More on OPEC Oil

In a previous essay, I laid out the presumed strategy of OPEC in trying to regain its monopoly of global oil by allowing the price to freefall according to the market surplus. With its low cost of production, OPEC can stand lower prices, while the higher cost producers will continue to be forced out of business. At the point where OPEC is the only significant supplier for the global oil market, it will likely increase prices significantly.
My suggested strategy for the US was to take advantage of the present and perhaps future lower global oil prices, shutting down its own higher cost production facilities to standby position for the time when OPEC significantly increases price.
In response, one of my political associates had what I considered a novel approach. In the traditional trade of commodities, the supplier offers a quantity at a specific price. While there may be subsequent negotiation, the seller usually has price control. This is also standard procedure in the trading of crude oil. My associate suggested we reverse that procedure by having the consumer offer to purchase at a specific price. He suggests the buyer "offer to buy" price presently be $70 per barrel, but I also have the impression that our associate may want to give the buyer additional flexibility to go to say $60 or $80 per barrel, depending on global supplies and intended pricing of producers at the time.
Here is what our associate had to say:

"Dr Sucsy,
I would like to discuss the oil topic with you and your distinguished comrades. 
The only reason that OPEC (Saudi Arabia is the lion share of the organization) is turning up the spicket is because the world has discovered that oil is abundant, but the cost of recovering this abundant oil is high relative to the cost of production in Saudi Arabia.  This bunch (OPEC) did the same thing to us in the early 80's and drove US oil development into the ditch, they did this again in the 90's and essentially killed most US oil production.  As soon as this is achieved, and when we are in deep trouble they turn down the spicket and turn up the heat, in 2009 the price of oil reached $150/barrel.
These people don't do this because they are our friends, on the contrary much if not most of the financial support for our muslim enemies comes from Saudi.  I for one am tired of this.  In the last year or so the US has become the world's largest energy producer.  This is positively effecting not only our economy and influence, but it is diminishing others.  Add to this the black market oil industry that is propping up ISIS and you get a lot of price pressure.
The US has never had an effective energy (oil) policy, at least not one that benefits its citizens.  I propose the following for an adoption in the US:
Establish a floor for the price of oil at say $70/barrel.  Oil can still be imported to the US but at the dock it will be tariffed to reach a minimum of $70/barrel.  These taxes collected should be allocated and applied to our national debt.  The cost of energy at $70 has been adjusted into our economy and will be easily digested.  The great benefit will be to our domestic producers, they could count on a price which will cause them to risk and produce even more oil.  As this happens our imports will drop and the world price will drop with it.  Our enemies will lose much of their funding and our country will be stronger.  In fact, it is estimated by some that the US together with Canada could achieve a position of being completely energy independent in a decade!!!  Sarah Palin said the answer was 'Drill Baby Drill', she is right and we should maintain the conditions that achieve this.
Over the years we have shipped $Billions to the middle east, this would help dry that money river up.  Imagine if all that money we have been sending to Saudi all these years started to pay off our debt, to me this is the plausible way of killing two birds with one simple policy.
I would like to know what the council thinks of this."

I believe this might work under present circumstances, but I also believe it would be much more effective if the US had less need for crude imports, which would give to the potential supplier the impression that the US is not being forced to purchase in order to supply its needs.
Present US consumption is about 18.9 million barrels per day. Production of US crude has been increasing but is still only said to be 8.3 million barrels per day. This is a big divergence, which is only made up by imports. It would be hard to convince foreign suppliers that we are in the drivers seat.