Thrill to drill: Delegates at last week’s Republican convention in St. Paul, Minn., proclaimed their support for more offshore oil drilling. The issue is likely to arise in Congress as soon as next week. (Mary Knox Merrill/The Chrsitian Science Monitor)
Face-off ahead on offshore drilling ban
It tops Congress’s agenda, now colored by lawmakers’ preelection calculus.
By Gail Russell Chaddock | Staff writer/ September 8, 2008 edition
Reporter Gail Russell Chaddock discusses the immediate options before Congress regarding offshore oil drilling.
Reporter Gail Russell Chaddock
Washington, DC
In a sprint toward November elections, Congress is planning votes on hot-button issues from energy and the economy to equal pay for women, but with slim prospect that any of them will become law.
In election season, every vote is grist for a 30-second campaign ad, and the last weeks before the October recess are shaping up as a marathon for symbolic votes.
At the same time, the spending bills to fund the 2009 fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1, are unfinished or barely started. Even a resolution to continue government funding into a new administration is expected to be a highly charged vote, because it is the probable vehicle for extending a ban on offshore drilling, now set to expire on Sept. 30.
“It’s almost impossible to separate any vote or debate in Congress now from the election,” says Julian Zelizer, a congressional historian at Princeton University in New Jersey.
“For a legislator to go to Capitol Hill and try to remove the sounds and sights of Denver and Minneapolis is impossible,” adds, referring to the parties’ national conventions in those host cities. “All of the votes are calculated in terms of how they will affect Barack Obama, John McCain, and the congressional races.”
A vote could come as early as this week over whether to lift a ban on oil and gas drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf. The ban has been renewed every year since 1981 as part of the annual appropriations process. During the August recess, Republicans held 25 protests on a darkened House floor to urge Democrats to call the House back into session for an up-or-down vote on an energy bill, including a vote on more access to offshore-energy reserves.
“This is not the end of the gas price protest. This is the beginning,” said Rep. Mike Pence (R) of Indiana during Friday’s protest.
Aware of recent polls showing that 7 in 10 Americans now favor lifting the ban, Democrats are crafting compromise energy legislation. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in a shift, on Aug. 18 promised a vote on offshore drilling as part of a comprehensive energy plan. Previously, she had characterized GOP claims that offshore drilling could reduce energy prices as “a hoax.”
“We are trying to do the right thing here: to get a bill that will end our dependence on foreign oil,” says Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly. The legislation, still being drafted, would remove some $18 billion in existing subsidies to oil companies and increase tax incentives for renewable fuels.
It is also expected to introduce a renewable electricity standard for utilities, to rein in speculation in oil futures markets, and to require oil companies to use existing leases or lose them. Any lifting of a ban on offshore drilling will include restrictions to protect the environment.
In addition to the House leaders’ bill, a bipartisan group of members led by Reps. Neil Abercrombie (D) of Hawaii and John Peterson (R) of Pennsylvania has released its own energy plan, which would open more of the moratorium area to drilling. That bill now has 131 cosponsors, and its lead sponsors predict the final count will be closer to 200.
“It’s about America, not about party. My Republican leadership wondered what we were doing, and I said, ‘I’ll report to you when it’s done,’ ” said Representative Peterson, in a phone interview. “This was drafted without either leadership or their top staff having any input. We think we have a good bill.”
In the Senate, majority leader Harry Reid is working closely with a bipartisan group of 16 senators. Their plan proposes higher government subsidies for renewable sources and a push to convert vehicles to nonfuel sources, while also opening more acres for drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico and off the coasts of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. A vote is expected next week.
If the bills fail, drilling proponents have another shot at the issue when lawmakers vote on continuing government funding into the next fiscal year, when the next Congress would finish budget appropriations. GOP leaders plan to offer amendments that would strip the drilling ban out of the resolution. Some Republicans and outside groups are urging President Bush to veto any spending resolution that renews the offshore drilling ban, even if it means shutting down the government.
In the other big initiative in the last weeks of the 110th Congress, Democrats aim to move a second stimulus plan to boost the economy. The $50 billion plan is expected to include new infrastructure projects, Medicaid funding for state governments, disaster relief for the Midwest and Gulf Coast, and home heating aid for the Northeast and upper Midwest states this winter. The White House says it will oppose the legislation, and there are not expected to be enough votes to override a veto. But the votes, whatever the outcome, are certain fodder for campaign ads.
Comments
2. Rosie | 09.08.08
It should be emphasized over and over again, that it will take at lest 5 - 8 years to see any significant production from any drilling in the US. The Repubs say less but that’s a smokescreen.
AND THEN any oil that is realized DOES NOT COME TO AMERICA - it goes into the Global Oil resource - we get a small percentage of that WHEN its been refined.
It will save us about 2c per gallon 8yrs hence! Whopeee
We need to get busy with alternative fuels ASAP - its the only way out of this mess. (Vote Obama/Biden ‘08)
The Republicans have been muttering about alternatives for 8 YEARS and we are still no closer, thanks to their hookup with the oil companies. You think anything will change with Ms Sarah being promoted to the new Energy Czar??
PAPERS IN EUROPE SAY:-
Sarah Palin to be energy independence chief in John McCain’s government
John McCain wants to put Sarah Palin in charge of US oil and energy policy if he becomes president,
GAWD help us
3. papadao | 09.08.08
When did “WE THE PEOPLE” vote for a ban on off shore drilling?
Wasn’t it just for the benefit of the rich with their seaside real estate?
4. SisterMeg575 | 09.09.08
I agree with papadao. What ten Americans did they ask about off-shore drilling, and how was the question phrashed in the poll? I’m fairly certain I could take a poll sitting at my desk, and the American public around me would most certainly NOT favor off-shore drilling.
5. Jim Mettenbrink | 09.09.08
A few weeks ago, I saw an interview with a man who was involved with he Alaskan north slope installation. He stated that because the infrastructure is in place and near ANWR that two years maximum is needed to get the ANWR oil into the economy.
6. Jamierae | 09.09.08
When I saw this headline, I was hesitant to read the accompanying article for fear that my blood pressure would rise to dangerous levels.
Instead, I was happy to see not only a well-written and researched article, but intellegent responses from the other readers!
More oil is NOT the answer.
I’ve always voted Republican, however I can no longer ignore the ignorance. I’m voting Obama this year.
7. Kerry H | 09.09.08
Another cold fact: The Oil companies do NOT have the rigs to deep-sea drill in the places they CAN drill!
The Republicans would have the obese eat at ALL YOU CAN EAT places instead of going on a diet. Trouble is, the military-industrial-complex machine is lubricated with oil and the blood of patriots.
8. Kerry H | 09.09.08
Lubrication of the Military-Industrial-Complex is made from the substance from which comes at the cost of patriot blood.
9. HauntedPA | 09.09.08
“The Republicans have been muttering about alternatives for 8 YEARS and we are still no closer, thanks to their hookup with the oil companies. You think anything will change with Ms Sarah being promoted to the new Energy Czar??”
That’s why Ford, GM and other companies have actual fuel cell, CNG and other hybrids all in development and out in the market? So the fact that GM has the Volt scheduled for 2010 and there’s many other “flex fuel” and biofuel vehicles already on the market means nothing? Glad you cleared that up without actually thinking. There’s been more advances into fuel cell and other alternative vehicles in the past 4 years than ever before. To say otherwise is a lie and left wing propaganda.
SisterMeg,
I think you missed Papadao’s point with their post. They asked “When did “WE THE PEOPLE” ever vote for no offshore drilling?” Never actually…the only people who oppose it have millions of dollars and think they can see 50 miles out into the water when it’s more like 3-5miles that we can see because of the curvature of the earth. When was the last major spill in the Gulf of Mexico or Alaska that was from oil platforms? How about the North Sea where the weather is basically hurricane force all year long? Can’t answer it? Well that’s because there hasn’t been one in a few decades. (maybe longer) I’m all for alternatives but without the infrastructure have fun walking to work.
10. Don Barnes | 09.09.08
In what way can it be justified to spend the tax payer miney to bail out greedy (keep up with the Joneses) borrowers and reckless - equally greedy lenders — and reward them for their failings at the expense of those who live modestly within their means and have paid off their mortgage?
Let all involved pay at least a portion of the obligations they so eagerly assumed!
Is it not immoral of our government to encourage such stuidity and/or dishonesty?
11. Ned Ward | 09.10.08
We are all dependent on experts on the subject of energy. Common sense is in short supply, political posturing is abundant. Experts I’ve listened to indicate that the oil industry is not poised to exploit high risk potential oil deposits on the continental shelf or the northern reaches of Alaska. These risky reserves will beg for heavy tax breaks to encourage exploitation. Moreover the yield of the output appears to be a small percentage of our consumption–a false hope. Others here have mentioned timing issues, and lack of appropriate drilling equipment. The best estimates point to years of waiting. The same experts note how inefficient we are in the use of oil as energy. Have we forgotten the environmental disasters associated with oil exploration offshore? All over the world countries dependent on imported oil place substantial taxes on these imports to discourage consumption and protect their monetary reserves. The debate on drilling is very likely a staw man. The real issue is a comprehensive energy policy featuring oil conservation and the development of technological alternatives rapidly. The experts say we need bridge fuels like natural gas on the way to renewable energies. The oil drilling debate may be a political hot button, but it really misses the mark. I would like to see more articles in the Monitor and elsewhere promoting debates on energy policy.
12. Jim | 09.10.08
When President Bush just mentioned offshore drilling the price of oil went down overnight and is still dropping. If Opec, and Iran is the no. 2 producer continues to drain our currency and control our living standards we won’t have to go to war we will be owned by them. Drilling now, creates lots of good paying American jobs, gives us the time we need to develop other energy alternatives. Opec pretends it can’t control prices, but just today they decided to cut production. Their profit is still very very high. They will allow prices to go up as high as we are willing to pay. The only person I see willing and able to deal with this problem is John McCain.
13. Charles Hill | 09.12.08
John McCain to support drilling in ANWR, biggest news from Palin/Gipson interview.
http://strategicthought-charles77.blogspot.com/2008/09/john-mccain-to-support-drilling-in-anwr.html
14. James D | 09.12.08
Rosie,
Do you have any knowledge about oil drilling? Apparently not. It would take 2 years to get ANWR oil into the pipeline. That is a lot of oil. As far as the 5-8 years, that is for Gulf of Mexico oil. And guess what? In 2000 the Republicans wanted to drill more. We heard the same argument, 5-8 years. It would have been nice to get 1-2 million bbls a day more of USA oil in 2005, wouldn’t it have? Let’s not live in a childish fantasy like Rosie. Let’s plan for our future just 5 years from now (2 for ANWR) and not extend the drilling bans.
As far as alternate energy, let’s get breeder reactors up and running. Probably take about 20 years.
15. Diane | 09.23.08
When the legislation passes, the ban lifts, drilling commences, it takes 5 years to see any difference, the ensuing environmental devastation when a spill happens-those who (7 out of 10 was it?) were in favour of lifting the ban will feel what? Sick? They should. But at least that will spur the notion of complete oil independence and renewable energy sources instead of just making committees about it.
16. Squeakers | 10.09.08
I’m writing a case for debate on off shore oil drilling. And in my opinion, it’s a good idea, temporary at best while we are developing our alternative energy resources, like wind and hemp. But I have found information about how there is like 50 million barrels just off the shore. But I agree that with Papadao that who exactly decided that we can’t drill off-shore? i know i didn’t get polled. But hey, this is only a democracy… i think.
Off shore oil drilling is an alternative energy policy. It’s temporary while R and D is going on, but it’s still an alternative policy to depending on foreign oil. And with our economy, that’s the last thing we need.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
1. Tour Salzburg with SALZBURGSNOW.COM » Blog Archive » Drilling a hot topic as Congress gets back in action | 09.10.08
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. LaRae | 09.08.08
It’s time to unite!
Here is an interesting read regarding McCain’s choice of Palin. It is from the most unique religious perspective I have ever heard. I highly recommend checking it out:
http://www.newsflavor.com/Opinions/McCain-Hijacks-Christianity-Via-Palin.240929