House OKs coastal oil drilling—sort of

Chicago Tribune ^ | 9/17/2008

[markomalley]

The House, on a 236-189 vote, on Tuesday approved a bill to allow oil drilling off the nation's Atlantic and Pacific coasts if states agree — but only 50 or more miles out. Republicans called the bill a ruse, saying that's well beyond where most of the estimated 18 billion barrels of oil is located.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the measure marked "a new direction in energy policy" because of its emphasis on alternative energy.

The White House threatened a veto, saying the bill doesn't go far enough to generate new domestic supplies of oil and natural gas. The bill's prospects in the Senate are

[markomalley]

We better get on the phone to encourage Bush to do the right thing and veto this sucker (I know that he said he would, we need to support that). After all, it's not like he needs to run for re-election...

[Red Badger]

To put it bluntly, you can drill only where there is no oil to be found.......

[IrishMike]

“It’s a hoax on the American people. This is intended for one reason . . . so the Democrats can say we voted on energy.” - House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio, speaking yesterday in opposition to a bill meant to allow offshore oil drilling - but mostly beyond where the bulk of the estimated 18 billion barrels of recoverable oil is to be found

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

DOA...

[MrChips]

How many Republicans voted for this sham?

[conservativemusician]

This is a BS bill. No state would sign on for this and Bush said he would veto.

[avacado]

" but only 50 or more miles out."

Is the continental shelf off the west coast even 50 miles wide? Put Pelosi and Reid on eBay... NOW!

[andy58-in-nh]

It's quite a bit worse than that, actually. Not only can the oil companies not drill where the vast majority of the oil is, they must pay increased royalties to do so, and also will be assessed increased taxes which will in turn be passed along to the consumer in the form of higher prices for refined oil products. And that assumes that state legislatures will allow drilling in these relatively non-productive areas (much of which is in California, so forget it).

It is a classic election-year scam, designed to get the other party to appear to vote against a popular initiative, even though they are actually in favor of it. Disgusting, but par for the course in Pelosiland.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Good question. Let’s see the GOP votes on this bogus bill.

[bray]

This Do Nothing Nancy No Drill Bill was a gift to the Enviroterrorist Lobby. It should be a gift to McCain since it is such a huge target.

Pray for W, McCuda and Our Troops

[andy58-in-nh]

221 Democrats were joined by 15 Republicans. Roll call vote is here.

[Red Badger]

Thanks to the Internet and the alternative media, the “scam” kill-drill-bill won’t work on Americans like in the old days of MSM “filtered” news........

[Red Badger]

[Red Badger]

We should call this the KILL DRILL BILL! PLEASE SOMEBODY PHOTOSHOP THIS WITH PELOSI’S HEAD!............

[LibLieSlayer]

I want a list of the Republican traitors that voted for this POS and I want it asap!

LLS

[kabar]

It is my understanding that the bill bans permanently any drilling less than 50 miles from shore. The current moratorium on drilling expires. Let it expire.

[LibLieSlayer]

I found it and Thank You!

LLS

[Fractal Trader]

It’s even worse:

1)They have been excluded from specific locations, in particular from George’s Bank off the coast of Massachusetts

2)It forces energy companies to produce 20 per cent of their energy as renewable energy, whatever boondoggle that may be. Over the last 20 years, we have been promised to be rescued by a variety of methods, some renewable, some not: shale, coal gasification, electricity, solar power. geothermal power, hydrogen, and ethanol. Neither of them has panned out — who really believes this 20 per cent can actually be achieved?

[cp124]

Call your Senators.

[Sacajaweau]

YOur Congress....9% and tanking...Vote them out.

They're your personal reps and they've told you "Go To H***".

[Bishop_Malachi]

Here's the response I got back from my correspondence with Sen. Saxby Chambliss. I requested that he vote against the Senate bill. Here's the response:

Dear Mr. xxxxxxx :

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding energy and the New Energy Reform Act of 2008 . I appreciate hearing from you. I have also included a myth vs. fact sheet to dispel any inaccurate information.

As I am sure you know, I recently formed a bipartisan energy working group to craft legislation to address our current energy crisis. We came together because we all believe this issue is too important to fall victim to political games. I believe that Congress can not sit idle while Georgia families and businesses continue to suffer as a result of the escalating high cost of energy.

I fully support offshore drilling and believe we must utilize all of our domestic resources. Additional oil exploration and increased refining capacity here in the United States will continue to receive my support. It is important that we utilize the resources here in this country whether that includes oil in Alaska , the Outer Continental Shelf, or any of our oil sands or shales.

On Friday, August 1, 2008, the group unveiled the "New Energy Reform Act of 2008" (New ERA 2008). This comprehensive bipartisan energy plan focuses on increased domestic production, increased energy efficiency, and improved conservation in order to reduce the price of gas and secure our energy future.

The New Energy Reform Act of 2008 has three main components: first, targeted, responsible domestic production of energy resources ; second, a robust federal commitment to conservation and energy efficiency; and third, an intensive effort to transition America 's vehicles to non-petroleum based fuels .

To help meet our energy needs, this bill would increase the amount of federal land that is open to oil and natural gas exploration. This would include opening the eastern Gulf of Mexico for production in a manner that is consistent with national security and our military training that occurs there. It would also allow the States of Georgia, North Carolina , South Carolina , and Virginia to opt in for drilling off their shores, while establishing a 50-mile coastal buffer zone for Florida , Georgia , North Carolina , South Carolina , and Virginia where new oil production is not allowed.

To ease gas prices and protect our environment during the transition, the proposal includes a significant federal commitment to promoting conservation and efficiency. This includes extending renewable energy, carbon mitigation, and energy conservation and efficiency tax incentives, including the production tax credit, through 2012. Furthermore, it would extend and expand the $2,500 tax credit for hybrid electric vehicles. These tax credits will lead Americans to obtain highly fuel efficient vehicles by making them more affordable. These efforts will also provide the stability needed for the renewable energy industry.

The New ERA legislation funds a $20 billion "Apollo Project" like effort to support the goal of transitioning 85% of America 's new motor vehicles to non- petroleum-based fuels within 20 years. This will include $7.5 billion for the research and development of advanced batteries and other major technological barriers to alternative fuel vehicles. Another $7.5 billion will help U.S. automakers and parts makers re-tool and re-equip to become the world leader in making alternative fuel vehicles. Reaching this goal will not only allow the United States to be free from our dependence on foreign oil, it will benefit our economy by energizing our domestic auto manufacturers.

I will continue to work to address this issue. If we put as much effort into finding a solution to the energy crisis as we do in blaming one political party or another, we can solve this problem.

I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues in a bipartisan manner to address this critical issue. As the Senate moves forward, I will review energy legislation in accordance with these principles, and I will keep your comments in mind.

If you would like to receive timely email alerts regarding the latest congressional actions and my weekly e-newsletter, please sign up via my web site at: www.chambliss.senate.gov . Please let me know whenever I may be of assistance.

[DannyTN]

Republicans need to communicate to the people what a sham it is, not simply veto it.

Without communicating the nature of the sham, it looks bad regardless of what Republicans do. If it's vetoed, 'Rats will blame us. If it's not vetoed, 'rats will claim they did something.

If it raises taxes, then we need to call it a tax bill, that doesn't provide meaningful drilling.