Posted on 07/21/2006 8:32:21 AM PDT by thackney
Drue Pearce, a former Alaska legislator, is President Bush's nominee to be the new federal coordinator for construction of an Alaska gas pipeline. But she got a scolding at her confirmation hearing Thursday that seemed more aimed at the Alaska Legislature.
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, was frustrated that the Alaska Legislature has not endorsed the governor's gas pipeline contract with the state's three major oil companies.
"What's the holdup?" he asked Pearce.
The governor's contract includes a new method of taxing the companies on the oil they extract. Pearce said that component has troubled legislators but "they do appear to have critical mass to move forward on an oil tax change."
Domenici was in no way placated.
"You can sit there and tell me with your nice placid face that this is all going along, and the legislature is going to vote and approve things, but things aren't going very well," Domenici said. "There are too many disputes going on for my cup of tea. . . . There's an awful lot of something that smells and looks like politics going on."
Domenici's needling follows similar prodding from other federal officials _ Sen. Ted Stevens, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, Vice President Dick Cheney _ to get the pipeline project moving.
Pearce's job _ a new one, created by legislation Congress passed in 2004 _ would be to keep the federal agencies working together to get the pipeline built without undue delay.
Another Alaskan, Mark Myers, also went before Domenici's committee Thursday for a confirmation hearing. He has been nominated to lead the U.S. Geological Survey. He called the USGS "one of the premier scientific research organizations in the world" and stressed the importance of providing top-notch, unbiased data.
Myers directed Alaska's oil and gas division until November, when he and five other top administration officials resigned over Gov. Frank Murkowski's gas pipeline negotiations. Myers said at the time he couldn't sit idly and watch the state's interests being undermined in favor of the big oil companies.
At the confirmation hearing, though, there was no mention of why he resigned, and Domenici unleashed his impatience over the pipeline only when questioning Pearce. Domenici said he expected to call her up to Capitol Hill often once she is confirmed.
Stevens and Alaska's other Republican senator, Lisa Murkowski, had unreserved praise for both Myers and Pearce. Murkowski said that when she was in the state Legislature she relied on Myers' expertise and found him to be objective and exceptionally clear.
After the hearing, she said that his resignation did not affect her high opinion of him.
"He needed to be true to himself," she said.
She also said she shares Domenici's frustration.
The legislature, which is set to resume its special session on Monday, needs to act soon, she said.
"If they don't like the specifics of this (proposal), then don't just say no, figure it out. Make it happen. That's their job," she said.
Alaska House Speaker John Harris said there are good reasons the Legislature hasn't approved the governor's oil tax.
"It's a bad bill. It has a lot of problems," he said.
Harris said he isn't going to commit the state to unfavorable terms for decades to come no matter what Domenici says.
With the state's primary election just a few weeks away, politics does play a role, Harris acknowledged.
"If the election goes like I think it's going to go, the governor is not going to win," he said. "People don't want to put together the biggest deal that the state's ever seen _ after the Alaska (oil) pipeline _ with a governor that's not going to win the primary."
Sen. Murkowski said Alaska has only a window of opportunity to get its gas to market.
"Alaska can't be seen as dragging its feet on this project," she said. "We do that, we lose."
The Alaska Gas Pipeline
State Website and links
http://www.gov.state.ak.us/gasline/
The One Who Shall Not Be Named favors the Port Authority proposal. Half the Republican Party favors the Port Authority proposal. The Governor favors what he negotiated with the natural gas producers. If Murkowski is not reelected, expect the Natural Gas Pipeline to be further delayed at least one year and probably more.
Dominici is a good guy but he is really getting old. He always clacks his dentures when he talks these days. Murkowski is very knowledgable, but he is 73 or something. We need some young turks to push this energy stuff.
Listening to Murkowski on radio right now. He is quite sharp. He is covering everything from natural gas to property tax to moose population. Better some experience and wisdom due to age than an ambitious youngster who hasn't yet made his quota of serious errors.
You sahould have heard the contrast between him and the hysterical CA senators during their energy crisis. He is knowledgable. They were embarrassing.
I have known Murkowski for several decades including when he was a local businessman. He was always very conservative and not given to doing radical things. Some say he is dull, but being conservative in manner can give that impression if that is what somebody is looking for.
Well, I live in Alaska, I voted for Murkowski last time, and I have read pretty carefully the provisions of the Governor's gas line bill. I am pretty pro-business and 90 percent of the time vote republican. In my opinion, the bill as proposed gives away too much to the oil companies without getting enough for the state of Alaska and its people. Why should Alaska fix gas prices for 30 to 45 years? Why should the tax on oil be on profits instead of on the wellhead, like it is now? Why should oil companies not be required to pay a penalty if they don't build the gasline once the contract has been implemented?
And so on and so forth. The bill as submitted is so bad and so one-sided in favor of the oil companies that it is pathetic.
One more year is not going to kill a gasline the oil companies haven't pledged to build anyway. And this year I'll be voting for Tony Knowles. He has 8 years in the governor's office already, I know him personally, and he won't sell out to the oil companies.
He Who Shall Not Be Named will kill the natural gas pipeline contract and the project.
Why should investors commit billions of dollars only to have Alaska jump rate after they make the investment? To me, that is no different than changing the price of the payments after I bought my house or car. Alaska is competing with the rest of the world for this capital investment and jobs.
Why should the tax on oil be on profits instead of on the wellhead, like it is now?
I prefer strictly a royalty payment on gross. But the proposed legislation does not do away with existing royalty payments, the 20% on profits is in addition to the royalty and other payments bringing the total tax to about 60%. Name one other industry that comes close to the tax rates paid by the oil companies.
Why should oil companies not be required to pay a penalty if they don't build the gasline once the contract has been implemented?
Why shouldn't mining companies pay penalties for not producing? Why shouldn't those with fishing license pay penalties for not producing? Why should any business do as you propose?
One more year is not going to kill a gasline
One more year of increased foreign imports in LNG terminals, one more year for companies to increase their investments in LNG projects elsewhere in the world.
And this year I'll be voting for Tony Knowles.
I work in the oil/gas support industry. If Tony Knowles is elected I will be moving to a state that is not so anti-business. Many of my co-workers plan to do the same to beat the rush before the fallout.
He has 8 years in the governor's office already
And clearly demonstrated his lack of ability to increase the jobs and productivity of this state.
I believe He Who Shall Not Be Named is working with the Reublicans of the Port Authority, as is Hinkley. That cuts the choices to the bone.
Those that support a LNG terminal in Valdez do not understand the business and are not paying attention to the protest in Washington and California holding up the building of LNG receiving terminals. The so called "All Alaska" gasline would ship gas through pipelines in Canada AND in Mexico.
Murkowski seems to be nearly alone in perceiving this obvious truth. His opponents, both Rs and Ds, are getting behind the Port Authority proposal, just to oppose Murkowski, even though it will at best delay the project and at worst put Alaska in a business it has no right or ability to be in.
The real motivation. Alaska will get the short end if the voters fall for this. And I will be moving back to the heat.
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.