Posted on 05/09/2008 6:57:57 AM PDT by yoe
As Ann Coulter points out in the cover story of this week's HUMAN EVENTS, the Democratic Party has long pursued a strategy designed to force up the price of gasoline for American families.
Part of this strategy is to maintain a moratorium on oil drilling off the East and West coasts of the United States, thus artificially limiting the domestic supply.
Back in 1982, according to the Energy Information Agency, Congress enacted a moratorium on oil and gas drilling off the coast of Northern California. In 1990, President George H.W. Bush ordered the Department of Interior not to allow any new drilling off virtually all the rest of the East and West coasts until 2000. Some drilling was still allowed in the Gulf of Mexico, but not off the coast of Florida. In 1998, President Clinton ordered that President Bush's moratorium be continued until 2012.
Many Republicans in Congress want to lift this moratorium. House Resources Chairman Richard Pombo (R.-Calif.) is pushing legislation that would allow each state to decide individually if it wants drilling off its shores. But congressional Democrats, led by liberal House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.), are adamantly opposed to developing our domestic oil supplies to counter escalating gasoline prices.
HUMAN EVENTS Assistant Editor Amanda Carpenter confronted members of Congress on this issue.
I'm with HUMAN EVENTS and we've talked about lifting the moratorium on offshore drilling on the East and West coasts. Is that something you would support?
HOUSE RESOURCES CHAIRMAN RICHARD POMBO (R.-CALIF.): Yes, but what we are moving is a bill that basically turns over to the states the ability to decide whether they want development off their shore. If you do that, you will end up with a number of states that will allow it.
What states do you think will go for that?
POMBO: Georgia, South Carolina and Virginia have already indicated that they want to do that.
How much do you think that will help the oil supply?
POMBO: That will help dramatically. The immediate difference it makes is on natural gas, which is a bigger problem than the oil prices, because natural gas impacts the entire economy and that's where we would have the most immediate impact and it would be huge.
When could we expect that?
POMBO: We're going to move a bill this year. Whether or not we can get it through the Senate, I think, is the big question, but I believe the House will pass a bill this year.
Is lifting the moratorium on oil drilling off the East and West coasts on the table to increase the supply of oil?
HOUSE ENERGY CHAIRMAN JOE BARTON (R.-TEX.): Chairman Pombo of the Resources Committee has jurisdiction on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), and what he's thinking about doing, what my understanding is, is to give the states sort of an opt-in on a state-by-state basis. They can decide to allow drilling in the federal OCS off their shores, and if they did, states would get an increased royalty share.
Would you support lifting that?
BARTON: Oh sure, sure. We have up to a 100 billion barrels of oil and gas in the OCS and in ANWR that are off-limits right now, and that would help our supply a lot.
Doesn't the oil moratorium put in place by Bush Sr., extended by President Clinton until 2012, that essentially prohibits drilling off the East and West coasts hurt the [oil] supply? Would you support lifting that moratorium?
SEN. MARIA CANTWELL (D.-WASH.): I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to
CANTWELL AIDE: Offshore.
CANTWELL: Oh, offshore?
Yes.
CANTWELL: Listen, the United States has 3% of the world's oil reserves, okay? And we have seen, if we think we are going to drill, why are the gas prices in Washington State higher? Because those prices out of Alaska end up getting set on the world market, okay? So, now we're going to get 3% or whatever the United States has? Do you think we're going to control the world market by having that? No. So, my point is that you know, I'm not saying that in every case the answer is no, but go and be aggressive about the alternative fuel market so you have some competition to gasoline prices. Because right now you don't have any competition, and we have places like China and India and other places eating up demand. We are just going to continue to get squeezed, so now is the time to be much more aggressive about alternative fuels.
Would you support lifting the moratorium on offshore oil drilling on the East and West coasts?
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R.-TEX.): Would I support it? Absolutely.
Would you support lifting the moratorium on offshore drilling on the East and West coasts?
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D.-CALIR): No.
No? Now, I'm not trying to be cheeky, but doesn't that artificially inflate the price if we can't drill because of legislation?
FEINSTEIN: No, not necessarily at all. The fact of the matter is California is at refining capacity. They couldn't refine more if we had it.
Even if we opened it up?
FEINSTEIN: No.
And opened more refineries?
FEINSTEIN: Well, that's not the issue here. The issue is should there be drilling off the coast of California, and Califomians have spoken and they don't want it. So the answer is no.
I've been looking at the oil moratorium on offshore drilling on the East and West coasts. Would you support lifting that to increase the oil supply?
SEN. JUDD GREGG (R.-N.H.): I think we should give the states the option.
I just talked with Mr. Pombo, and he said there's actually going to be a bill in the House that will do that. Do you think that will have a chance of passing the Senate?
GREGG: I don't know. There's certainly more interest in it now than there has been in the past. There's also resistance to it. Obviously there's the issue with Florida, but there's states like Virginia that have expressed a desire to do it.
Would you support lifting [the moratorium on oil drilling off the East and West coasts] to immediately impact gas prices and drive them down?
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D.-CALIF.): Absolutely not. What we have to do, what our nation has to do, is make a decision to be energy independent. We should be spending our energy dollars on the Middle West, not the Middle East. Mr. [James] Clyburn [D.-S.C.] and Congresswoman [Rosa] DeLauro [D.-Conn.] talked about alternative energy sources where we and our own agriculture area would be able to have sources of oil that would reduce our dependence on foreign oil. They're [Republicans are] thinking so tiny, tiny, small. They have to think beyond that. They have got to think of our national security, our economy, our environment, and they have got to think about America's consumers. As long as they are only thinking big oil, they will come up with these small solutions.
REP. JAMES CLYBURN (D.-S.C): Let me say something else about that. Let's go back to the State of the Union. The President said in the State of the Union Address that we must get rid of our addiction to oil. He didn't say foreign oil, he said addiction to oil. So then why are we going to spend time and resources drilling for more oil, be it ANWR or off the East or West coast? Why aren't we developing alternatives to oil? And we can do it within five years. I have spent the whole break working with colleges and universities on what we need to do going forward, hydrogen fuel cells, what we need to do with biofuels. I have coming into South Carolina, this coming weekend. Gov. Schweiker of Montana who will be at South Carolina State College spending a day there talking about alternatives to oil. [Iowa] Gov. Vilsack will be coming, talking about corn and soybeans. We know that rural farmers can be a part of making this country energy independent, and that's where we ought to be spending our resources. That's where we ought to be spending our money, not finding other sources of oil. You don't get rid of the addiction by changing the brand.
These Democrats are clueless and quite frankly, dumb. Cantwell’s response is classic.
-—<>-—<>-—<>-—<>-—<>-—
Absolutely true
‘
“the Cubans are working with the Chineses ....to drill for oil in Cuban waters....A few miles away, American companies are not permitted to drill...”
There was some guy on the Glenn Beck show the other day that had just come back from an Off-shore Oil Technology conference. He had dinner one night with folks from all over (Kenya, Malaysia, etc.) and they said the U.S. is the laughing-stock of the other oil producing nations that are expanding their capabilities.
And hey - Pelosi. What do you think is more environmentaly responsible? Exxon/Mobil drilling off shore Florida under U.S. rules or Cubans/Chinese drilling under Cuban rules?
If these Liberals really cared about the environment they would ONLY allow drilling, mining, timber cutting, etc. in the U.S. and Canada. And maybe Norway. (Okay - most of Europe probably!)
Thank you for that map.
I just sent it to Bill O’Reilly. He wanted to know what we thought about McNut’s interview.
Prior to your sharing your map, I sent him photos of ANWR and what a liar McNut was (although I used polite terms…a difficulty for me when I get wired).
I followed that up with your map.
I also asked him (not holding my breath here) to show those photographs of ANWR on his show. I am sure he will (/sacr).
Many states have sales taxes on gasoline that RISE when the price of gasoline rise.
It is a mixed situation. Both “per gallon” and “percentage of price” taxes are in effect here.
Brilliant bumper sticker
That would include all taxes paid, I believe. Fees would come out of operating costs.
Oil shale - by far the largest deposits in the world are found in the United States in the Green River Formation, which covers portions of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Estimates of the oil resource in place within the Green River Formation range from 1.2 to 1.8 trillion barrels. Not all resources in place are recoverable; however, even a moderate estimate of 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil from oil shale in the Green River Formation is three times greater than the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. Present U.S. demand for petroleum products is about 20 million barrels per day. If oil shale could be used to meet a quarter of that demand, the estimated 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil from the Green River Formation would last for more than 400 years.
I has been estimated that it is profitable to recover with oil at a less than $50 per bbl. Why are we not doing it?
Why? Give all the help they need to hurt themselves so that we’ll be awarded.
I wasn’t disagreeing with your numbers. I was just mentioning that government costs imposed on the energy industry and included in energy prices go beyond just taxes. If you look at the total Federal, state and local taxes and the costs of regulatory and environmental compliance they are way higher than the oil company profits.
The lead time to develop big oil shale projects is several years. The initial work is being started. This is a remote area and pipeline transportation systems also need to be built. There is also plenty of oil and natural gas available offshore that the government does not allow to be drilled.
Also, most of the Green River Formation is on BLM land. They have only recently allowed very small pilot projects to be considered. The EIS was just done earlier this year.
No sooner said than done!!!
Thank you.
When someone finally gets it in D.C. and they pass legislation that approves the immediate construction of small electrical Nuke Plants all over the U.S. and allows extraction of our own oil reserves, then and only then will the Mid East countries realize they have lost.
Us’ins too with the Boy Scouts and sports as well as weekend getaway trips. We’re gonna be stayin round the casa more, burnin some BBQ s/charcoals in order to make EGore proud of how big our carbon footprint is! Footprint compensation as a result of less carbon based fuel usage. hehe
“Also, most of the Green River Formation is on BLM land. They have only recently allowed very small pilot projects to be considered. The EIS was just done earlier this year.”
You’re right. Good point.
In '86, the price collapsed, and it is likely some of those projects would have not been completed or downsized due to the economics of the situation.
That said, Daddy Bush did a few things I didn't like. By '86 Neil had problems of his own...in the Savings and Loan biz (Silverado). I also recall that was when I started voting for leser (but noticeably) evils, which has led us to the mess we have today.
Correction: GWHBush did not become President until 1989. He could not have signed any orders before that date.
Per Sierra Club, “During 1990, a yearlong study by the National Research Council (NRC) of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences found that insufficient scientific data existed to enable offshore drilling to proceed within the annual congressional OCS Moratorium areas while ensuring that the environment would be protected. Having commissioned this scientific study by the NRC, former President George Bush, Sr., became known as the “Environmental President” in 1991 when he issued his Executive OCS Deferrals, declaring that the existing Moratorium waters, with the exception of Bristol Bay in Alaska, would not be offered for new offshore oil and gas leasing until at least 2002.
GHWBush proudly became our first Green President embracing the enviromental wackos and appointing the nutcase Souter to the Supreme Court at about the same time. In 1998, Clinton extended the moratorium until 2012 and GWB has refused to modify that executive order.
“by drilling for our own oil while developing alternatives and building nuclear power plants as fast as we can.”
I guess the point Cantwell made is, would the oil we drill off our own shores be a commodity to be bid on or will it be used just for America with the oil company setting the price and not the speculators?
Thank you for that correction. You are, of course, right about the line of Presidential succession.
The Silverado S&L collapse was in ‘88, and the oil patch Started downhill in ‘82 and had crashed by ‘86, as described, but that happened at the beginning of Reagan’s term, not Daddy Bush’s. Thank you again for the correction.
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.