Posted on 01/13/2015 7:47:47 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The Senate could vote soon on a proposal to lift the nation’s longstanding ban on crude exports, worrying both supporters and opponents of the trade restrictions who say it’s premature.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is set to force the issue by offering his proposal to lift the 40-year-old ban as an amendment to legislation authorizing the Keystone XL pipeline.
That is a much faster track than even crude export supporters envisioned when they launched a methodical, deliberate discussion of the issue a year ago. If Cruz insists on a roll call vote on his proposal, it would force many senators to publicly take a stance on the issue for the very first time.
Keystone XL supporters also worry it could sink the underlying legislation to authorize the TransCanada Corp. pipeline.
“We’re encouraging the Senate to make sure that this vote on Keystone is a vote only on Keystone,” said Erik Milito, upstream director for the American Petroleum Institute, which supports the pipeline as well as oil exports.
“We support Sen. Cruz’s leadership on exports and the fact that he’s stepping to the forefront as a leader and making sure we’re moving forward in a way that benefits constituents and consumers,” Milito added. “This is hopefully an amendment or a piece of legislation we’ll be able to see past the finish line at some point but at this point, we want to see the Keystone vote being only about the Keystone vote. It’s time to pass that and get it to the president’s desk.”
Cruz’s campaign for oil exports could help him in any future presidential bid, demonstrating he is taking a leadership role on energy policy issues and perhaps allow him to claim the title as a free market defender in any Republican primary.
But it could come at the cost of the underlying oil export plan, because an early vote on oil exports could lock Cruz’s fellow senators in on the issue, potentially making it difficult for them to shift positions later on.
It also risks exposing the Republican party’s divisions on the issue. Some lawmakers who back the oil industry on other issues have been reluctant to embrace crude exports, wary of being blamed by voters for any subsequent jump in gasoline prices, even if it is not tied to a specific policy change.
Several reports have predicted that broader oil exports would have little effect on U.S. gasoline prices, which generally track the cost of international Brent crude, not the lower-cost domestic benchmark, West Texas Intermediate. But recent polling shows motorists are not convinced.
Crude export critics, including some U.S. refiners, say they are confident the Senate would vote to preserve the longstanding trade restrictions.
“The crude oil export ban issue is complex, and senators have just begun to engage on it,” said Jay Hauck, executive director of Consumers and Refiners United for Domestic Energy. “We believe the Senate should proceed in a thoughtful and deliberate way to examine the policy issues before the full Senate deliberates.”
“We welcome an in-depth examination of crude exports, and we believe at the end of that process the Senate will reject attempts to lift the ban,” Hauck added.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who is managing the Keystone XL bill on the Senate floor and has fiercely championed crude exports, said an amendment on the issue could “complicate” the pipeline debate. But she stressed that Republicans are inviting amendments to the legislation and oil exports are “an area that is appropriate for discussion with the Keystone XL bill.”
“I really don’t want to dissuade members from amendments; this is what this full and open transparent process is all about,” Murkowski told reporters.
It is not clear whether Cruz will insist on a vote on his exports proposal.
“You may be introducing an amendment to make a message, make a point, have an opportunity for discussion and debate and then choose to withdraw it,” Murkowski said. “The issue of export is a legitimate one for debate on Keystone is elf; what we do with that debate remains to be seen.”
Other controversial amendments are on the horizon too. Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, is expected to offer a proposal insisting that climate change is real, is caused by human activity and has already spurred devastating problems. A version Sanders proposed previously also says “it is imperative that the United States transform its energy system away from fossil fuels and toward energy efficiency and sustainable energy.”
A vote on Sanders’ proposal could put some Republicans in a politically uncomfortable spot.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday dismissed suggestions that Republican senators would try to block Sanders’ climate change amendment.
Republicans looking for a way to blunt the political pain of Sanders’ proposal could turn to a “side-by-side,” an alternative, GOP-drafted amendment that would be brought to a vote first and provide cover to lawmakers. Republicans also could move to table the amendment, casting a resulting vote as procedural, rather than substantive.
Great move.
America needs to be an oil exporting nation.
Why? How does it benefit the US to supply our oil to Communist China? Why not keep our oil in our country, and reduce the amount we buy from OPEC?
We don’t have the refining capacity to deal with all the crude we produce. If we can export the excess crude the drillers can keep operating.
And it gets a better per barrel price and keeps fracking viable. Saudi Arabia is driving down the price to get rid of fracking.
The more I think about it the more I think that not only that Saudi Arabia’s intent is to wreek harvic on America’s Oil shqle fracking boom but to stop the Keystone project and stop America exporting it’s own crude oil to the world.
Obola has already stated that he will veto any bill that comes to his desk on the Keystone project.... And most likely he will be against lifting of the ban of exporting oil.
The exporting crude ban was a response to the oil crises back in the 70s after Saudi Arabia choked off the oil supply to America in response to the US helping Israel in the 1973 Israeli Arab war.
The SPR Strategic Petroleum Reserve was also a result of that.
I remember it very well when you could not get gas on certain days, either od or even days..... Lines of cars lined up at the gas stations.
What the oil shale fracking boom does for us ?
Even IF that were to happen again or if Iran desides to choke off the Straight of Hormez, the effects of that or the 70s oil crises won’t be as profound or far and wide.
Energy security.
Exporting our own crude ( saving more than enough for our own uses ) would actually be of great benefit to us in that it would help keep the fracking industry alive, actually bring revenues into government pockets, and reduce our trade deficit....... Thackney ? Is that correct ? What do you think and have to say ?
“Why? How does it benefit the US to supply our oil to Communist China? Why not keep our oil in our country, and reduce the amount we buy from OPEC?”
Markets should be free and Protection kills free markets.
The oil produced in this country is not our oil.
It belongs to the producers and those who own mineral rights.
We still import roughly a quarter of our oil. If you really want to reduce our trade deficit, let’s stop paying money to a bunch a Arab tyrants and keep it in country. This does several things. It keeps our $ out of their pockets, it reduces our trade deficit, and it keeps the oil weapon out of OPEC’s (read Saudi and Iran) hands. Until we stop importing oil, I see no reason to export it.
While I would agree with you that any oil located on private lands belong to the land owner, I vehemently disagree that the oil from public lands is not our oil. Oil from public lands belong to the people of the United States.
As far as “Markets should be free and protection kills free markets” are you saying that there should be no controls over exports to our enemies? How about North Korea or Iran? Should any company have the ability to sell anything to them?
In addition, we still import roughly a quarter of our oil. Why should we sell oil to Communist China when we can use it in our country? No exports of American crude to Communist China until we stop importing oil from the Arabs!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.