It’s not George W. Bush alone, and it’s not greedy oil company executives alone, either. Please check your knee-jerk political jingoism at the door.
There are two economic forces here, supply and demand. On the supply side of the equation, well, there’s instability in the Middle East and political turmoil in Venezuela and Nigeria. Those are among our major sources of oil. Because of that instability and turmoil, getting the oil out of those countries to be refined is a dangerous proposition, and so it costs more to produce.
On the demand side, China is industrializing as rapidly as it can, and it needs both energy and petroleum products (plastics) to do that. China is willing to pay in the neighborhood of $100 a barrel for as much oil as can be provided, and so anyone who also wants oil needs to beat China’s price.
Further, the American dollar is plummeting, because of our extensive debt load, both collectively as a nation and personally. Because of that, $1 doesn’t buy as much oil as it did a year ago.
And the “record profits”—that’s record amounts, not record percentages, because the oil companies are selling record amounts of oil and gas to consumers.
So how do we fix this? We find alternative sources of energy, and sell them to China. This will cause the demand for oil as energy to drop significantly. We find ways of bringing stability to the Middle East and to Venezuela (hint: rattling sabers and making important proclamations about the axis of evil is the wrong thing to do). Drilling for more oil may be a short-term solution, but hey, that’s the sort of thing that oil company profits pay for, and you’re so opposed to those.
You can blame Bush for some of the instability in the Middle East and for some of the debt load that the country is under. But honestly, every person who expects his or her representatives to bring federal money home to the district is guilty, because it only takes 218 votes in favor of deficit spending to make it law.