Posted on 06/30/2006 4:02:48 PM PDT by new yorker 77
Congress has taken a major step toward allowing oil and gas drilling in coastal waters that have been off limits for a quarter-century.
Still, a battle looms in the Senate over the issue. And the Bush administration's support for the legislation, which was approved Thursday by a 232-187 vote in the House, is lukewarm.
The House bill would end an Outer Continental Shelf drilling moratorium that Congress has renewed every year since 1981. It covers 85 percent of the country's coastal waters — everywhere except the central and western Gulf of Mexico and some areas off Alaska.
Rep. Richard Pombo (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif., a leading proponent for lifting the ban, said he believes a majority of the Senate wants to open the protected waters to energy companies.
Asked about White House opposition to some parts of the bill, especially a provision that would give tens of billions of dollars to states that have drilling rigs off their coasts, Pombo said, "I dare them to veto this bill."
"They don't like us giving money back to the states. I think it's right," Pombo told reporters after the vote. Forty Democrats joined most Republicans in favor of ending the drilling moratorium.
In the Senate, the measure is likely to face a filibuster from Florida senators and possibly others from coastal states that fear offshore energy development could threaten multibillion-dollar tourist and recreation businesses if there were a spill.
The Senate is considering a limited measure that would open an area in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, known as Lease Area 181, that comes within 100 miles of Florida. It is not under the moratorium. Even that is unlikely to pass unless its sponsors get 60 votes to overcome a filibuster from the Floridians.
Sen. Pete Domenici (news, bio, voting record), R-N.M., chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said he would pursue efforts to open the Lease 181 Area. The committee's ranking Democrat, Sen. Jeff Bingaman (news, bio, voting record), also of New Mexico, criticized the House-passed bill, saying it would eventually create "a huge hole in our federal budget and undermine environmental protections on our lands and off our coasts."
Sen. Mary Landrieu (news, bio, voting record), D-La., said Friday that Senate GOP leaders and Domenici have agreed on a new revenue-sharing plan that would funnel 37.5 percent of future royalties from Area 181 development to the four energy producing Gulf states, and also open an additional 6.3 million acres south of Area 181.
But that proposal does not address the Florida senators' concerns and may generate new opposition to Domenici's bill from senators opposed to changing the royalty distribution formulas.
Domenici later said in a statement, "I've had a number of productive meetings with Sen. Landrieu. ... We've made progress ... but we're not there yet."
Still, the House vote was a huge victory for Pombo, two Louisiana lawmakers — Republican Bobby Jindal and Democrat Charlie Melancon — and Rep. John Peterson (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., who spearheaded the drive to lift the moratorium.
Only six weeks ago, a proposal by Peterson to open coastal waters to natural gas development fell 14 votes short.
This time, they included a provision that would allow states to keep the moratorium in place if they opposed drilling and changed the revenue sharing so that states' share of royalties would soar eventually as much as 75 percent.
The Gulf states where most U.S. offshore energy resources are being tapped, now get less than 5 percent of the royalties. For example, Louisiana's royalties would go from $32 million last year to a total of $8.6 billion over the next 10 years — and even higher after that.
The Interior Department estimated that the changes could cost the federal government as much as $69 billion in lost royalties over 15 years and "several hundred billion dollars" over 60 years.
The White House issued a statement saying it favors much of the bill but strongly opposes the changes in royalty revenue sharing, which it said "would have a long-term impact on the federal deficit."
The Interior Department estimates there are about 19 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 86 trillion cubic feet of natural gas beneath waters under drilling bans from New England to southern Alaska.
Supporters of the drilling moratorium argue there's four times that amount of oil and gas available in offshore waters open to energy companies, mainly in the central and western Gulf of Mexico and off parts of Alaska.
___
On the Net:
Interior Department Minerals Management Service: http://www.mms.gov/revaldiv/RedNatAssessment.htm
Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
This should be another example of separating the people in the Senate who have a reasonable amount of common sense from the (majority, I fear) ones who are hoplophobic demagogues.
They must feel China and Cuba will be better stewards of the environment, or something. Feeling is what they do. Very little critical thinking can enter that august body due to all the pandering and "feeling".
Reminds me of when I had my boat.... I loved offshore drilling ;)
As a Floridian, I say drill away.
Sure, we have the best beaches in America, (except for maybe Hawaii), and a beautiful coral reef in the upper keys, but so what. Cuba is drilling near the keys anyway. Either stop those rigs, or join them and claim the territory.
Finally. One small accomplishment.
its about time!
This near daily votiong is fun. Congress needs to keep up the pace.
College kids can now have a way to pay off or pay cash for their tuition. I remember Oklahoma in the 70's and early 80's. Great wages and nothing happened to the environment.
It's about time
Charge a tariff to any state that does not drill
Give it back to the states that do.
Hey, if the Senate passes the bill and Bush signs it to lift the ban, I guess you better go get another boat. ;-)
This would be a huge boost to local economies, particlarly those areas affected by Katrina. Score one for common sense.
Besides, drilling is one of the least causes for oil in the water. The National Academy of Sciences has published "Oil in the Sea" which summarizes sources of oil pollution:
Nearly 85 percent of the 29 million gallons of petroleum that enter North American ocean waters each year as a result of human activities comes from land-based runoff, polluted rivers, airplanes, and small boats and jet skis, while less than 8 percent comes from tanker or pipeline spills.
Finally !! Hoping the Senate will follow suit.
It's all political BS with little or no hard evidence at all to back up any of the liberal feel good rants.
We just had two of the biggest hurricanes around cruise right over the entire Gulf with oil well derrick after derrick and there are no reports of spillage. My info is that the oil companies have figured out how to cap the wells when storms come. And, if there are any spills, methods of cleaning up are far superior to what they had during Exon Valdez which is the standard for the rats and rinos in the senate. wind mills,electric cars good, gas engines bad. Might no be so easy if gas hits $4.00.
The worse part of the whole deal is that we wind up buying crude from out worst enemies or those who would just as soon blow us up. And with china helping Cuba drill 45 miles off the coast soon we will probably buy from that combo as well.
What red blooded American in their right mind would buy oil from terrorists or commie countries rather than drill it our self--how stuck on stupid can the critters get?
Our consumer-based economy is driven by and dependent upon readily-available, reliable energy-- choke that off, and we'll all be back to using one rotary dial phone in the dining room, watching one TV in the living room, and driving one car per family-- probably a Hudson Hornet or a Nash Metropolitan...
We need to
1) end the nonsensical ban on offshore drilling off California and Florida--read & weep:
Castro Plans to Drill 45 Miles from US Shores, But We Can't
2) build a lot of next-generation nuclear power plants, not just for electricity, but for any process requiring heat, power, or steam.
And if we replaced our existing nuclear plants with this one
...there would be significant benefits.
3) end Jimmy Carter's idiotic ban on recycling nuclear waste, and reprocess the stuff rather than fighting over where to bury it. Europe has done this for decades.-- what to do with spent nuclear fuel? Answer here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1468321/posts?page=50#50 hattip: Mike (former Navy Nuclear Engineer)
4) use the 300-500 years worth of coal we have on our own land, using the new clean-coal technology.
-Clean Coal Centre--
5) and finally, there's nothing wrong with conservation, we should all practice it- but you can't conserve your way out of a shortage. Nor is there anything wrong with "alternative" energy sources- except they don't supply the vast ( not to mention readily-available ) amounts of power we need at a price competitive to more conventional sources.
Then again, there is this to ponder:
Energy From the Gulf Stream
http://www.energy.gatech.edu/presentations/mhoover.pdf
We do need to get serious about this before we get strangled by a bunch of petty thieves and dictators who don't like us much.
My tongue-in-cheek collection of energy-related links:
Sticker Shock-$3 a gallon gas? Click the picture:
And kindly note, and note well-- the first reply to this post ( when gas was $1.45 a gallon ) was derisive... so, who's laughing now?
Vest-Pocket Summary:
1- drill for gas & oil like crazy- onshore, offshore, and in Alaska
2- go nuclear for power
3- convert stationary plants to clean coal technology or Next-Gen Nuclear
4- slash taxes and regulations like crazy
Please, everyone, do what I did: email or call the two Florida Senators and tell them you will not be visiting Florida if they vote against offshore drilling or if they make outlandish demands (like drilling more than 20 miles off shore). The reason Florida has such low taxes is because they stick it to tourists in hotel/motel/rental taxes. If the Senators feel tourism is severely threatened, maybe they will suddenly get a dose of common sense. I told them my wife and I were down there earlier this year, but would not be returning if they vote against the bill. And that I would be telling my friends and family not to visit there, either. Because this is not a "Florida" thing - it is a "UNITED STATES" thing. Why should Florida not want to do something that would help the country???
So call! Write! Email! Right now! :)
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=FL
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
Phone numbers:
Martinez: 202-224-3041
Nelson: 202-224-5274
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.