Oil firms don't need Alaska refuge to drill - Democrats
Date: 18-Apr-02
Country: USA
Author: Chris Baltimore
The Senate debate over a tundra in northern Alaska known as ANWR was expected to be concluded on Thursday. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle expressed confidence that the Republican measure attached to a broad energy policy bill would fail.
Two Democratic presidential hopefuls - John Kerry of Massachusetts and Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut - said they had the votes needed to kill the measure.
President George W. Bush and other Republicans contend that ANWR and its potential 16 billion barrels of oil is a national security issue. It would reduce imports from the volatile Middle East, and drilling technology means that caribou, oxen and other wildlife would not be harmed, they say.
To woo votes, Republicans have offered to add language that would provide financial benefits to workers in the depressed steel industry and offer ANWR oil to Israel.
Senate Democrats insist there are plenty of other areas that energy companies can drill, including a huge tract of Alaskan land near ANWR and offshore waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Instead of drilling in the pristine refuge, they favor more alternative energy sources and conservation.
TWO VIEWS OF ENERGY POLICY
Kerry took direct aim at the Republicans, saying "there are two competing visions" for the energy future of the nation.
"You can't drill your way out of America's energy challenge. You have to invent your way out of this challenge," said Kerry, referring to new technology for alternative energy and conservation. Kerry was among five Democratic presidential contenders who trolled for support at a party meeting in Florida last weekend.
Another Democrat, Senate Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman, said energy firms have other promising places to explore.
For example, companies can lease tracts in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve, which is located near ANWR. They can also invest in natural gas drilling on Alaska's North Slope or deepwater tracts off the coast of Louisiana, Texas and Alabama, Bingaman said.
Drilling in ANWR "is simply not a necessary component of a progressive energy policy for this country," Bingaman said.
Bingaman also said drilling in ANWR would not produce any commercial volumes of oil for 10 to 12 years, and would do nothing to address near-term supply problems.
REPUBLICAN OFFERS
Alaska Republicans Frank Murkowski and Ted Stevens have sought to woo reluctant Democrats with non-oil provisions.
They offered to attach language giving health benefits to U.S. steel workers and to stipulate that ANWR oil could only be exported to Israel.
"The plan further renews our commitments to our ally Israel, ensuring that, if needed, American oil can help meet the energy needs of the Middle East's only democracy," Murkowski said.
But those offers show Republicans' "desperation to acquire votes by these unusual marriages of legislation," Daschle told reporters. "Those issues ... are not going to produce one additional vote for their effort."
The Republican plan calls for limiting the ANWR area that would be affected by drilling to just 2,000 acres (809 hectares) at any one time. The proposal matched language contained in energy legislation passed by the House of Representatives last year that allowed drilling in the refuge.
The Senate's Democratic leadership wants to finish work on the energy bill this week, a goal which may prove difficult given that are about 40 amendments pending on the legislation.
In addition to the ANWR proposal, lawmakers must also consider amendments on climate change and a multibillion dollar package of energy tax credits and incentives.
If the energy bill clears the Senate, lawmakers from both chambers would have to work out differences with the House version before a final plan could be sent to the president.