Skip to comments.Governor (Schwarzenegger): Offshore drilling will not solve energy woes
Posted on 07/25/2006 9:16:30 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Gov. Arnold Schwarznegger stood with environmentalists Monday to decry what he described as congressional effort to open federal waters off the nation's shores to oil and gas drilling.
"We do not want to make any changes," he said during a telephone press conference organized by the Sierra Club and other environmental groups.
"For anyone to think that this would bring gas prices down is ... a big mistake. Because this is not the answer."
The House already haspassed a measure giving states the right and a large slice of the resulting revenue to open federal waters 100 miles from the coast to oil and gas drilling.
The Senate is poised to vote this week on a measure opening a large chunk of Florida's coast to such drilling. Environmentalists fear the bill could lead to a merger with the House version and ultimately result in drilling off other states' coasts.
But the bills' supporters say the governor and the environmental community are demagoguing the measure that protects California's coast while enriching its coffers.
Today two moratoriums prohibit offshore drilling in federal waters: A presidential decree that carries no force of law and can be rescinded at will, and a congressional rider to a spending bill that gets approved annually.
The latter barely survived an effort to strike it last month.
"There is unprecedented pressure on Congress to do away with those bans in their entirety," said Brian Kennedy, spokesman for the House Resources Committee, which is chaired by Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Tracy, and played a key role in crafting the House legislation.
"God forbid there's a major interruption (in supply)," Kennedy added. "Congress could be forced to act ... and the first likely action would be to do away with the ban."
If that happened, states would have "no say whatsoever" over their coastal waters beyond three miles, Kennedy said.
The House bill, if signed into law, would impose an automatic ban on oil and gas drilling from three miles off the coast to 50 miles. State legislatures must vote to ban drilling from 50 miles to 100 miles. Conversely, they can authorize drilling from three miles out.
The bill also would give states a far larger share in the royalties from such drilling. California, where only a few federal leases are active in waters off Santa Barbara and Long Beach, would see annualpayments jump from $6 million to $140 million, Kennedy said.
Meanwhile, holders of other inactive but controversial leases would be able to exchange them for leases elsewhere, and California's historic aversion to offshore drilling stemming from a 1969 blowout that sullied miles of coastline along Santa Barbara would likely ensure a de facto ban.
"California gets a better deal than any other coastal state," Kennedy said.
Sierra Club executive director Carl Pope and many senators see it differently. The bill, Pope said, lets individual states control federal waters while diverting revenue from the federal treasury.
"It's a divide and conquer strategy," Pope said. "It enables the oil industry to start picking off one state after another."
California Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, both Democrats, have placed holds on the Senate legislation. And any effort to bring the House version to a vote in the Senate would likely spark a filibuster, according to Sierra Club's lobbyist.
So why worry?
"We prefer not to take any chances," Pope said.
Their is no singular correct "answer", rather their is a combination of factors which make up the solution.
If he's right, then a hurricane shutting down the Gulf shouldn't make the problem worse.
Oops. Guess he needs to re-think his position.
Hmm, since when did they become "federal waters" and when did they extend that far from the coast???
Arnold does NOT have the endorsement of Sierra Club.
The SC endorsed ANGELIDES.
But as you know, environmentalists have a lot of power in CA and Arnold is in the fight of his life.
Some polls show him ahead, but others show him behind Anglides. It is going to be a tight race.
The bottom line still holds: it's going to be either Gov. Schwarzenegger, or GOV. ANGELIDES. Pick one!
As for the polls, here are a couple recent ones:
Zogby Poll shows Angelides 44%, Arnold 42.3%, margin of error 3.5%
Field Poll shows Schwarzenegger leading in governor's race:
The Field Poll found 45 percent of likely voters surveyed favored Schwarzenegger, with 37 percent backing Angelides.
Lear jet liberals don't want the views spoiled from their multimillions dollar mansions on the left coast, but they don't mind filling up their private jets with fuel produced elsewhere. At the same time they admonish ordinary Americans who drive SUV's about their environmental impact.
Today, I am repealing the laws of supply and demand. No longer will increasing supply lower price.
You got the gubby's bus all fueled up and shiny? Drink lots of water, it's hot out there.
I meant to write
both NOT have the Sierra Club endorsement, but he carries their water, nonetheless.
You don't deny he has done more for the green movement than any governor in the state's history?
He'll take anyone's vote, huh? It's not like he will honor it later anyway.
I wonder how long until China sets up rigs out there off California just as Cuba is doing near Florida? We should just tell them it will not solve their energy woes, I guess.
I also notice you rarely if ever speak to the issue, just slam anyone who isn't in lockstep, real impressive campaign style.. It's more than a few.
I wish I could keep track of how many choose not to even vote because of your "technique".
Yeah, but think of the limousine liberals faces as they watch those gorgeous rigs from the verandas of their beach houses in Malibu.
Next time there is an earthquake in California, don't take my tax dollars and send it to those bastards if they won't allow drilling. If we drilled everywhere we have oil, we would be well on our way to being energy indedependant, and would help take $ from the middle east where our petro dollars buy weapons for terrorists to kill us.
So, he's just doing this because the evil environmentalists made him do it?
ROFL! Whatever, FO. Keep on spinning!
It's the old "Bring Me A Rock" gambit. Anything anyone proposes is, for these idiots, "not the answer". Offshore drilling, ANWR, more refineries, nuclear energy, all of these are "not the answer" for the environmental wackos. Trouble is, they never tell you what "the answer" is. Except more government regulation, and "conservation".
This is election year.
All issues have an impact on the election.
CA Chamber of Commerce and Small Business Association endorsed Arnold. They understand the choices.
What good is the oil doing anyone just sitting there?
It may not be the answer , but it could be aprt of the answer, It could be used, What good is it doing now?
Will we just let it sit there forever?
I fear folks like you and the New Majority (M)ilk have so muddied the state of affairs with your rush to the middle, it really dooesn't matter who wins... except for a few issues and behaviour , there isn't much difference in agenda apparent.
OK, awnald maybe it isn't going to bring prices down, but that really isn't the issue is it. We as a nation are trying to become energy independent before we suddenly have to, and CA drys up and blows away. CA has been one of the reasons this nation is in the negative energy position it is in, by being one if not the largest energy consumer in these United States. It is therefor encumbent on the state of fruits and nuts, to be on the forefront of energy exploration, and development. OK! How soon you forget the guv you just got rid of, and the bad policies of that administration.
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.