Posted on 07/14/2008 9:21:29 PM PDT by Conservababe
Just curious as to what a federal ban on offshore drilling means. Now that it has been lifted can individual states still refuse to allow drilling?
Nothing whatsoever has changed.
So, in reality, it’s a political power play?
I was under the impression that the individual states could only claim an exclusion zone several miles out.
Wheras the United States of America claims a territorial exclusion zone out to 200 miles.
True, but where do Republican governors fall if they still refuse to allow offshore drilling?
Only the executive order was lifted. Next, the ban passed by congress will need to expire in September without being renewed. If it expires, then the individual states can choose, in areas under their jurisdiction.
-PJ
Wrong! There was both an executive order and a law prohibiting offshore drilling except along the Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama coasts. The law expires this summer unless it is reenacted by Congress. This act by W forces Congress to vote on offshore drilling and go on the record before the election. If they don't vote, the legislative ban expires and leases could become available for bidding. If they vote and lots of DemocRATS defect from the party leadership in the House and Senate, Harry and Nancy will look bad. If enough DemocRATS side with leadership to pass a new ban, it will be unpopular with the electorate in November. Furthermore they will have gone through all those motions for nothing, because W will veto any reauthorization of the ban.
There is still a law that was subsequently enacted by Congress (but I don't know which President signed it) that prohibits off-shore drilling. That has to be repealed.
I read elsewhere that the law will expire 10/1/2008, and must be renewed. Can anyone confirm or refute this?
There was a congressional ban and a ban by executive order (thanks to Bush 41). Bush 43 lifted the executive ban but Congress still needs to lift their ban. If that happens, states can allow drilling off their coast. If I understand correctly, the congressional ban expires on October 8th, so it will require a vote to keep it in place if they don’t do something sooner.
It is something the president can do to make himself look good without necessarily provoking any kind of action or expending any of his limited political capital. He can say that now it is up to Congress. The fact is, when the Republicans had Congress for many years they never made overturning the Congressional ban on offshore drilling a priority. So it never happened. And the president could have overturned the executive ban at any time since 2001. But now he has and we’re all supposed to applaud.
I know. But this process could have happened years ago. So far it is all noise.
Republicans had a bare majority in the Senate, and RINO's held the balance of power. They kept the ban in place. Gasoline was barely $1 per barrel. The RINOS like Specter, Collins, Snowe, etc. may have changed their minds.
Can you elaborate more of these boundries under control?
If congress lifts their ban, the states can decide if they want to have drilling off their coasts. Bush is actually in favor of congress passing a law that would allow neighboring states to have some kind of say in the matter too.
It means the issue lands on congress to drill. The executive branch is out of the way.
Actually Bush Sr. just renewed the order, Reagan put it in place to begin with.
With gas at $2gal and under for 6 of the past 8 years, any approval for offshore drilling by the President would have been met with stiff resistance from both parties and the residents of most coastal states.
Now, the Dimwits are going to be hardpressed to explain why they want to reauthorize the ban come Fall.
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.