The [him] moderator received this anonymous comment: "The same characters who are oppose humanitarian aid to Burma are defending Chevron's ability to stay in the country and using US tax payer money to reimburse Chevron for taxes that it pays to ... the junta. The people defending an "engagement" position with respect to a private oil company are so morally righteous and so actively anti-engagement on the humanitarian front. Outrageous."

The commenter calls this outrageous. The moderator calls it normal American political partisan behaviour.

[him] moderator

******************************

Feinstein Fights McCain on Tax Break for Big Oil in Burma
Democrat Sides With Chevron in Rangoon Deal
By JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN, Staff Reporter of the Sun June 6, 2008

The Republican Party's presumptive nominee for president, Senator McCain, is locked in a disagreement with a Democratic senator from California, Dianne Feinstein, over whether to permit Chevron to do business with the regime in Rangoon. One of them is taking a hard-line human-rights stand against the military junta in Burma. The other is carrying water for the interests of America's second largest oil company.

Mr. McCain's stance has been to require Chevron to sell its stake in a large gas field that is widely considered the single most important source of income for Burma's regime, one of the world's most repressive. Ms. Feinstein, who represents the state in which Chevron is headquartered, is seeking to allow the company to hold on to its stake in the gas field.

Both senators have been allied as vocal opponents of the ruling Burmese junta. Yet the narrower issue of Chevron in Burma would seem to undermine the stereotypes about how Republicans and Democrats take sides when it comes to big oil companies.

At issue are competing provisions in Senate bills introduced in October to ratchet up sanctions against Burma. The bills were introduced at a time when events in Burma had seized the world's attention, with the junta engaged in mass arrests of the monks and citizens who had taken to the streets in September in a rare protest.

The version of the bill favoring Chevron, which was co-sponsored by Ms. Feinstein and others, edged out Mr. McCain's bill. But now the issue of whether to penalize Chevron, which is the only major American corporation in business in Burma, is re-emerging as a sticking point between the House of Representatives, which seeks to tax Chevron for its ties to Burma, and the Senate, which would leave Chevron alone.

A 1996 law prevented new American investment in Burma, but didn't affect pre-existing investment. The grandfather clause was the result of an amendment sponsored by both Ms. Feinstein and Mr. McCain, who has apparently since switched sides on the issue. At the time, one notable investment in Burma by an American firm involved the offshore Yadana gas field: a California oil and gas company, Unocal, which has since merged with Chevron, held a minority stake, along with a Thai-government-owned company, a French oil company, and the Burmese government's oil and gas company.

While few statistics about the Burmese economy are available, American-based critics of the regime say that this gas revenue is providing the junta with a lifeline of cash needed to maintain its grip on power.

The gas is piped to Thailand across a narrow section of Burma. In 2006, Thailand purchased about $1.1 billion of gas from the Yadana field , according to a report by EarthRights International, an advocacy group that sued Unocal over its business with Burma.

In 2004, Unocal settled the EarthRights suit brought on behalf of Burmese villagers who say they suffered human rights abuses, including forced labor, during the construction of the Yadana pipeline. In 2005, Ms. Feinstein introduced a bill that would have sharply curtailed the kind of suits that foreign plaintiffs can bring under the law used by the Burmese villagers to sue Unocal.

Chevron, and, previously, Unocal, are headquartered in California, the state Ms. Feinstein represents. In 2005, the year before Ms. Feinstein was last up for re-election, Chevron's political action committee donated $10,000 to her re-election effort.

"It's absurd to suggest that any contribution would affect her policy view on Burma," a spokesman for Ms. Feinstein, Scott Gerber, said, adding that "she has been a strong supporter of ratcheting up pressure on the military junta."

One aspect of the debate in Washington is whether requiring Chevron to divest its share in the Yadana gas fields would harm the regime. Other oil and gas companies would likely be eager to buy Chevron's share, some Senate staffers say.

"The net effect of just requiring divestiture of Chevron is the transfer of Chevron's asset to some other foreign company, which could be Lukoil in Russia or Sinopec in China," a Senate aide, who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record, said. Others say the Burmese government could simply seize Chevron's stake. Critics of Chevron's involvement, however, say there would be some symbolic and moral value in preventing an American company from profiting hand in hand with the Burmese regime.

The bill that ultimately passed the Senate was introduced by several Democrats in addition to Ms. Feinstein, including senators Biden, Dodd, Leahy, and Boxer, who is also of California, as well as a Republican, Mitchell McConnell, who in 1996 had strongly opposed the amendment to allow Unocal to stay invested in Burma.

A Chevron spokesman, Kurt Glaubitz, wrote in a statement sent via e-mail that the project "helps meet the energy needs of people in the region" and "serves as a positive influence in the country." He said that Chevron has no employees in Burma or offshore on the project.

A spokesman for Mr. McCain did not return repeated calls for comment.

The question of whether Congress will sanction Chevron for its business with the junta is back on the table, due to differences between the House and Senate versions of the Burma sanction bills.

The House version of the bill, which had been introduced by a California Democrat, Rep. Thomas Lantos, who has since died, would not force Chevron to divest from Burma. But it would deny Chevron tax credits for the tens of millions it pays annually to Burma in taxes. The bill is also championed by a congressman from Queens, Rep. Joseph Crowley. Currently, to avoid double taxation, Chevron receives a tax break on the money it pays in taxes to the Burmese junta.

The legal director at EarthRights International, Marco Simons, estimates Chevron's income from the project at about $100 million for 2007, with about $30 million due to Burma in taxes. Mr. Glaubitz, of Chevron, declined to confirm those figures.

Senate and House staffers have been negotiating over whether the final sanctions bill will contain any language at all about Chevron. There are a few other discrepancies to be worked out: The Senate version calls for the appointment of a policy coordinator on Burma and would also prevent importation of teak and other lumber that was cut in Burma.

http://www.nysun.com/foreign/feinstein-fights-mccain-on-tax-break-for-big-oil/79452/