasoline from oil, their net profit - as a % of revenue - might actually be higher.


48 posted on 05/25/2011 4:43:35 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I’m not feeling especially generous tonight toward democrat fascists and commies. There should be a list of offenses that democrats are automatically hanged for.

This is one.


49 posted on 05/25/2011 4:59:12 PM PDT by sergeantdave (The democrat party is a seditious organization that must be outlawed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

“Someone smarter than you and I could make economic predictions about the price of gasoline based on what is known today. I can’t, and I don’t assume that if we just get more domestic oil production we will necessarily get a lower price in gasoline. I think getting more domestic production is worth doing regardless of the price of gasoline; if only to reduce imports and be more secure with regard to our energy sources.”

I agree with the general sense of your analysis but you are not clear about the volatility in oil and gasoline prices. Oil prices have been volatile for decades with periods of increased demand pushing up the price and then falling demand and increased supply pushing the price back down. The market is relatively tight so rather small changes in demand and supply can have non linear impact on prices.

Many individuals argue that increased domestic exploration will not impact prices or not impact prices much. If all producers behaved in this manner, world production would be stuck at 1980 levels. With 1980s level production, the worldwide economic activity would be sharply lower. Increased production has allowed increased demand, vital to increased economic activity. Thankfully, every country except the US allows its domestic oil industry to explore and produce more.


50 posted on 05/25/2011 6:13:08 PM PDT by businessprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson