Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Six Republican Senators Turn Against Bush on ANWR
Reuters ^ | 1/31/03

Posted on 01/31/2003 11:32:06 AM PST by areafiftyone

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 201 next last
To: cajun-jack
maybe it won't have an immediate effect on gas prices, but a helluva lot of Americans and American Companies will have jobs that will help them, their families and the economy.

Absolutely. And that's a major added bonus that many democrats "choose" to forget. Afterall, they're not the party of creating jobs, they're the party of making sure you don't have a job, so in effect you will depend on the government for everything. In turn they feel they will get re-elected this way. People are starting to learn differently.
121 posted on 01/31/2003 12:48:06 PM PST by rs79bm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
Just imagine people like Estrada being kept off the federal bench.
122 posted on 01/31/2003 12:55:43 PM PST by GraniteStateConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
Indeed. The Framers never viewed the Supreme Court as *ever* having the power it ended up having. Blame Warren and the age of the activist courts. The point of getting conservative justices on there is more to keep the Supremes *out* of business that isn't theirs (although the 2000 election is a rather unique example of them *having* step in -- otherwise we might STILL not have a president...) rather than, IMHO, get them running around and making conservative decisions. The Supremes *still* have some of the residual Warren court activism about them. They need to butt out. Ah well. General grumblage. ;-)

--CWL
123 posted on 01/31/2003 1:00:28 PM PST by Kip Lange (The Khaki Pants of Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Robert_Paulson2
You leave out one the central, hidden tenet of the eco-nuts (and you CAN get them to admit this, if you push hard enough with one, trust me): They don't love the environment, they *hate people*. They would rather see an old couple die because they can't afford heating oil than lose one precious caribou. They don't really love nature; they want to *dictate* nature; or rather, how *you're* supposed to like nature. They are eco-fascists; nothing more, nothing less.

--CWL
124 posted on 01/31/2003 1:03:14 PM PST by Kip Lange (The Khaki Pants of Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
You think the Saudis bought them off too.
125 posted on 01/31/2003 1:09:14 PM PST by weikel (Your commie has no regard for human life not even his own)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone
Oh, surprise, surprise. Those six are RINO's and nothing they do amazes me. My son lives in AK and he says the caribou actually do better in areas where the gaslines are. From what I understand, we have refining plants right here in the good ole USA that are standing still. Hmm.
126 posted on 01/31/2003 1:09:26 PM PST by Marysecretary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone
Before we overreact, this is Reuters again.

Who will be hurt if we drill in Alaska?

The Opecker Princes and Opecker Islamofacist Thugs, both of which Reuters will lie and do anything to protect. Without Opec, Reuters, the Opecker Princes and the Opecker Islamofacists are irrelevant.
127 posted on 01/31/2003 1:10:15 PM PST by Grampa Dave (Stamp out Freepathons! Stop being a Freep Loader! Become a monthly donor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stalin
TOP 10 REASONS TO SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT IN ANWR

1. Only 8% of ANWR Would Be Considered for Exploration Only the 1.5 million acre or 8% on the northern coast of ANWR is being considered for development. The remaining 17.5 million acres or 92% of ANWR will remain permanently closed to any kind of development. If oil is discovered, less than 2000 acres of the over 1.5 million acres of the Coastal Plain would be affected.

2. Revenues to the State and Federal Treasury Federal revenues would be enhanced by billions of dollars from bonus bids, lease rentals, royalties and taxes. Estimates in 1995 on bonus bids alone were $2.6 billion.

3. Jobs To Be Created Between 250,000 and 735,000 jobs are estimated to be created by development of the Coastal Plain.

4. Economic Impact Between 1980 and 1994, North Slope oil field development and production activity contributed over $50 billion to the nations economy, directly impacting each state in the union.

5. America's Best Chance for a Major Discovery The Coastal Plain of ANWR is America's best possibility for the discovery of another giant "Prudhoe Bay-sized" oil and gas discovery in North America. U.S. Department of Interior estimates range from 9 to 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil.

6. North Slope Production in Decline The North Slope oil fields currently provide the U.S. with nearly 25% of it's domestic production and since 1988 this production has been on the decline. Peak production was reached in 1980 of two million barrels a day, but has been declining to a current level of 1.4 million barrels a day.

7. Imported Oil too Costly The U.S. imports over 55% of the nation's needed petroleum. These oil imports cost more than $55.1 billion a year (this figure does not include the military costs of protecting that imported supply). These figures are rising and could exceed 65% by the year 2005.

8. No Negative Impact on Animals Oil and gas development and wildlife are successfully coexisting in Alaska's arctic. For example, the Central Arctic Caribou Herd (CACH) at Prudhoe Bay has grown from 3,000 to as high as 23,400 during the last 20 years of operation. In 1995, the Central Arctic Caribou Herd size was estimated to be 18,100 animals.

9. Arctic Technology Advanced technology has greatly reduced the 'footprint" of arctic oil development. If Prudhoe Bay were built today, the footprint would be 1,526 acres, 64% smaller.

10. Alaskans Support More than 75% of Alaskans favor exploration and production in ANWR. The Inupiat Eskimos who live in and near ANWR support onshore oil development on the Coastal Plain.

Worried About Fuel Prices?
ANWR Equals 30 Years of Saudi Oil
Arctic Power April 01, 2001

ANWR = 30 years of Secure Oil & Gas Supplies

Rising Prices: America’s homes and businesses have experienced dramatic spikes in their electric bills and the prices they pay for gasoline, heating oil and diesel fuel. Public service agencies have cut vital services to pay skyrocketing energy bills. Prices for everything from airline tickets to consumable goods are being recalculated to capture these increased costs. Policy analysts say relief will not come soon enough.

Shrinking Supply: Consumers have good reason to be worried about the future. They worry about our growing dependence on foreign oil imports—now nearing 60% of total supply. They fear the loss of mobility, of not being able to go where they want, when they want. They fear a repeat of the 1970s gas lines and price volatility, and the likelihood of brownouts and blackouts at home. Will there be another war with foreign suppliers? Americans now realize the growing costs of energy can gravely affect their livelihoods, their sense of security, their savings and investments. They demand to know why this situation exists, what can be done about it, and who will do it.

Solutions Sought: There are, unfortunately, no quick fixes. The fundamental problem is that national energy policy, largely fashioned by groups opposed to fossil fuel use, has seriously jeopardized industry’s ability to meet energy needs in a timely fashion. This failed, shortsighted policy has ignored abundant U.S. energy resources while encouraging foreign countries to produce more oil for the United States. Last year alone the U.S. bought more than $120 billion worth of imported oil while exporting thousands upon thousands of American jobs. This has resulted in huge spinoff costs to consumers and our economy.

The time to balance energy, economic and environmental concerns is long past due. It is up to the nation’s policymakers, from local and state elected officials to Congress and the President, to resolve this growing crisis. It is their responsibility to find solutions, in concert with energy conservation, and we must hold them to it. While we will always rely on substantial levels of imports, increased domestic production will provide needed leverage to negotiate from strength with foreign producers.

Alaska’s Role: Policy leaders now realize our government must reconsider rules that prevent industry’s exploring for oil and gas in America’s most promising locations. Obviously, Alaska’s Arctic is one such place. Both government and industry experts recognize the non-park area of ANWR, its coastal plain, as the single most promising unexplored region for major oil and gas discoveries.

Developing this tiny sliver of land, which would impact but two thousand acres (the size of a regional airport) of the 20-million acre refuge, could yield up to 16 billion barrels of oil. This would equate to 30 years of Middle East imports, and possibly more.

(The North Slope, originally thought to contain nine billion barrels of oil, has to date produced 13 billion barrels.) With new technology, production could occur sooner than expected. While the last major Arctic oil field took just seven years to bring on line, companies project it can be done in five years—assuming no delaying lawsuits—as opposed to the ten years claimed by development opponents.

America’s Environmentalists: More than 75% of Alaskans support careful energy exploration in ANWR, including the Inupiat Eskimos who live in ANWR’s coastal plain and have been stewards of the land for centuries. They’ve seen the Prudhoe Bay caribou herds grow nine times larger in the 34 years since oil was discovered there, and the environment negligibly affected. They’ve seen oil produced under the world’s strictest environmental standards, and Alaskans would have it no other way. (Some Canadian and Alaskan Gwich’in Indians, who live outside the Refuge, opposed ANWR exploration only after Exxon and BP let their leases on Gwich’in tribal lands expire.)

Oil and Gas vs. Wind and Solar Energy: A nationally organized advocacy effort seeks to prohibit oil and gas exploration in key prospective areas. Proponents favor using renewable energy resources instead, particularly wind and solar systems, believing they are more environmentally benign and less polluting. While increased use of home solar systems would likely be well received by communities, their cost (about $20,000 for a 2,000 sq. ft. home) is out of reach for typical homeowners. At the community level, it would be difficult to overstate the complexities of siting, permitting, legal challenges and construction problems associated with large commercial wind or solar installations.

Paul K. Driessen of Fairfax, Virginia calculates that producing 50 megawatts of electricity from photovoltaics would mean covering 1,000 acres with solar panels. To produce the same amount of electricity with wind towers (100-200 feet high) would require some 4,000 acres. By comparison, less than half an acre would be required to produce 50 megawatts of electricity from oil, or 2 to 5 acres for natural gas.

The noise, access roads, visual blight and wildlife impacts from wind turbines would be unacceptable to nearby residents. To transmit electricity to urban areas, wind and solar farms would have to be linked to miles of high-tension power lines; and fossil-fuel generators would still be required to supplement intermittent power generation.

Access: With projected energy shortfalls, access to public lands is critical for fossil fuel exploration, production and pipelines, as well as for staging areas for wind, solar and other non-fuel resources. Americans are now recognizing the need for choices among a combination of all energy resources that, along with energy conservation, will assure progress and prosperity over coming decades.

HOW MUCH OIL & GAS IS IN ANWR'S COASTAL PLAIN?

High potential. The high potential for significant discoveries of oil and gas in ANWR has long been recognized. Early explorers of the region at the turn of the century, found oil seeps and oil-stained sands. However, since ANWR was established in 1960, exploration in the region has been restricted to surface geological investigations, aeromagnetic surveys, and two winter seismic surveys (in 1983-84 and 1984-85). No exploratory drilling has been accomplished in the area except for one well commenced in the winter of 1984-85 on Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation and Arctic Slope Regional Corporation lands southeast of Kaktovik on the Coastal Plain. Location to big finds. Although little oil and gas exploration has taken place in ANWR, the Coastal Plain is believed to have economically recoverable oil resources. The Coastal Plain lies between two known major discovery areas. About 65 miles to the west of the Coastal Plain, the Prudhoe Bay, Lisburne, Endicott, Milne Point, and Kuparuk oil fields are currently in production. Approximately 1.5 million barrels of oil a day are produced from these fields, representing 25% of our domestic production. To the east of the Coastal Plain, major discoveries have been made in Canada, near the Mackenzie River Delta and in the Beaufort Sea.

U.S. Geological Survey - 1980. In 1980, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated the Coastal Plain could contain up to 17 billion barrels of oil and 34 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

U.S. Department of Interior - 1987. After several years of surface geological investigations, aeromagnetic surveys, and two winter seismic surveys (in 1983-84 and 1984-85), the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), in its April, 1987 report on the oil and gas potential of the Coastal Plain, estimated that there are billions of barrels of oil to be discovered in the area. DOI estimates that "in-place resources" range from 4.8 billion to 29.4 billion barrels of oil. Recoverable oil estimates ranges from 600 million barrels at the low end to 9.2 billion barrels at the high end. They also reported identifying 26 separate oil and gas prospects in the Coastal Plain that could each contain "super giant" fields (500 million barrels or more).

Only drilling will tell. The geologic indicators are very favorable for the presence of significant oil and gas resources in ANWR, but the limited data means that there is a high level of uncertainty about how much oil and gas may be present. Consequently, current estimates represent the best scientific guesses. However, most geologists agree that the potential is on the order of billions of barrels of recoverable oil and trillions of cubic feet of recoverable gas and that these resources may rival the initial reserves at Prudhoe Bay. The validity of these estimates can only be proved by drilling exploratory wells. Authorization for exploration can only be given by Congress and the President.

In 1996 the North Slope oil fields produced about 1.5 million barrels of oil per day, or approximately 25 percent of the U.S. domestic production. However, Prudhoe Bay, which accounts for over half of North Slope production, began its decline in 1988, and no new fields have yet been discovered with the potential to compensate for that decline.

As you can see, the oil isn't the only reason we need to drill ANWR. It's the economy.

It's not just oil either, oil is only one aspect of our economy that has shut down. We need logging. We need mining. That is what I was trying to tell you in my other post.

Our country must return to developing our natural resources, and the jobs that go with that development. Our economy depends on it.

128 posted on 01/31/2003 1:10:35 PM PST by alaskanfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone
Before we overreact, this is Reuters again.

Who will be hurt if we drill in Alaska?

The Opecker Princes and Opecker Islamofacist Thugs, both of which Reuters will lie and do anything to protect. Without Opec, Reuters, the Opecker Princes and the Opecker Islamofacists are irrelevant.
129 posted on 01/31/2003 1:10:35 PM PST by Grampa Dave (Stamp out Freepathons! Stop being a Freep Loader! Become a monthly donor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BOBTHENAILER; Shermy
Bob would you like to respond to Stalin's bravo sierra here. Stalin is very pro enviral and doesn't want us to be energy self reliant! You and Stalin have danced before if I'm not mistaken.

I suspect that he is an officer and life long Club Sierra mole rather than a conservative.

Shermy feel free to comment on this.
130 posted on 01/31/2003 1:14:07 PM PST by Grampa Dave (Stamp out Freepathons! Stop being a Freep Loader! Become a monthly donor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone
Is anyone surprised?

These are Republicans only because they could not be elected as democrats.

I never thought that I would see it, but there is one thing more repugnant than a democrat.

These six senators.
131 posted on 01/31/2003 1:16:08 PM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
I'm only willing to give up McCain's seat to a Dem if the GOP picks up another somewhere else...But, seriously, I'm really tired of this guy's act.
132 posted on 01/31/2003 1:38:15 PM PST by My2Cents ("...The bombing begins in 5 minutes.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: stalin; Grampa Dave
It's not enough oil to have any effect on prices. The oil companies arn't going to drill it fast enouph to have any effect on prices in the future. If they did it would last about a month.

If you call a million barrels a day minimal, if you call potentially eradicating Saudi imports for 20 years minimal, then I think we can easily say that you have drunk the DU kool-aid long and deep.

One months supply is a neat RAT/Enviro/nazi/fascist trick that makes a nice sucker sound bite. What that translates to in real speak is this: if we turned off every power plant on the lower 48, shut-in every well in the US, shattered all your solar panels, clogged up all your wind mills with butchered raptors, shut down every dam producing electricity and then generated all that power with ANWR crude, then it might, and I friggin' repeat might, take 30, 60, 90 days to run out.

Pretty impressive if you ask me.

133 posted on 01/31/2003 1:48:28 PM PST by BOBTHENAILER (Vaporize Saddam's Smoking Gun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone
Did they ever hear of national security?Can you say,EXECUTIVE ORDER?
134 posted on 01/31/2003 2:02:35 PM PST by INSENSITIVE GUY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stalin
"Because the opening of the Arctic refuge to drilling raises a host of policy concerns, including serious environmental ramifications, we do not believe this issue should be injected in the budget process," the lawmakers said in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Don Nickles.

Whereas depending on foreign oil production has no ramifications whatsoever.

135 posted on 01/31/2003 2:05:22 PM PST by alaskanfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: alaskanfan
Our country must return to developing our natural resources, and the jobs that go with that development. Our economy depends on it.

Wow. Great job, my friend.

136 posted on 01/31/2003 2:06:40 PM PST by BOBTHENAILER (Vaporize Saddam's Smoking Gun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: areafiftyone
In addition to McCain, the letter was signed by Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois and Mike DeWine of Ohio.

Whew!

For a while there I was thinking some Republican senators had signed it.

137 posted on 01/31/2003 2:07:24 PM PST by N. Theknow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #138 Removed by Moderator

To: BOBTHENAILER
Thanx BTN!

I liked you letter to the editor.

139 posted on 01/31/2003 2:15:27 PM PST by alaskanfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: All
I think that the GOP should pick battles wisely. Are we certain that THIS is where you want to expend your political capital? I personally would LOVE to see a full blown filibuster happen.

Im guessing that most of the people in these senatorial districts are unaware of their representatives obstructionist tendencies. A filibuster would be just the thing to inform them of exactly where they stand on the issues.

That said, I think that attaching ANWR Drilling to the 2004 Budget is a bad idea. Because the 2004 Budget is a larger priority to the GOP than the DNC. I think we should allow the ANWR attachment to be removed from this bill, and instead it should be attached to something the DNC has a big priority on, like say for instance... any extension of the CAFE standards.

Let the democrats and the activist groups expend the political capital. There is really no hurry to get at ANWR, we have bigger fish to fry right now.
140 posted on 01/31/2003 2:18:50 PM PST by Samurai_Jack (where'z that confounded tagline!?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 201 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson