Posted on 01/06/2007 7:53:32 AM PST by saganite
WASHINGTON (AP) – Opponents of oil drilling in an Alaskan wildlife refuge are going on the offense after playing defense for a quarter of a century.
They want the new Democratic Congress to make an oft-challenged drilling ban permanent.
Legislation introduced in the House on Friday would make the oil-rich 1.2 million-acre coastal strip of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge a permanently protected wilderness, and end repeated efforts to open the area east of the Prudhoe oil field to energy companies.
“The consensus is that there should not be drilling in the refuge, so the logical next step is to pass legislation which turns it into a wilderness,” Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., chief sponsor of the legislation, said in an interview.
Markey has introduced similar legislation in each of the last three congressional sessions.
However, the House has approved drilling in the refuge a half dozen times, only to see the effort die in the Senate, where supporters couldn’t muster the 60 votes to overcome a likely filibuster.
This time, with Democrats in the majority and a number of moderate Republicans on record as opposed to drilling, Markey believes that he has a good chance in the House to go one step farther and declare the refuge permanently off-limits to oil development.
A co-sponsor of the bill is Rep. Jim Ramstad, R-Minn.
Cindy Shogan, executive director of the Alaska Wilderness League, also says this time is different.
“What’s changed is we won’t have those daily assaults” from pro-drilling forces, she said. “We are definitely on the offense.”
Environmentalists said they plan to mobilize the same people that have fought drilling proposals in past years behind the Markey-Ramstad legislation.
Two years ago, when Republicans expanded their majorities in both the House and Senate, the likelihood of opening the refuge to oil development gained new momentum. It already had been a top energy priority of President Bush since 2001.
“Many people had written the obituary for the refuge,” said Melinda Pierce, legislative director of the Sierra Club. But a concerted push by pro-drilling forces fell short.
Now Markey believes the momentum is going the other way.
“We now have a majority of House members that have publicly said they oppose any drilling in the refuge. In the previous Congress we were battling the Republicans in the majority who wanted to drill.”
Environmentalist know that in the Senate they will need 60 votes to get the wilderness designation, with the filibuster threat coming from Republicans this time. Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who has battled to open the refuge to oil drilling for a quarter century, has not given up.
The coastal strip of ANWR, as the refuge is commonly referred to, is believed to contain 10.5 billion barrels of oil, approaching the size of the Prudhoe Bay field to the west. At peak production the refuge could supply 1 million barrels a day by 2025, according to the Interior Department.
On the other hand, to environmentalists and conservationists the refuge’s coastal strip represents the ultimate wild place to be protected. They compare it to the Serengeti in Africa because of the wildlife that abound: polar bears, musk oxen, caribou and millions of migratory birds that fly there as part of their annual migration.
Drilling proponents argue that modern technology can limit the footprint on the coastal tundra and develop the oil without disturbing the wildlife.
Bush, who called for opening the refuge during his 2000 presidential campaign, repeatedly has said its environment can be protected alongside oil rigs. He views the refuge’s oil as essential to lessening America’s dependence on foreign energy sources.
Markey disagrees.
“Our addiction to oil is real (but) drilling in the refuge would amount to a declaration that we remain in denial about this addiction,” he said.
“There are some places in our world that are so rare and so special, that we have a responsibility to protect them.”
––––
The bill is H.R.39
“The consensus is that there should not be drilling in the refuge,"
Consensus of who? Markey is showing his dependence on the enviro-whackos.
Stay-at-home-voters reaping the fruits of their stupidity...
This is a classic case of people getting the government they deserve.
When our next few crisis comes, the Dems and enviros will blame anyone but themselves. Will the public fall for it again? Probably.
Gutless RINOs reaping the fruits of their own impotence...
The official oft-repeated response here now instead of "Bush's fault(tm)", it's "Thank you, stay at home 'Real Conservative' voters".
Yep, ban Alaska oil drilling and then spend the next 2, 4, etc. years demagoguing about the price of gas.
This is the issue that has turned my young - 30ish - co-workers from liberal to conservative. They are appalled at the lack of logic. Saying things like, "What do these liberals think will happen if we continue to limit the amount of drilling ...?"
"These" liberals coming from that source is music to my ears. But unfortunately too many 'conservatives' taught everyone else a lesson last November.
bump
Nobody taught anyone a lesson. Conservatives still went out and held their noses for GOP candidates.
Republicans lost due to a variety of factors, none of which include conservatives supposedly staying home. Those who repeat this lie have no proof that they did and are simply masking the GOP's own failures.
In the meantime..east of the our artic border the Canadians are drilling like hell.
I thought they were even "greener" than us.
They are also tearing up a good portion of Alberta for the oil sands.
The DemocRats are stuck on dumb. They are doing everything possible to see that we remain dependent on foreign oil. All the windmills and Pious's won't change that.
The Republican Senators would be wise to let the House Rats know that any bill will be filibustered to oblivion.
The resulting smoke and soot will cause great global warming.
And the burning and erosion will cause multiple native species to die and famine across the area.
Dims to enjoy the chaos.
So tell me why the fus about the refuge?
The map shows a very large, in fact humonguous, area to the west of the sanctuary where the current fields are. Why not expand this area for the time being?
You protest too much...
Dems hate oil, nuclear,wind, and coal. Their plan to energy independance rests on infanticide and euthanasia. Eliminate people and energy demand decreases.
Just a simple question, how can you support energy independence and support a drilling ban. Thank you RINOs for leading us to this.
I'm not sure there are 41 Senators with the balls to do that. My guess is the Republicans are going to go along with pretty much anything the Dems want. That was the way things worked before Reagan and the pubs have slipped back into old habits.
>>Stay-at-home-voters reaping the fruits of their stupidity...
Hogwash. Prove it.
While you're at it, check out my tagline. I'll bet I speak for a large number of conservatives, too.
On the other hand, in their infinite wisdom our Republican (real es)Statesmen did everything they possibly could to trample on their own small-government party principles. The party of small government has indeed become the party of the Chamber of Commerce, housing boom, illegal immigration, Country Club welfare. (Does that describe you, johnny7 ?)
But their defeat *wasn't* at the hand of "stay at home conservatives".
Someone please explain this to me. We had a Republican President who said he was in favor of this drilling, and he had a Republican House and a Republican Senate for six years. I'd like to know why the Dims aren't proposing legislation to dismantle all the rigs put up during these six years.
ML/NJ
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.