Democrats Block Republican Attempts To Drill Offshore
The elitist Democrats have once again shown their true colors. House Democrats failed to resurrect a bill to punish price gouging at the gas pump, while maneuvering to block Republican attempts to expand offshore drilling.
It’s evident that the Democrats are out of touch with the American people. They are fine with the high price that we are paying at the pump. They have successfully put the vote off until later this summer. “Someone’s afraid that we’ll send a message” and lift the drilling ban, Rep. Jerry Lewis of California, the ranking Republican on the Appropriations panel, said Tuesday. “We have the votes,” maintained Rep. John Peterson, R-Pa., sponsor of the pro-drilling measure that would open waters 50 miles offshore to oil companies. But he said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California “will do everything she can do to stalemate it.”
Is this the “change” that the Democratic party is offering? Why aren’t they listening to the American people? A new Zogby poll from this weekend reveals that 74% of Americans support offshore oil drilling, including 90% of Republicans, 75% of independents, and 58% of Democrats–majorities of each party. In addition, the Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less campaign has received more than a million signatures, yet the American Left continue to deny the wishes of the American people.
How long can you afford to pay these gas prices? How long will you let the Democrats force you to pay over $4.00 for a gallon of gas? If you want real change it’s time to let them hear you. Call your congressman, sign the Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less petition, Let Obama know that you will not be voting for him. A vote for Obama is a vote for higher gas prices.
MonkeyCrash is Your Source For Conservative Opinion.
Comments
By Tony on July 5th, 2008 at
You’ve obviously been tricked by Dubya and the republican’ts who want the oil companies to make more profits on your tax dollars. There is no “drill now, play less”. Its a scam. It exist as much as Santa and the Easter Bunny.
For one, the for/against argument is not split by party as much as it is split by geography. Those that have been affected by oil spills and rely on tourism are usually against it. This just happens to be those on the coasts, which are typically more liberal. Those less affected, in central America, are more conservative. To say it is a democrat vs republican argument is simplifying the issue for nothing more than O’Reilly talking points. Its sad.
Also, drilling “now” will not even begin to produce for at least 10 to 13 years, and will not increase what is refined for up to 17 years. It will not help “now”. And looking at the projections it won’t help “then” either.
Everything they would drill would be used up in 2 to 5 years. Since this wouldn’t make any significant impact, most clear minded people don’t think it is worth the risk. If it would produce more “now” (actually now, not made up “now”), and if it would produce for a significant amount of time, most would be for it and think it might be worth the risk.
And finally, are you aware of the THOUSANDS of leases that are already owned but sitting idle while Bush and company lets the oil companies rack up more and more profits before the American people grow some brains and get them out? Lets use those first, then if it will correct things “now”, when they begin to use all of it up, we can start the offshore drilling. But most people are not aware at how many leases the oil companies are just sitting on while prices increase.
Before passing on Rush and O’Reilly misinformation, you should really learn the facts. Until the oil companies (led by Dubya), quit sitting on the reserves they have, the prices will continue to go up. Giving them permission to sit on even more is nuts.
By Bryan on July 6th, 2008 at
Thanks for stopping by Tony. Feel free to stop by again.
By Anna on July 25th, 2008 at
Here is the petition. The site in the article would not open for me.
http://www.americansolutions.com/General/?Page=f0259511-97ac-41e1-a64c-55a6077b7723
By Anna on July 25th, 2008 at
Try this site…please sign.
http://www.americansolutions.com/
By Bryan on July 25th, 2008 at
Thanks Anna, I had http:// twice in each link, thats what caused the problem. It’s fixed now. Glad you signed!
By TruePatriot on August 24th, 2008 at
First McCain shovels some populist poop by promoting a Holiday Tax Credit, then he scoffs at Obama’s reference to proper tire pressure, and now he is the Drill Shill. As if it isn’t simple minded enough to believe drilling will solve our energy problems, conservatives believe Pelosi is the sole obstacle to our energy solutions (though both she and Obama are willing to make compromises on drilling). And Obama does support nuclear power, just not in asking Nevada to store the entire nation’s nuclear waste.
Let’s please review this all a little more before we get ourselves in a tizzy and make an election mistake (or re-elect the wrong candidate like we did after 9-11). First, a good energy plan is an important part of improving our economy, but it’s just one factor. In regard to the economy as a whole, what candidate will represent the best interest of the people rather than big business, including big oil? I will also ask what candidate is more likely to continue the war in Iraq, and possibly engage in new wars? Because the price at the gas pump doesn’t compare to the price we are paying for the Iraq war, which will cost $3 trillion plus — now that’s economic crazy talk!
But back to the issue of energy, will more domestic drilling help us? People need to stick to the facts if they really want answers to this question. To begin, I encourage people to do the homework for themselves – and more importantly, know the guidelines for determining what a reliable source is when they do it (hint, Rush Limbaugh is not considered a credible source).
Here are the questions I’ve had:
1) How much of a factor is speculation in setting the price of oil?
Is it short-term thinking to remain addicted to fossil fuel rather than focusing on new, alternative forms of energy?
2) If we drill more oil, how soon can we expect any relief in prices at the pump?
3) When oil is drilled in U.S. territory, is it slated for domestic use, or is it sold on the global market?
4) How much known reserves are there in U.S. territories?
5) If we produced more oil, including lower grade crude, do we have refineries that can handle the larger quantity and/or lower grade of crude?
6) How much public land is already approved for drilling that isn’t being utilized, and if not, why not?
7) Are there legitimate environmental concerns, for example, how much are the refineries and off-shore platforms in the Gulf of Mexico at risk during hurricane season?
Here is some of what I’ve found so far:
1) While there are many factors affecting the price of oil (global demand, value of US$, inventories, etc.) supply and demand is NOT the only factor. Speculation has contributed to the soaring prices for oil. Congress seems to think so too. “Lawmakers are threatening to get tough on traders and have introduced 9 different bills.” – on CNN Money (http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/24/news/economy/oil_legislation/?postversion=2008062413) Though supply hasn’t changed and demand continues to increase, why the swings in price including the recent drop in price? Interestingly, when lawmakers began to make these regulatory threats, traders backed off and prices dropped.
2) The time frame for if/when more drilling would bring relief at the pump has been all over the map. Once again, here is what the EIA reports:
“But there’s a flaw in that logic: even if tomorrow we opened up every square mile of the outer continental shelf to offshore rigs, even if we drilled the entire state of Alaska and pulled new refineries out of thin air, the impact on gas prices would be minimal and delayed at best. A 2004 study by the government’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) found that drilling in ANWR would trim the price of gas by 3.5 cents a gallon by 2027. (If oil prices continue to skyrocket, the savings would be greater, but not by much.)” - http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1815884,00.html
By 2027 is hardly in a year or two as claimed by Republicans/FOX News. Also, see: “Arctic Drilling Wouldn’t Cool High Oil Prices – Federal energy analysts say it would take 10 years for production to begin, and its impact could be very modest” -
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/05/23/arctic-drilling-wouldnt-cool-high-oil-prices.html
3) Finding information on how U.S. oil is sold is difficult. It appears that most may be slated for domestic consumption, but not all. More importantly, it appears U.S. oil is nonetheless sold in the U.S. according to global pricing. So it remains questionable in my mind whether drilling more oil in the U.S. will significantly reduce the price of gas in the U.S. regardless of how quickly it could be produced.
4) Reserves are also difficult to determine, because even the experts have different numbers, but it was reported on MSNBC that the U.S. has only about 6% of the world’s known reserves. Here is information from Wikipedia:
“United States proven oil reserves were 21 billion barrels (3.3×109 m3) in 2006 according to the Energy Information Administration. [49] This represents a decline of 46%, or 18 billion barrels (2.9×109 m3) from 39 billion barrels (6.2×109 m3) in 1970. U.S. crude production peaked in 1970 at 9.6 million barrels per day (1.53×106 m3/d), and had declined 47% to 5.1 million barrels per day (810×103 m3/d) by 2006. [50] United States crude oil production has been declining since reaching a smaller secondary production peak in 1988 (caused by Alaskan production). Total production of crude oil from 1970 through 2006 was 102 billion barrels (16.2×109 m3), or roughly five and a half times the decline in proved reserves.[51]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves#United_States
Based on these numbers from the EIA, this calculates to about 11 years of supply, though I’ve heard it as being as high as 60 years supply (at current consumption) from oil company advertisement. Okay, so let’s say there are more reserves to be tapped than indicated by the EIA, or that there is a 60-year supply rather than 11 years. That still means drilling is a temporary strategy. And this kind of short-term, instant-gratification consumer mentality is why the Middle East is now a thorn in our side, and why countries like China will soon kick our bums as well.
Further to this topic, and in regard to reserves such as oil shell, these reserves are expensive to extract. I recently read an article in the financial section of MSN that discussed Exxon/Mobil and their requirement for a minimum ROI in order to drill. As such, government tax credit subsidies have not been an incentive for them in regard to land already approved for exploration/drilling (or for that matter alternative energy). Unless there is low-hanging fruit to be picked with large profits, they won’t go after it. -http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/04/30/8405398/index.htm
5) This financial article is a good overview on refineries - “Behind high gas prices: The refinery crunch” http://money.cnn.com/2007/04/17/news/economy/refineries/index.htm. “So why hasn’t a new refinery been built since 1976?” I live near one, and it isn’t pleasant. As with nuclear waste, no one wants it in their backyard. Sure, there are environmental laws that make it more expensive to build a refinery now, but with the large profits oil companies are raking in, what’s their excuse? Let’s face it. A just-in-time delivery method controls for risk and is more profitable for oil companies. So in the meantime we are stuck with limited refineries, not only in regard to quantity, but also in regard to capability to refine lower-quality crude. -http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_46/b3908079.htm
6) This is a great article in regard to the topic of U.S. reserves in general, but this is what is said specifically about leased land:
“But for all this activity, the Wilderness Society says, in a state like Colorado, where 4.9 million acres are leased out, just 1.4 million acres are under production. And of 7,124 drilling permits approved on public lands in fiscal year 2007, only 5,343 wells were drilled. Whether the cause of the lag time between leasing federal lands and producing oil and natural gas is due to environmental restrictions or strategy by energy companies, the delays mean that “opening protected areas of the coasts or public lands to new leasing is not going to lower the price of gasoline,” said David Alberswerth, a senior policy adviser at the Wilderness Society.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/us/03drill.html
Once again, it is difficult to find reliable articles on this topic (which makes me more wary of what people like Rush are reporting). But it appears that the Rockies are mostly natural gas reserves, so that leaves extreme and expensive areas like Alaska, and risky areas like off-shore platforms in the Gulf of Mexico.
7) How risky is it to increase drilling in the Gulf, and in regard to refineries in the same area? Remembering Katrina, we know there is some risk. Apparently speculators think so too.
“And given that the hurricane season is not even halfway over, traders remain nervous about the possibility of storms striking oil facilities in the Gulf of Mexico.” - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12400801/
If the burning of fossil fuel is contributing to global warming, and ice caps continue to melt causing sea levels to rise, areas in the Gulf such as New Orleans will be at even more risk.
Pelosi told CNN’s Larry King late Monday: “Well, we can do that [drill in protected areas]. We can have a vote on that. But it has to be part of something that says we want to bring immediate relief to the public and not just a hoax on them.” http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0808/11/lkl.01.html
Yes, our oil, as well as coal and gas resources will need to be part of our energy plan in the interim. But fellow Americans – please take off your “happy ears,” and don’t be so gullible during this election year. Please use the Rule of Reason when you go to the polls.