These are happy times for executives of big oil. While the average household budget reels under the weight of the price of oil at the pump and rising prices elsewhere because of the rising cost of energy, the oil companies and their executives are reeling in record profits while their CEO’s earn record benefits. Read the stats here.

Yesterday oil executives representing the five top oil companies (Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Shell Oil Co., and BP America) were summoned to testify before the Senate Energy and Commerce Committee to, as The Washington Post put it (on page D-10), “defend their high profits and spikes in gasoline prices and to beat back calls for punitive action.” If you were expecting a combative session with our Senators asking tough questions, demanding straight answers, and threatening strong action, well than yesterday just wasn’t your day.


The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank probably described the session best in a commentary, “oil and Grilling Don’t Mix,” (also on page D-10) accompanying the hard news piece.

Majority Leader Bill Frist started things off, announcing that the hearing would expose “those who abuse the free-enterprise system to advantage themselves and their businesses at the expense of all Americans.”

And the hearing did not lack its fair share of contentiousness. Unfortunately it was not directed toward the oil executives:

When Energy Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska, $102,190 [in oil and gas company contributions over the past five years]) announced that he would not require the executives to give their testimony under oath, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash., $9,400) asked for a vote on the issue. Stevens shot back: “There will be no vote . . . It’s the decision of the chairman, and I have made that decision.”

“I move that we swear in witnesses,” Cantwell persisted.

“I second the motion,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif., $9,450).

“That’s the last we’re going to hear about that, because it’s out of order,” a piqued Stevens replied. When the two women continued their protest, the chairman informed them that “I intend to be respectful of the position that these gentlemen hold.”

…[later] Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J., $10,000) asked whether any of the companies had participated in Vice President Cheney’s energy task force, and all five answered in the negative. Fortunately, they were not under oath: A report by the Government Accountability Office found that Chevron was one of several companies that “gave detailed energy policy recommendations” to the task force.

The oil executives fared better than Cantwell and Boxer:

…But instead of calling oil executives on the carpet yesterday, senators gave them the red-carpet treatment.
The companies summoned to testify have given about $400,000 in PAC money this year alone — and much of that has found its way to those who served as the executives’ interrogators. So while protesters came to the hearing wearing “Exxpose Exxon” T-shirts, most lawmakers opted to extol Exxon Mobil — and Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP and Shell.

And so the grilling began:

Mary Landrieu (D-La.), recipient of $249,155 in oil and gas money over the past five years:

“First, let me begin by thanking each of you and the companies for what you all did to save lives, to save property, to restore the communities along the Gulf Coast.”

Larry Craig (R-Idaho), who received $96,950 in oil and gas company largesse:

“There’s a great deal we know about your industry; there’s a great deal the average citizen does not know.” “I must tell you, it’s not terribly fun defending you. But I do.”

John Sununu, (R-N.H.), who received a mere $64,480 in oil and gas company money:

praised the executives for being “very reasonable,” [adding] industry’s profits are big “because they are very big companies,” [and arguing] against higher taxes on their profits.

Senator Barbara Boxer was in a less generous mood though, and Stevens was in no mood to let her make a point:

Stevens did not fail in this goal. When Boxer later displayed a large chart showing the executives’ pay, Stevens cut her off.
“We’ll stop the clock right here for you, Senator,” Stevens said, ordering the chart taken down because it was not “information that pertains to our issue.”

And so the day went. Another noble outing for the United States Senate, and and its pro-consumer agenda…not.