The Instigator
Texas14
Pro (for)
Winning
38 Points
The Contender
chowder65
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The United States should lift the ban on crude oil exports.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 7 votes the winner is...
Texas14
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/21/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 733 times Debate No: 68702
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (7)

 

Texas14

Pro

First round if for acceptance. Crude oil is defined as a dark oil consisting mainly of hydrocarbons. Our government currently has a ban on exporting crude oil and I believe that ban should be lifted. Here are the rules:
1. Forfeiture will result in loss of conduct points
2. Sources are required for rounds 2,3 and 4.
3. Proper spelling and grammar will be used. Occasional errors are fine.

I look forward to my opponent's arguments.
chowder65

Con

By doing this we put our nation at risk of oil shortages, we might lose our power because we are a country that runs on oil, if we export what little oil we drill at home, we put ourselves at risk of major oil shortages, so you decide make a little bit more money or watch our world crumble around us
Debate Round No. 1
Texas14

Pro

Just to clear up, you really didn't have to post those arguments because I stated that the first round was for acceptance.

I'll now go in to a few contentions and some brief arguments.

Recently, in fact as recently as five or so years ago, exportation of crude oil was not necessary in this country, but that has drastically changed. According to a report done by the Council of Foreign Relations, it says, "Oil production has grown more in the United States over the past five years than anywhere else in the world, even as domestic oil consumption has declined. With these changes has come a widening gap among the types of oil that U.S. fields produce, the types that U.S. refiners need, the products that U.S. consumers want, and the infrastructure in place to transport the oil. Allowing companies to export U.S. crude oil as the market dictates would help solve this mismatch." Currently, it is illegal for U.S oil companies to export crude oil. There are a few exceptions which permit small amounts, but the reality is, these exceptions are insufficient. Unless there is an exceptionally strange situation, lifting the ban on exporting U.S crude oil will strengthen our economy.
In addition to this, the ban is an outdated policy. I will cite the same report as I did earlier. It stated, "When Congress in the 1970s made it illegal to export domestically produced crude oil without a license, the goal of the legislation was to conserve domestic oil reserves and discourage foreign imports. In reality, the export ban did not help accomplish either of these objectives. It has now become more of a burden than a help. The denseness of the export approval process discourages would-be exporters from applying for licenses. Companies see a lack of legal clarity and fear inconsistent regulation. They are hesitant to incur negative publicity on Capitol Hill when they doubt they will be granted approval." We can clearly see from this that the ban did not work and is an outdated policy.
http://www.cfr.org...

I look forward to your arguments and will focus more on countering your arguments in the next round.
chowder65

Con

chowder65 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Texas14

Pro

I extend.
chowder65

Con

chowder65 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Texas14

Pro

I extend my arguments once more. Vote Pro.
chowder65

Con

chowder65 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
So, since this one didn't pan out, I am happy to take this up with you, Texas14, if you still want to have it.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
Not what I meant. This would just be a lifting of the ban? Nothing else involved?
Posted by Texas14 2 years ago
Texas14
Lifting the ban means the U.S. can sell crude oil worldwide.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
Could you be a tad more specific? How does lifting the ban look? How will it be done?
Posted by LostintheEcho1498 2 years ago
LostintheEcho1498
Totally agree here. We need to re-expand American industry. Oil is definitely a big one.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by The-Voice-of-Truth 2 years ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
Texas14chowder65Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Hanspete 2 years ago
Hanspete
Texas14chowder65Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
Texas14chowder65Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Texas14chowder65Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by mishapqueen 2 years ago
mishapqueen
Texas14chowder65Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro provided sources and argumentation and Con forfeited.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
Texas14chowder65Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit, leaving Pros arguments unrefuted. Only Pro had sources.
Vote Placed by bsh1 2 years ago
bsh1
Texas14chowder65Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF