10/04/01 -- Alaska Drilling Not Included in Senate Defense Bill

UPDATE

***********************************************

FOREST CONSERVATION NEWS TODAY

Arctic Drilling Not Included in Senate Defense Bill

***********************************************

Forest Networking a Project of Forests.org, Inc.

http://forests.org/ -- Forest Conservation Portal

http://forests.org/links/ -- Forest Conservation Links

10/04/01

OVERVIEW & COMMENTARY by Forests.org

The U.S. Senate has soundly voted to not allow amendment of the

Defense Department spending bill to include oil drilling in the Arctic

National Wildlife Refuge. This occurred just shortly after I penned

and sent out the recent item on this matter. Nonetheless, the threat

to America's last great wilderness is obviously far from over.

Legislation that authorizes drilling has already passed the House of

Representatives. Oil drilling advocates in the Senate continue to

threaten to attach Arctic drilling to all Senate legislation.

American citizens should continue to contact their legislators

encouraging them to resist hasty decisions and requesting permanent

protection for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, perhaps using the

Vote.com web site at http://www.vote.com/vote/36279946/index.phtml .

g.b.

*******************************

RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:

ITEM #1

Title: Alaska drilling not put in Senate defense bill

Byline: Julie Vorman

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Senate voted yesterday to limit debate on the

multi-billion-dollar Defense Department spending bill, blocking an

attempt to attach an amendment that would open the Arctic National

Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling.

Senate Republicans and Democrats are split over drilling in the

Alaskan refuge, a measure that proponents now say is more important as

the United States prepares for military action linked to the deadly

Sept. 11 attacks.

Sen. James Inhofe, an Oklahoma Republican, had threatened to add the

drilling language to bill if the Democratic-controlled Senate did not

agree to debate a broad U.S. energy package before lawmakers adjourn

later this month.

But Inhofe joined his Senate colleagues in voting 100-0 to limit

debate on the Defense bill to issues related to military spending.

The defense bill has taken on added urgency since the suicide airliner

attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, which left about 6000

people dead or missing.

LAWMAKER WILL TRY OTHER LEGISLATION

Inhofe separately urged the Senate to adopt a non-binding resolution

promising to take action this month on a broad U.S. energy bill to

ensure adequate supplies of oil for the U.S. military.

But Democratic leaders ruled the resolution out of order.

Inhofe said he would find other Senate bills to use as a vehicle for

attaching the energy legislation.

The United States imports more than half of its daily oil needs,

with most supplies coming from the Middle East. Iraq, which the

United States has accused of sponsoring terrorism, has steadily

boosted exports to the United States and now provides more than

600,000 barrels per day.

"I can't imagine that someone would not want to support this,"

Inhofe said. "What we're saying it, we're dependent upon our ability

to import oil from Iraq to fight a war against Iraq. That's insane."

Supporters of opening the Arctic refuge contend U.S. oil supplies from

the Mideast are at risk and the Alaska wilderness may hold enough

crude to replace the amount of oil imported from Iraq at current rates

for the next 70 years.

The drilling proposal, backed by President George W. Bush, has also

been endorsed by the Teamsters union as a way to create new jobs.

Environmental groups oppose opening the refuge, arguing drilling would

jeopardize a wilderness area that is home to polar bears, caribou and

other wildlife. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service describes the

refuge as "one of the finest examples of wildernesses left on the

planet" and one of the places least affected by modern man.

Green groups contend stricter fuel efficiency standards on sport

utility vehicles, pick-ups and cars would offset any need for more

Alaska oil.

SENATE ENERGY BILL STILL POSSIBLE

Nevada Democratic Sen. Harry Reid said Senate leaders would try to

move an energy bill ahead "hopefully this year."

"There is no question that we need to do something about energy policy

in this country," said Reid, the second-ranking Democrat in

the chamber.

Although Republicans and Democrats are split over Alaska drilling,

Reid said there was about, "75 to 80 percent that both parties want

and that we can all agree on."

Oil industry experts have said it would take about five years for any

significant oil production to start flowing from the refuge, if

Congress approved drilling there.

In early August, the U.S. House passed an energy bill that would

allow drilling in the Arctic refuge, as well as provide $33 illion

in tax breaks to the energy industry over 10 years.

The Senate has yet to finish writing a broad energy bill, which is not

expected to include Alaska drilling.

ITEM #2

Title: Alaska drilling not put in Senate defense bill

Date: October 2, 2001

In a display of unity and statesmanship seldom seen in Washington,

most politicians have put aside partisanship and personal squabbles to

concentrate on helping a traumatized nation recover from the terrorist

attacks of Sept. 11.

Then there's Sen. Frank Murkowski, a Republican from Alaska.

Last Wednesday, he threatened to bring all Senate business to a halt

unless there was a vote on the Bush administration's energy bill,

which contains a provision to open Alaska's National Wildlife Refuge

to oil drilling--a pet project of his and a few others in the Senate.

"If I have to hold up normal legislative business, I will do that," he

said.

Way to go, senator: Your sense of national priorities is about as keen

as your timing. What better moment to push your agenda than now, when

your colleagues and the nation are still mourning the dead and

pondering how to prevent another terrorist attack?

Though drilling was approved by the House earlier this summer by a

comfortable margin, it faces much tougher going in the Senate. Indeed

it's a short-sighted proposal that would damage one of the few

pristine wilderness areas left in the country. It ought to be

defeated; the terrorist attacks don't change that.

Yet, Murkowski and a few others--Sens. James Inhofe (R-OK) and Larry

Craig (R-ID)--are using the national crisis to grease the drilling

proposal through the Senate with a minimum of debate.

Murkowski's office says the oil could start gurgling through the

pipelines as soon as a year from now--if only the Senate would pass

legislation to dispense with lawsuits, environmental studies and other

inconveniences.

In other words, forget the details and let `er rip.

Any responsible plan to drill in Alaska will take anywhere between 7

and 10 years of study, planning, engineering and construction. At

that, the oil from there would have just a small impact on the amount

of oil the nation needs to import. In the short or the long term,

drilling in the refuge has little to do with the terrorist challenges

the country faces.

What an astonishingly crass move, to manipulate the Sept. 11 tragedy

to get the energy bill approved. Threatening to shut down the Senate

smacks of gross political opportunism.

###RELAYED TEXT ENDS###

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior

interest in receiving forest conservation informational materials for

educational, personal and non-commercial use only. Recipients should

seek permission from the source to reprint this PHOTOCOPY. All

efforts are made to provide accurate, timely pieces, though ultimate

responsibility for verifying all information rests with the reader.

For additional forest conservation news & information please see the

Forest Conservation Portal at URL= http://forests.org/

Networked by Forests.org, Inc., gbarry@forests.org