House eyes another vote on ANWR oil drilling

Yahoo ^

[Sub-Driver]

House eyes another vote on ANWR oil drilling

By Chris Baltimore 6 minutes ago

The House of Representatives will hold another vote this week on opening Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, Majority Leader John Boehner said on Tuesday.

Drilling in ANWR, a cornerstone of President George W. Bush's energy blueprint, is the only one of three Republican energy proposals that will come to a vote before lawmakers leave for a holiday recess at week's end, Boehner said.

A vote on opening about 2,000 acres of ANWR to drilling was likely on Thursday, House aides said.

A proposal to give companies incentives to expand refining capacity will be delayed, and the fate of a bill requiring the administration to rethink vehicle fuel efficiency standards was unclear, Boehner told reporters.

In the Senate, Alaska's two Republican lawmakers said they would continue to push to advance ANWR drilling.

Sen. Ted Stevens (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the Commerce Committee, said ANWR drilling could be included in a package of energy legislation that Republicans are drafting for possible consideration this summer.

The Senate will not take up any energy-related provisions this week, Majority Leader Bill Frist said.

Both the House and the Senate have passed proposals to drill on a limited number of acres in ANWR. But both bodies have failed to pass the same bill approving ANWR, which has prevented the proposal from advancing.

Tapping the refuge's potential 16 billion barrels of crude is a key part of the Bush administration's national energy plan to boost domestic oil supplies and reduce U.S. reliance on petroleum imports.

Environmental groups argue that there is not enough oil to justify destroying the habitat for ANWR's polar bears, caribou and other wildlife.

[Sub-Driver]

good, make the Dems make a stand......

[BoBToMatoE]

We need to keep forcing a vote on it until it either gets through, or we make people understand why there is a problem with the supply part.

I still believe that many of the speculators are jerking the markets around and making money beyond their wildest dreams while our enemies in Iran and Venezuala are building up their armies against us.

Either way, we need to drill there, and off our own coast.

[sgtbono2002]

I heard on the radio a while ago that Hillary had made a major speech on energy, In it she proposed 50 billions for energy research, and proposed farmers grow more corn for ethanol.

Somebody need to tell this stupid wench that the answer lies in the offshore wells and ANWR. Why give CHina free reign off Cuba to drill oil we should be drilling. Does she really believe China gives a Shat about the environment when they start drilling?

The whole damned bunch is retarded.

[TheBlueMax]

Environmental groups argue that there is not enough oil to justify destroying the habitat for ANWR's polar bears, caribou and other wildlife.

The up side is that wildlife makes for great grilling! (Just a little non P.C. humor);-)

[latecommer]

For some of you who, as I have, been to that wonderful place called ANWAR, you know what a desirable wilderness this is. This is an area only sparcly populated by animals and that only seasonally. The only reason drilling is opposed is foolish idea that if we are not allowed to drill for more oil we will magically invent a replacement for oil....Sometime I marvel at the juvenile thought patterns of some Americans.

[gov_bean_ counter]

I want someone to bring some stinking pictures to this debate. Then take them on every stinking talking head show known to TV. One of the "pristine" frozen tundra, then one that shows the proposed drilling sight takes up about as much area as a fly on an elephants a$$.

[susannah59]

there is not enough oil to justify destroying the habitat for ANWR's polar bears, caribou and other wildlife.

OK, maybe I'm stupid or something.

I live in West Texas. I don't have an oil well in my back yard (darn it!) but they are not at all an uncommon sight.

I've seen oil wells sitting there pumping with cattle grazing a few feet away (they do put a fence around the pump). Some pumps sit right in the middle of a cotton field.

I don't understand why drilling for oil will "destroy" the habitat for these creatures.

I also think that it's highly unlikely that the people who actually live closest to the proposed drilling area would want the environment destroyed. From what I've read, they're all for it.

How many caribou or polar bears did the Alaska Pipeline kill off, anyway?

[lormand]

North Eastern Liberals will keep killing it in the Senate.

We should cut off all oil supplies to the North East until they relent.

[Jeff Chandler]

Hillary . . . proposed farmers grow more corn for ethanol.

This is beyond ignorant, it's stupid. Ethanol made from corn is too expensive, and we DO NOT want fuel crops competing with food crops.

Cellulosic ethanol is now feasible and should be promoted, along with nuclear power and drilling for oil everywhere we find it.

[Straight8]

Are all available drilling sites subject to congressional ok?
Why should China be allowed to drill and suck up our oil and we aren't able to?
Maybe I'm not able to figure out that reasoning, but WTH is wrong with our dems? It's our oil; let's use it!
We already kiss enough terrorist a** to get the oil we use now! Jeez!

[eyedigress]

I thought global warming was killing the Polar Bears anyway.

[VRWCmember]

Environmental groups argue that there is not enough oil to justify destroying the habitat for ANWR's polar bears, caribou and other wildlife.

Environmental groups' argument hinges on the false strawman that the oil exploration would destroy the habitat for these critters. Their assertion is a bald-faced lie. No habitat will be destroyed. Similar arguments against the pipeline years ago have been proven false as the wildlife flourished around the areas where the pipeline was built. Since no habitat will be destroyed, the only question is whether there is enough oil to justify exploration and extraction. All indications are positive on this question.

[no dems]

"good, make the Dems make a stand......"

Yeah, and while you're at it, make the Republicans who voted against it the last time take a stand.

[P-40]

we will magically invent a replacement for oil.

These people don't want a replacement for oil, they just don't want people to have private automobiles...period. Cars need roads and the more cars there are, the more roads we need. We have alternatives to oil for some uses now...but don't look for these people to do anything but oppose them.

[VRWCmember]

http://www.anwr.org/

maps and photos

[bpjam]

This would have more affect in torturing already vulnerable democrats if the House hadn't just passed with GOP support a bill banning future off-shore drilling (by the US. The bill doesn't ban China or Cuba from doing it).

[bpjam]

You aren't stupid. The arguments about not drilling in ANWR or anywhere else in the North America are religious arguments. The lefties believe with a religious fervor that oil is wrong. They don't care if you or I can prove everything they say is wrong. They will still go on believing in their religion (and keep driving SUVs). The facts do not deter them or change their beliefs at all.

At heart, they are anti-capitalists and they view oil as the blood of the oppressive capitalist regime in this country that is destroying all of the things they believe in (whatever the hell those are today).

[RasterMaster]

[ReformedBeckite]

Question to ask those in the know, after they get the right to drill for oil, how are they going to get the oil to the market, are they going to tap into the Trans Alaska Pipeline, are they going to send an oil tanker up to that area if they can.

p.s.--I am for the drilling of the oil, just curious on the logistics.

[VRWCmember]

Question to ask those in the know, after they get the right to drill for oil, how are they going to get the oil to the market, are they going to tap into the Trans Alaska Pipeline, are they going to send an oil tanker up to that area if they can.

They can probably do a combination of both. It would certainly be no problem to connect from the ANWR production sites over to the TAPS. Also, tankers could be used especially in the summer months.