House GOP rejects Obama plan for offshore drilling
WASHINGTON (AP) - In an election-year swipe at President Barack Obama's energy policies, the Republican-led House on Wednesday voted to revoke Obama's five-year plan for offshore drilling, replacing it with its own plan that calls for more ambitious oil and gas development off the U.S. coast.
The legislation will likely go nowhere in the Senate and the White House has issued a veto threat, but as with the tax and regulatory bills the House is also taking up this month, it puts lawmakers on the record on the issues that divide the two parties.
Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, said the bill would offer lawmakers a choice between Obama's restrictive plan and the far more expansive Republican version that opens up areas off the Atlantic and southern California for drilling.
The Republican proposal passed 253-170 with 25 Democrats supporting it. The House also voted 261-164 to reject the president's plan.
The Interior Department on June 28 announced its 2012-2017 offshore oil and gas leasing program that schedules 12 potential lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico and three off the coast of Alaska. The White House, in its veto threat issued earlier this week, said its plan makes available for development more than 75 percent of estimated, technically recoverable oil and gas resources in U.S. oceans.
The House bill, by contrast, provides for 29 lease sales over the same five-year period, and includes areas of the Atlantic coast from Maine to Virginia, and areas off the southern coast of California as well as Alaska and Gulf areas.
Hastings said the administration's plan proposed fewer leases than any administration since the Jimmy Carter presidency. Singling out an election swing state, he said "Virginia will be left out in the cold" until 2017 at the earliest, cheating the commonwealth of thousands of jobs. The Obama plan, he said, keeps 85 percent of America's offshore areas off-limits to energy production.
He and other Republicans said the Bush administration, responding to $4 gas prices in the summer of 2008, had newly opened nearly all offshore areas to energy production, but that Obama tossed that decision aside when he took office in 2009. The Obama administration, he said, has spent the past 3 1/2 years on a plan "that effectively re-imposes the drilling moratoria lifted in 2008."
Hastings said the GOP plan would generate $600 million in additional revenue and create tens of thousands of new jobs.
But Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, top Democrat on the Natural Resources Committee, chided Republicans for bringing six "giveaways to Big Oil" to the House floor, "all far too extreme to pass the Senate." The Republican bill, he said "would place drill rigs right off our beaches in Southern California" as well as off beaches in Maine and other eastern states.
Democrats also argued that more domestic oil is in production today than at any time during the past 14 years and that oil companies already have leases in the Gulf that contain 18 billion barrels of oil and are sitting idle.
The White House said the GOP bill would mandate Outer Continental Shelf lease sales in areas "without regard for significant issues such as state and local concerns and impacts on important fishing areas and with inadequate consideration of military use conflicts."
Congress has 60 days from the time the Interior Department issued the proposal to reject or change it. Without congressional action, the plan will go into effect.
Alaska's Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski on Wednesday introduced a companion to the House bill that adds lease sales off the mid-Atlantic coast, allows exploration from existing oil wells in southern California and provides revenue sharing to states with energy production off their coasts. Virginia's two Democratic senators, Jim Webb and Mark Warner, were among her co-sponsors.
The legislation will likely go nowhere in the Senate and the White House has issued a veto threat, but as with the tax and regulatory bills the House is also taking up this month, it puts lawmakers on the record on the issues that divide the two parties.
Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, said the bill would offer lawmakers a choice between Obama's restrictive plan and the far more expansive Republican version that opens up areas off the Atlantic and southern California for drilling.
The Republican proposal passed 253-170 with 25 Democrats supporting it. The House also voted 261-164 to reject the president's plan.
The Interior Department on June 28 announced its 2012-2017 offshore oil and gas leasing program that schedules 12 potential lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico and three off the coast of Alaska. The White House, in its veto threat issued earlier this week, said its plan makes available for development more than 75 percent of estimated, technically recoverable oil and gas resources in U.S. oceans.
The House bill, by contrast, provides for 29 lease sales over the same five-year period, and includes areas of the Atlantic coast from Maine to Virginia, and areas off the southern coast of California as well as Alaska and Gulf areas.
Hastings said the administration's plan proposed fewer leases than any administration since the Jimmy Carter presidency. Singling out an election swing state, he said "Virginia will be left out in the cold" until 2017 at the earliest, cheating the commonwealth of thousands of jobs. The Obama plan, he said, keeps 85 percent of America's offshore areas off-limits to energy production.
He and other Republicans said the Bush administration, responding to $4 gas prices in the summer of 2008, had newly opened nearly all offshore areas to energy production, but that Obama tossed that decision aside when he took office in 2009. The Obama administration, he said, has spent the past 3 1/2 years on a plan "that effectively re-imposes the drilling moratoria lifted in 2008."
Hastings said the GOP plan would generate $600 million in additional revenue and create tens of thousands of new jobs.
But Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, top Democrat on the Natural Resources Committee, chided Republicans for bringing six "giveaways to Big Oil" to the House floor, "all far too extreme to pass the Senate." The Republican bill, he said "would place drill rigs right off our beaches in Southern California" as well as off beaches in Maine and other eastern states.
Democrats also argued that more domestic oil is in production today than at any time during the past 14 years and that oil companies already have leases in the Gulf that contain 18 billion barrels of oil and are sitting idle.
The White House said the GOP bill would mandate Outer Continental Shelf lease sales in areas "without regard for significant issues such as state and local concerns and impacts on important fishing areas and with inadequate consideration of military use conflicts."
Congress has 60 days from the time the Interior Department issued the proposal to reject or change it. Without congressional action, the plan will go into effect.
Alaska's Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski on Wednesday introduced a companion to the House bill that adds lease sales off the mid-Atlantic coast, allows exploration from existing oil wells in southern California and provides revenue sharing to states with energy production off their coasts. Virginia's two Democratic senators, Jim Webb and Mark Warner, were among her co-sponsors.
Misleading article... he scaled back the amount of drilling to be allowed.... the GOP wants more hence rejected the Obama plan and offered their own LARGER plan ... yeah I don't think so...again government fails to make progress becuase each side is out to hurt the other all the way to november.... so tired of hearing about this crap... and Romney HAH the technology to improve fuel economy has been around but it is restricted how far we can jump ahead becuase automakers and big oil each want to milk as much oil profits as possible ... otherwise I bet we would be at 50 MPG over a decade ago!
The concept is very simple.
Â
Obama is a communist and his goal is to drive energy prices as high as possible.
Â
Anything that furthers the destruction of the US, is the standing Obama policy.
We should drill everywhere but the coast of Alaska as there is absolutely no way anyone can respond to a spill in those waters. It would be nice to see some rigs off our coast and in the sound because there would be a huge increase in fish populations as they love the rigs. Then we could see gas prices drop and have many good paying jobs. The northern half of Alaska should be opened all the way also instead of a tiny 2000 acres currently. The Caribou actually love the pipeline.Â
If the liberals and environmentalists would start letting us drill for more of our own oil, we could put so many people back to work, and end our dependency on oil that we have to buy from countries who hate us. It seems like a no brainer, but liberals continue to fight this idea tooth and nail.
@glamdring2012 If the GOP would have allowed the US to start going green in the late 70s, we would 50% less dependent today. Instead, the GOP does not have the guts to lead. Instead they would rather poke holes all over the US and suck mother earth dry. They make no preparations for the day that we run out of oil then go up the creek without a paddle. They complian that we will leave our children with a deficit but have no problem leaving them with no energy.
When will you gas hogs understand big oil will not change thier prices to give you cheaper gas. When will to undersatnd that the oil under our ground is also a powerful weapon when the time comes we can't get oil. When will you understand the a good part of the oil we drill here gets shipped out. When will you under stand the the Keystone pipe line would have across our country with dirty sand oil and on to tankers bound for overseas markets at market price.
Do anybody on the GOP understand how this works, we can drill oil in every state and it won't change the market. Did you know the Suadis were worried at one time that we would go green and market solar engery so that increased production and OPEC for a shortimet cut prices. That was near the end of GWB's term. Once they noted China taking up the solar engery program and manufacturing, our technolgy, the Suads worries waned.
So stop with the liberal are ruining our country and look in the mirror.
@glamdring2012 We are already seeing lots of new jobs from oil and natural gas. We are starting to see record amounts of oil and natural gas being extracted from the U.S. and by 2020 we might even be an energy exporter. So it looks like those liberals are failing at what you claim they are doing.
The real issue at hand is do we continue to be dependent on fossil fuels for the long run. In my opinion we should not. We need fossil fuels for the short run, and by short run I mean 30 years or so. It will take at least that long to get other U.S. sourced energy options to scale, such as natural gas fueled large trucks and buses, and perhaps better battery technology for cars. U.S. oil companies want us all to stay with oil. Who can blame them. But we won't do that and the oil companies will eventually have to come to grips with that. Follow the money with big oil and the politicians on both sides of the aisle that support them. Watch their not too subtle TV commercials about how they claim to be such saviors of american jobs. It is all a PR attempt to convince people we need oil for 100+ years.
 @UR-SUCH-AN-EXPERT Most of the new drilling is on non-federal, private land. Oil production on federal lands and off shore drilling is down under Obama.
Â
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2012/02/23/ier-analysis-oil-and-gas-production-declines-on-federal-lands-in-fy2011/
@glamdring2012 @UR-SUCH-AN-EXPERT So what. You vote Romeny, I'm sure you will and if he wins, I'm sure he will drill all over the place and his oil buddies will be happy, I'm sure the Kock brothers expect no less for the money they are putting out. You might even get a war now that Cheney, Bolton and Rove are in the picture. What a sad world you want.
The GOP said "no"? Really?
"The legislation will likely go nowhere in the Senate and the White House has issued a veto threat, but as with the tax and regulatory bills the House is also taking up this month, it puts lawmakers on the record on the issues that divide the two parties."
Â
Political grandstanding at it's best. Once again the GOP wastes time and energy on something they know will not be successful just to be on record, as if anyone had any doubts about their opinions on offshore drilling.
@alaska_dreamin
 @UR-SUCH-AN-EXPERT Yes, did you intend to make a comment?
Obama must go. Â Something is wrong with these people like Obama- it is a some sort of mental illness.
@None I learned a lot from your post.
This one is easy, Bush (who I do not like) saw gas prices get to $4, opened up drilling. Gas prices dropped to under $2, Obama takes office shuts it down and gas is $3.50 or more where I live. If they open it up prices will go down. How much I don't know but I sure know it would be nice to put less money in the gas tank and more money in the grocery cart.
 @uplink I agree that its better to buy food than seeing money go to gas. I don't drive much anymore but I rode scooters back in the day and it was fun and cheap on gas. By scooter I don't mean todays kind of scooter either.  One was an Indian. I even had a scooter with a sidecar. I rode my first son in it to the big city. He was 4 years old at the time and still remembers it even though he's an old geezer now. Â
@uplink Actually world demand sets oil prices, thus controls our gasoline prices.
World demand for oil sunk during the Great Recession of 2007/2008. Once the economy finally started to improve in 2009 world demand increased and oil prices increased. (along with some turmoil from Iran, Nigeria, etc). U.S. drilling has very little impact on the price of oil, thus it has very little impact on the price of U.S. gasoline. Another factor that impacts U.S. gas prices are refineries and their capacity. So those that like to say more drilling in the U.S. will bring down prices are lying or they don't know what they are talking about. Of course this topic is used for politcal purposes instead of actual good energy policy. I am not saying not to drill. More U.S. sourced energy is a good thing, but don't pretend that it is going to lower oil prices. We need more oil for the short run while working on better energy sources for the long run. Oil is not a good long term solution.
@uplink The President cannot control gas prices. I did not hear any coming thanking Obama when dropped for the few past weeks, and he should not get credit.
Alaska's Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski's paln sounds good becuase it provides revenue sharing to states with energy production off their coasts. Other than ttaht all, oil pumped regardless from where in the US, it will go for market price. The oil companies will be good american and give cheap gas.
That would go against the free market.
 @uplink Gas prices went down to $2.00 a gallon during the worst part of the recession.  Pricing was due to demand, not supply. Â
Â
@RainyState Thake this chart out 5 years, it dropped like a rock in June 2008 when Bush opened up drilling by June of 2009 it had rocketed up to twice the bottom price.
Â
http://www.seattlegasprices.com/retail_price_chart.aspx
The plunge had nothing to do with Bush's supply. It has 100% to do with the GLOBAL ECONOMIC MELTDOWN, and the lack of demand. You are having a problem with causation vs. correlation. The cause of the price drop was the economic meltdown. The price drop has a correlation with the Bush drilling policy. The opening of areas to new drilling takes months, if not years, for the oil to reach the markets.Â
Â
Your graph actually re-enforces my point that the prices flow with the meltdown and recovery.Â
This comment has been deleted
@OweBomba Did you know that the U.S. is extracting more oil and natural gas than it has in years? And we are projected to actually be an energy exporter by the year 2020, at this current pace? So how are we such a bad country by ignoring own own natural resources when we are headed towards record amounts of oil and natural gas? I really wish people would look at the facts before spouting off on these forums. But I guess it makes some people feel good to speak their politics and partisanship and to repeat what they hear on their favorite cable news network or radio show.
@UR-SUCH-AN-EXPERT "Â Did you know that the U.S. is extracting more oil and natural gas than it has in years?"
Â
 While that is true it is no thanks to Barack Obama and the Democrats. It is due to private enterprise and oil being recovered on private lands such as those in North Dakota. And even there the Democrats with the help of their far left wacko environmentalist green comrades are trying to stop the extraction process, fracking. The fact is we have vast untapped oil reserves on federal land and offshore which the Democrats have blocked in favor of literally throwing away hundreds of millions of dollars by investing in failed "green" energy companies such as Solyndra. Tell me again where are all those "green jobs" Obama and the Democrats promised? Â
 @OweBomba "We are the only country in the world that puts our own natural resources off limits."
Â
You clearly know nothing about any other countries in the world.