« The Bumblers | Main | 2006 and local blogs »

November 22, 2005

The Delahunt-Chavez deal: what's the problem, exactly?

CitgosignWhat a fascinating story this is.  Congressman Bill Delahunt (D-Quincy) has personally cut a deal with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to provide millions of gallons of low-cost heating oil, to be distributed through Citgo (which is a subsidiary of the Venezuelan state-owned petroleum company) and handled here by Citizens Energy, Joe Kennedy's outfit that for years has been helping poor area residents find affordable heating oil.  The back-room goings-on behind this deal are a tale worth reading.

Sounds great, right?  Some people don't seem to think so.  Chavez, of course, is not exactly on the Bush administration's A-list - he's the guy who publicly called Bush a "crazy man" and an "assassin," and his distinctly left-leaning government is fairly tight with Fidel Castro.  And so Steve Johnson of the right-wing Heritage Foundation has piously proclaimed that deal-cutting with someone like Chavez "is not something I'd like my congressman to be doing."

BushsaudiLet's take a moment for a reality check.  It's not like we don't do business with Venezuela already - they're our fourth-largest supplier of petroleum products, and they own the omnipresent Citgo.  And who's number 1?  Why our good friends the Saudis, of course.  Oh, but of course, we would never cut deals with them.

Mr. Johnson, I assume, earns a nice salary from the Heritage Foundation, and is able to pay the heating bills on his pleasant home in Silver Spring, Md. without thinking twice about it.  Apparently, it's more important to him and his ilk that foreign leaders who don't like the Bush administration be easily portrayable as bad, bad, bad, than it is that low-income Americans be able to heat their homes.  Or maybe he doesn't think the private sector should have any role at all in helping poor people with their heating bills - rather like the CEO of a different oil company, ConocoPhillips, who told Congress not long ago: "We feel it's not a good precedent for one industry to fund a program as such.  We think that's a responsibility of the government."  Oh, but whoops, the government has seriously underfunded its principal program to help poor people buy heating oil, and Senate Republicans recently blocked an effort to bring funding up to authorized levels.  So, Mr. Johnson, what's your solution?

If Hugo Chavez wants to bolster his image with the American public by selling them cheap heating oil through Citgo, I have a hard time seeing what the problem is.  Call it petro-diplomacy if you want.  At least his government doesn't underwrite Islamic extremism.  Joe Kennedy has it right: "You start parsing which countries' politics we're going to feel comfortable with, and only buying oil from them, then there are going to be a lot of people not driving their cars and not staying warm this winter. There are a lot of countries that have much worse records than Venezuela."

Anyway, so Chavez doesn't like the way Bush is running the country?  Big deal.  He's not alone.

Posted by David at 04:00 PM in Massachusetts | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83456d93f69e200e55078b80d8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Delahunt-Chavez deal: what's the problem, exactly?:

Comments

I don't see what the problem is. We're talkign about non-profits (not gov't agencies) brokering a deal with a legal trading partner. After that, folks can STFU.

It's not like the deal was brokered with a state government, nor with a country who is off-limits (say, Cuba or somesuch).

What's the problem again? The controversy seems rather underwhelming.

Posted by: stomv | Nov 22, 2005 4:37:04 PM

I don't get why a Congressman was engaging in foreign policy? I don't have a problem with a non-profit brokering a deal, but I don't understand why Delahunt was involved.

Posted by: Abby | Nov 22, 2005 6:12:31 PM

Good for Delahunt. I have my criticism of Chavez, but he's certainly better than Castro, who is cerrtainly better than the Saudi royal family and numberous other national leaders tha the US likes. Of course the Heritage Foundation dcoesn't like it, but that almost argues in the deal's favor--generally, if the Heritage Foundation likes something, I'm a bit concerned if I like it too.

Posted by: Matt | Nov 22, 2005 6:40:01 PM

Abby-how is getting reduced-price oil "engaging in foreign policy?" i don't think it is. simply put, it is getting reduced-price oil to make available for folks who might otherwise be very cold during the winter months in new england. i hope my congressman, mike capuano (who a group of us are meeting with in the a.m. to discuss universal health care efforts) will be the next to broker a similar deal that benefits ordinary americans.
Matt- Ditto (except what are your ciriticisms of Chavez?)

Posted by: Ann (at DefendHealth) | Nov 22, 2005 11:02:21 PM

Well I think it's just BRILLIANT. I mean, the Feds haven't gone out of their way to help New England's heating oil crunch, so we'll just take care of our own, thank you very much.

I don't, however, think that the Honorable Mr. Delahunt was being *completely* altruistic in his efforts. It's not quite dabbling in foreign policy, but he is brokering deals with a governement that is openly hostile to the Almighty One (Bush). However, it's completely within the bounds of state's rights and I think Mr. Delahunt will be getting some great publicity mileage out of this.

Actually, I've listened to inteviews with Chavez. I don't think he's a bad person at all. In fact, he doesn't sound any more hostile towards Bush than, say, the majority of us here in New England. He's frustrated and angry.... the only difference is we squirm when a foreign dignitary calls the president a hateful war monger, but we nod our heads in agreement when our friends say it :-)

Posted by: Frank | Nov 23, 2005 8:24:51 AM

Ann, in response to your question, I'm generally wary of strong heads of state, and I think that Chavez revels in his own cult of personality. I support the majority of his policies and his outspokenness, but this sort of leadership can sometimes work against building strong grassroots leaders and democracy.

Posted by: Matt | Nov 24, 2005 2:49:50 PM

OT: Ann, how did the meeting with Capuano go? Anything to report?

Posted by: Charley on the MTA | Nov 24, 2005 7:30:02 PM

Just understand that sending money to Chavez means more weapons in the region, more instability, more war, more death. If you're comfortable with that then go for it, by all means.

Posted by: Ken | Nov 29, 2005 10:18:54 PM

More death? Cool - we're pro-death, right? Let's go for it!

Seriously, we're already spending money hand over fist to buy the guy's oil - he owns Citgo, for God's sake. Should we take down the Citgo sign? Should we be buying oil only from countries whose policies we like? Like I've said several times, Chavez surely isn't the worst of the lot on that score - and anyway, if we were only to buy from nice countries, we'd be paying ten bucks a gallon.

Plus, by cutting a deal where Chavez lowers the price, aren't we actually paying him less than we otherwise would? Doesn't that mean less death?

Posted by: David | Nov 29, 2005 10:28:20 PM

Post a comment