Replies

Republican politicians should stop refering to it as ANWR or as having 10 billion barrels of oil. They should say "We have 1.45 trillion dollars worth of oil sitting in Alaska, which both Democrats and Republicans have been wisely declaring as off-limits for decades, until a time when global oil supplies started to become scarce. Clearly, prices are going up because demand is increasing, but supply is not. Therefore, now is the time to take advantage of the wisdom of our predecessors.".
It lets Congress to claim that they have half a brain, and possibly would increase their 9% approval rating. It reaches across party lines, and can wear the badge of "bipartisanship" proudly. It allows the Dems to save face and avoid getting blamed for $5/gallon gas. It lets Republicans help their e-e-e-e-evil friends in Big Oil. It reins in the speculation market (who until now had ZERO reason to expect supplies to increase), and instantly drops prices.

Seems like an all-around winner to me!

{DM rolls a d20 behind the DM screen, grins and says "Make a saving throw!"}

LOL Our problem is that we now have a Republican candidate that is going to start lamely communication that we have a global warming problem. People that believe in TW are torn between the price of gas and watching "mother earth die". My democrat dad said just yesterday, "if opening ANWR is going to bring the price of gas down to where people are buying hugh SUVs and burning gas as fast as they can, leave it closed". I asked him if it was necessary to keep gas from going to $5 dollars should we open it" to which he said "yes". I think Dems realize their constituents have reached a point where they believe some conservation will occur but we still need an economy.

I've always wondered if closing ANWR was simply a very big reserve waiting until we couldn't buy cheap stuff from the Middle East. It seems pretty smart even if it wasn't the original plan.