Congress voted for Drilling in Alaskan Refuge

[moneyisevil]

hahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

one step closer to the end of the world

[Halo]

There is still hope. It has to be passed by the senate.

WRITE TO YOUR SENATORS NOW!!



Congress Nears Alaska Refuge Oil Bill

By H. JOSEF HEBERT
The Associated Press
Thursday, April 28, 2005; 5:43 PM

WASHINGTON -- Congress on Thursday moved a step closer to opening an Alaskan wildlife refuge to oil drilling as House and Senate Republicans reached agreement on a budget outline that could be used to consider the issue without the threat of a filibuster.

Opponents of oil development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge repeatedly have used the filibuster, which requires 60 votes to overcome, to block action in the Senate.

But legislation that reconciles government spending with the budget is immune from filibuster and, therefore, can be approved by a simple majority vote.

The budget resolution agreed to Thursday among Republicans does not mention the Alaska refuge. But the resolution requires that lawmakers in both the House and Senate abide by certain spending cuts and revenue amounts when they develop spending proposals.

House and Senate committees have to come up with $2.4 billion in net revenue under the budget directive. The Interior Department puts the anticipated money from bonus bids for leases in the refuge also at $2.4 billion.

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, has said that he will include expected revenues from oil lease sales in the refuge to help meet the budget requirements. Such a move essentially would authorize drilling there.

It is not certain the House would follow the Senate's lead.

The chairman of the House Resources Committee, GOP Rep. Richard Pombo of California, has not decide whether to turn to the refuge to meet that budget obligations, said his spokesman, Brian Kennedy.

Last week, the House approved a broad energy bill that also includes authorization to open the Alaska refuge's coastal plain to oil companies. But in the Senate that legislation is certain to run into trouble because it is subject to a filibuster. Domenici does not plan to include the refuge drilling in a Senate energy bill.

House GOP leaders strongly support developing oil there. But they also want to limit the number of times the issue has comes up for a floor vote, fearful of losing the support of moderate Republicans on the issue.

The House may wait until negotiations with the Senate on a final budget reconciliation plan _ probably in the fall _ before agreeing to include the drilling proposal. This would require only one House floor vote about the refuge as part of the budget process.

President Bush on Thursday reaffirmed his support for drilling in the refuge (Fucking idiotic ass), where the government estimates there are about 10.4 billion barrels of oil beneath a 1.5 million acre coastal plain. Peak production is expected to be 1 million barrels a day.

The United States last year used 20.5 million barrels of oil a day, about 58 percent of it from imports. Bush said the United States needs oil from the refuge to help curtail reliance on imports.

But many Democrats and some moderate Republicans want to continue fencing off the refuge from oil companies, fearing that exploration, followed by oil development, will harm the refuge's ecosystem and an array of wildlife from polar bears and caribou to millions of migratory birds. They also maintain the oil in the refuge would have little impact on oil imports or prices.

[voiceofgod]

I hope they unlock and awaken some ancient alien culture and it annihilates the whole world. Next they are going to start rilling in Hawaii and then Tahatti, then the Bahammas, and Thailand. Any place that might actually be appealing or beautiful can't stay hidden very long. Goddamn money. Everybody's after it, nobody gets enough. Well, in case the whole shit house goes up in flames it's been real.


Hahaha

[Halo]

First of all....what is up with the date on this article? Today's date is only March 14th. WTF?


Published on Wednseday, March 16, 2005 by the Associated Press
Senate Votes to Open Alaskan Oil Drilling
by H Josef Hebert

WASHINGTON - Amid the backdrop of soaring oil and gasoline prices, a sharply divided Senate on Wednesday voted to open the ecologically rich Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling, delivering a major energy policy win for President Bush.

The Senate, by a 51-49 vote, rejected an attempt by Democrats and GOP moderates to remove a refuge drilling provision from next year's budget, preventing opponents from using a filibuster - a tactic that has blocked repeated past attempts to open the Alaska refuge to oil companies.

The action, assuming Congress agrees on a budget, clears the way for approving drilling in the refuge later this year, drilling supporters said. The House has not included a similar provision in its budget, so the issue is still subject to negotiations later this year to resolve the difference.

The oil industry has sought for more than two decades to get access to what is believed to be billions of barrels of oil beneath the 1.5 million-acre coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in the northern eastern corner of Alaska.

Drilling supporters acknowledged after the vote that for refuge development to get final approval Congress must still pass a final budget with the Senate provision included, something Congress was unable to do last year.

Still, "this is a big step," said Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who said he had tried for 24 years to open the refuge, but failed because Democrats blocked the effort through filibusters. The budget is immune from a filibuster, meaning drilling supporters will need only a majority - not the 60 votes required to break a filibuster - to succeed when the issue comes up for final action later this year.

Environmentalists have fought such development and argued that despite improved environmental controls a web of pipelines and drilling platforms would harm calving caribou, polar bears and millions of migratory birds that use the coastal plain.

Bush has called tapping the reserve's oil a critical part of the nation's energy security and a way to reduce America's reliance on imported oil, which account for more than half of the 20 million barrels of crude use daily.

It's "a way to get some additional reserves here at home on the books," Bush said Wednesday.

(Could the man be more of an idiot?)

The Alaska refuge could supply as much as 1 million barrels day at peak production, drilling supporters said. But they acknowledge that even if ANWR's oil is tapped, it would have no impact on soaring oil prices and tight supplies. The first lease sales would not be issued until 2007, followed by development seven to 10 years later, Interior Secretary Gale Norton said.

"We won't see this oil for 10 years. It will have minimal impact," argued Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., a co-sponsor of the amendment that would have stripped the arctic refuge provision from the budget document. It is "foolish to say oil development and a wildlife refuge can coexist," she said.

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., argued that more oil would be saved if Congress enacted an energy policy focusing on conservation, more efficient cars and trucks and increased reliance on renewable fuels and expanded oil development in the deep-water Gulf where there are significant reserves.

"The fact is (drilling in ANWR) is going to be destructive," said Kerry.

But drilling proponents argued that modern drilling technology can safeguard the refuge and still tap the likely - though not yet certain - 10.4 billion barrels of crude in the refuge.

The vote Wednesday contrasted with the last time the Senate took up the ANWR drilling issue two years ago. Then, an attempt to include it in the budget was defeated. But drilling supporters gained strength last November when Republicans picked up three additional seats, all senators who favored drilling in the refuge.

Opponents of drilling complained that Republicans this time were trying "an end run" by attaching the refuge provisions to the budget, a tactic that would allow the measure to pass with a majority vote.

The 19-million-acre refuge was set aside for protection by President Eisenhower in 1960, but Congress in 1980 said its 1.5 million acre coastal plain could be opened to oil development if Congress specifically authorizes it.

The House has repeatedly passed measures over the years to allow drilling in ANWR only to see the legislation stalled in the Senate. But last week, the House refused to include an ANWR provision in its budget document, although any differences between the Senate and House versions would likely be resolved in negotiations.

Drilling supporters argued that access to the refuge's oil was a matter of national security and that modern drilling technology would protect the region's wildlife.

Environmentalists contended that while new technologies have reduced the drilling footprint, ANWR's coastal plain still would contain a spider web of pipelines that would disrupt calving caribou and disturb polar bears, musk oxen and the annual influx of millions of migratory birds.

[fairyblood]

Well... it least it's not Iraq. Kind of a nieve statement but still...

[Halo]

I don't understand your reply.

We have bombed the fuck out of Iraq.

What does this have anything to do with drilling in our nations wildlife refugees?

Are you saying at least we aren't doing more to Iraq than we already have? Not really getting your point.

[fairyblood]

What I ment was at least they're trying to get more oil from our OWN country. I'm not saying I agree with drilling there. Of course I'm not the most politicaly savvy person. So, if you like, I don't mind if you disregard that...

[Halo]

No, there is no reason to disregard it, I just couldn't figure out what you were saying.

Thanks for clarifying.