Posted on 03/10/2005 1:43:46 PM PST by John Lenin
By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Democrats trying to head off the opening of an Alaskan wildlife refuge for oil exploration lost the year's first skirmish Thursday as the Senate Budget Committee voted to clear the way for drilling.
By a 12-10 vote, the Republican-led panel voted to forbid Senate filibusters against legislation later this year allowing drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Filibusters, a procedural delay, require the votes of 60 of the 100 senators to end — a margin that drilling supporters would probably find difficult to achieve.
The vote kept intact language in the $2.56 trillion budget granting the procedural protection to the opening of the reserve, which has pitted economic and environmental interests against each other. Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., who led the effort to strip the provision, said putting it in the budget was "a backdoor maneuver."
But Sen. Pete Domenici (news, bio, voting record), R-N.M., said claims of potential environmental damage go "far beyond reality" and said the reserve would create jobs.
The fight came as Republicans pushed their 2006 spending plan toward committee passage. Like President Bush (news - web sites)'s budget and a similar plan the House Budget Committee approved Wednesday, the Senate fiscal outline would shrink record federal deficits over the next five years by trimming domestic spending while cutting taxes and buttressing defense and anti-terrorism efforts.
At both panel's meetings, Democrats criticized Republicans for budgets they said would hurt the poor, students and others. They said deficits would be worse than the GOP was projecting because their plans were omitting the costs of wars in Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites) beyond 2006, easing the alternative minimum tax's effect on middle-income earners, and Bush's goal of reshaping Social Security (news - web sites).
Overall, the Senate plan requires other Senate committees to write bills by June carving $32 billion in savings from Medicare, student loans, farm programs and other benefits over the next five years. Reflecting the House's more conservative tenor, its budget calls for $69 billion in such savings, nearly $20 billion more than Bush proposed.
The Senate budget also orders $70 billion in five-year tax cuts and gives them a procedural shield from filibusters. The House plan gives such protection to $45 billion in tax cuts, but House leaders say they plan to produce the full $106 billion Bush wants in tax cuts.
The full House and Senate plan to vote on their budgets next week. In April they will try to craft a compromise that eluded them last year because of a tax-cut fight that produced a stalemate.
Congress' budget sets overall spending and tax targets while leaving specific revenue and expenditure changes for later bills.
The House budget did not specify where the benefit reductions would come from. But based on the House committees assigned to find the savings, the Medicaid program for the poor and elderly could be targeted for up to $20 billion in five-year cuts — more than double Bush's plan — plus other reductions for student loans, welfare, farmers and veterans.
By law, benefit programs grow automatically to cover inflation and population growth. While overall spending for these programs would grow under the GOP budgets, growth would be slowed through lower benefits, lower payments to providers or smaller numbers of recipients served.
Both budgets would hold domestic programs except benefits to just less than last year, with decisions on specifics to be made later. They would push Pentagon (news - web sites) spending to $419 billion, growth of 4.8 percent, with a smaller increase for anti-terror programs at home.
Following last year's record $412 billion deficit, the House projects a 2006 shortfall of $376 billion and the Senate a $362 billion gap. Both chambers claim to meet Bush's goal of halving the deficit by 2009, though their starting point is Bush's overestimated 2004 shortfall of $521 billion.
The two chambers see deficits dipping close to $200 billion by 2010. That is the last year covered by both plans, just as the baby boom retirement is expected to start driving shortfalls higher again.
HAHAHA the ANWR would supply Texas for 9 years. wow. compare that to D.C. - 1710 years. That was a pretty cool link. Added it to my favorites. Thanks!
My cousin works for an oil firm that goes out and finds oil for large companies to drill, and he just recently made a "huge" discovery in the Gulf. He wasn't allowed to divulge any specfics, but he said "look for development of a platform that will provide upward of 2 billion barrels". That's pretty significant. Needless to say, his superiors were pretty happy with him.
Drill baby, DRILL!!
The Republicans could frame this issue as a populist question by pushing to have the issue decided by a referendum by the voters of Alaska. The subsequent hue and cry by the 'Rats would, if exploited, expose them as the elistist NIMBY's they are.
Also checkout the photo gallery at
http://www.anwr.org -- they show some very happy caribou and bears near and on top of the oil pipeline -- so much for teh pipeline hurting them. LOL
Congratulations to your cousin -- it's about time that we explore oil at home and in our own back yard.
If only use for emergencies, it is still very important, because we won't be at the mercy of foreign oil and those who are controlling it. It puts us in a very good bargaining position.
While they're at it, uncap all the domestic wells.
We have alot more energy available to us right here in North America than people think...
PING...
It's about time!!!
Can't wait until they actually start drilling. Oil futures ought to tank, taking gasoline prices with them.
Maybe, but GWB is a pretty resolute guy. SS is a huge problem, and he doesn't want to leave it to another generation to fix.
This 'not leaving it to another generation' is a theme with him. The Middle East problem was one that has been handed from President to President since 1935. GWB stopped that particular buck too.
You may be right, but I think he isn't fooling.
I hope you're right. I DO NOT want to see headlines saying that senate Pubbies decided to leave the rules alone and let them continue filibustering judicial nominees in some sort of 'fence mending' APPEASEMENT gesture.
Yeeeeeaaaaaaahhhhh!
Now!
What procedural manuver allowed eliminating the need for a cloture vote?
It would seem to me this is the most important aspect of the story.
Am told it would yield @ 1 million barrels a day. We use upwards of 20m per day w/ @ 13m imported.
They should call this a tactical nuclear option.
Excellent! Now why can't the judicial committee do the same procedural trick with judges???
now we need to do something about building some refineries!
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.