Democrats To Offer Bill With Plan For More Offshore Drilling

WASHINGTON — Democrats' stance against offshore drilling has shifted more, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi signaling on Saturday her willingness to consider opening up more coastal areas to oil and gas exploration.

In her party's weekly radio address, Pelosi said opening portions of the Outer Continental Shelf for drilling would be a part of energy legislation that House Democrats intend to put forward in the coming weeks to address oil dependence and high gasoline prices.

Lawmakers will be able to "consider opening portions of the Outer Continental Shelf for drilling, with appropriate safeguards, and without taxpayer subsidies to Big Oil," said Pelosi, D-Calif.

Just weeks ago Pelosi seemed resolved to block any votes to allow offshore drilling, in part because Californians have opposed drilling off their coasts since an oil spill off Santa Barbara in 1969. New oil drilling is only allowed now in federal waters in the western Gulf of Mexico and off Alaska.

Pelosi's radio remarks were the latest to hint that the energy debate in Congress is still evolving, and that Democrats are budging on the issue.

Congress left for the August recess deadlocked over how to address $4-a-gallon gasoline. Democratic proposals to tap the nation's petroleum reserve, curb oil speculation and force oil companies to drill on already leased federal lands were blocked by Republicans trying to force votes on offshore drilling.

Yet any vote on drilling is likely to force the Republicans' hand, since it will likely be packaged with unpopular proposals to tap the petroleum reserve and recoup unpaid royalties from the late 1990s to pay for renewable energy projects.

"This comprehensive Democratic approach will ensure energy independence which is essential to our national security, will create millions of good paying jobs here at home in a new green economy, and will take major steps forward in addressing the global climate crisis," said Pelosi, who criticized Republicans' "drill only" plan.

Republican leaders called Pelosi's proposal a ruse.

She "is deliberately misrepresenting the facts about our plan in order to shift attention away from the Democrats' shameful record," said House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio. "Her new effort appears to be just another flawed plan that will do little to lower gas prices." Boehner and more than 100 House Republicans refused to depart for the summer recess in protest of Democrats' refusal to have a vote on their proposals.

The pressure to expand offshore drilling intensified last month when President Bush lifted an executive prohibition on drilling for oil and gas on the Outer Continental Shelf. A congressional ban remains in place.

Polls have shown that voters have grown more supportive of more domestic oil production as fuel prices have climbed.

Comments

[Brettster]

OFFSHORE DRILLING DOES NOT LOWER TODAY'S GAS PRICES! Why won't this elephant in the room be laid out at the top of every single article or newscast on the subject?? It's a common sense fact if you know anything at all about the oil industry. This is just disgusting.

[Destin]

I got a better idea than either the Dem or GOP ideas.....­. let's just ban oil, once and for all. We don't need it. We have sythetic chemicals for lubrication that are 10x better and more effective than oil, so don't worry about bearings wearing out anytime soon. Maybe then we'd finally get some green energy. And while the military jets and tanks might require petrol to fly, an aircraft carrier can still sail around the world on a few pellets of nuclear fuel that wouldnt' fill up a teaspoon. ;) I wonder why we don't have cars like that? Lifetime of energy in a single pellet.

[TheShadow]

Is Cindy Sheehan's campaign taking donations yet? It's time to oust Pelosi, and Reid.

[SweetJudith]

I'm with you!
Lets get rid of them both!!

[Swerinjer]

Let's get rid of ALL democratic leadership while we're at it. Viva la repugnicans.

[NoPCZone]

At what point do we decide to leave the Democratic Party behind? What good does it do to support a party that caves on every significant issue in the interest of 'bipartisanship'? When does it get to be our turn?
Since the end of WWII, the Democrats have managed to elect 1 President that was not a Southern conservative- John Kennedy. Truman, Johnson, Carter and Clinton were all southern and all relatively conservative- closer to the Republican mainstream than the Progressive Left.

What has this gotten us?

Gutted environmental, worker safety, unionization, banking and consumer protection laws. An expanding police state, ever deteriorating schools and ever growing income inequality. Wars without end and deficits without end. Civil liberties up for grabs and negotiation. Borders closed to legal visitors but wide open to undocumented low-wage workers. On and on and on.

I've just about had my fill of sellout democrats and the Blue-Tick, DLC and other Republicans -in -disguise. Do I get to see a real progressive Democratic Nominee in my lifetime? I'm seriously doubting the chances and wondering why I should support an organization that does not support me.

[Helzapoppin]

I already passed that point.

[Swerinjer]

Have you considered becoming a republican? I mean it sounds like you blame everything you hate about government on the Democrats.

[Oldbuck]

If someone could tell me drilling off shore is going to change the price of oil just how since all oil is price on the world market for oil even our own oil so tell what going to make this any cheaper. How about the oil companies using the leases they have already been approved their a lot of leases to drill off shore and have not used these. This is why it makes me wonder about motives of John McCain in pushing this along with his party.

[ohiomark]

That talking point about the "leases" has already been debunked. There is not enough oil under that land to make drilling worth while. Besides, those leases expire after ten years and if they don't drill they lose their money.

We should be drilling where we know the oil is.

[Trolmaster]

I have yet to see one single credible source that says there's no oil under any of these lands.

It has not been debunked, you're a liar.

McCain is ignoring these 68 million acres and therefore has no credibility on the energy crisis.

[Swerinjer]

Look what the right-wing media made you do: argue the merits of nonsense. They are simply using the energy crisis to push an unpopular policy they could never get through during peaceful times. Naomi Klein disaster capitalism in effect.

[Jrtrollspaceman]

it cost the saudis two dollars a barrel to get it out of the ground, I would think our cost have to be near the same - its a no brainer - we need to get off the foriegn oil tit

[mirza]

Impeach Pelosi!

[Swerinjer]

its as if everything that happened in the last 8 years was Nancy's fault...I cant help but notice you give the repugs a complete pass....

[Jrtrollspaceman]

its going to be their idea now

[chinationreport]

The billion dollar question is always how to balance long term vision and short term greed/convenience. Strategically it is far better for America to keep the oil underground! It is as good as hard currency reserve. Drilling will benefit the short term greed of world oil consumers, oil companies, you and me, but it does not help America in the long term. In the long term, I would say it is better to use others' oil and keep your own to the end.
But, there is a strategic short term advantage of US drilling: to weaken Russia's position due to high oil price.

From:
http://www.chinationreport.com/#EditorsChoice

[darthdarcy]

The increases in the price of a barrel of Oil and Gasoline is due to the criminal manipulation of the Commodities and Futures Market by largely Enron alumni, but since Goldman Sachs is Obama's largest contributor and Morgan Stanley among them as well, there is little hope that Democrats or the other criminal party of fascists will lift one finger to help the suffering average American..­!

If we were to put this market back under regulation along with London and Dubai Oil would return to selling for from $50-60 per barrel...!

Here is a detail of the biggest swindle in world history which is also enriching Russia adding to it's ability to create mischief among other even less friendly and reasonable nations...

Here's one good story that puts it all together for you Ed Wallace; Ice Ice Baby, that's for the International Commodities Exchange..

http://www.star-telegram.com/ed_wallace/story/659081.html

To bad Nancy won't tell American the truth....y­et again..

I guess the speculators are "off the table"...s­ame as good government­...and Impeachment and the Bill of Rights...r­ight Nancy...?

[smi2le]

I would support offshore drilling for oil and gas IF, the state gets a reasonable share of the royalties. California (and Florida) both desperately need money. However I would be opposed to it if it is based on some vague "cheaper gas at the pump" promise by the oil companies.

[Huffingtonposter231]

Multiculturalism dictates that we must give that money to other nations...­not ourselves.­...that would be greedy!

[Heavy]

Your administration has spent more money than any in history, and all of it on defense contractors and tax breaks for corporations and the uber rich. The irony of your mo ronic posts eludes you.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Please check out this very easy to understand chart of oil prices in constant dollars:

http://perotcharts.com/2008/07/monthly-oil-prices-in-constant-2007-dollars-1946%E2%80%932008/
(Lots of great charts there on other topics as well.)

Loosely put, the "natural" price of oil (in constant 2007 dollars) is $25 to $40 per barrel.

In April 2008, when the chart was made, oil was $123 per barrel -- more than TRIPLE the high end of "normal." (again, in 2007 dollars).

As I recall, it got up to $145/barrel in July 2008... call it $140 in 2007 dollars, or 3-1/2 times the high end of "normal."

P.S. When I say "normal," I'm talking about a 60-year period, save for 1973-1986 when OPEC "activism" was at its highest, starting with the oil embargo, and continuing through a period of extreme Iraq-Iran instability. Clearly, at $25-40/barrel, oil producers make a "normal," non "shortage," non "monopoly" profit.

And here we are again. Oil's down to $113, not that I've seen a commensurate dip at the pump.

[Swerinjer]

Unlike the knee-jerk reactionary anti-Pelosi progressives I trust in her to always make the smartest political move she can in her position.

Political reality is political reality. The executive and judicial branches are against her. So is the justice department and the media. Don't forget red democrats like Joe Traitorman, et al. All she has is groundswell popular support, but even that is gone because the right-wing media has successfully manipulated progressives into blaming her for everything the repugs have done. You r gullible pawns.

If you tear her down while doing NOTHING to help build a groundswell of popular support for democratic leadership then you are most definitely helping the repugnican agenda.

[mistlesuede]

The gang of eight/ten, can't remember which it is, has the Democrats backs on this. I think this is a great idea. If you read some of the gangs ideas it is a good bipartisan plan that if put before the Congress by the Dems will call the Repugs bluff. There is no chance Repugs can vote against it and the Dems will have taken the high road again. If some drilling is allowed in order to get the alternative energy programs started and funded, then we are all better off.

[gr8abz]

Proof that all the well intentioned and noble left wing fringe groups efforts to educate Americans has failed. People STILL do not know that off shore drilling WILL NOT lower gas prices. Nor will we see any new supply of fuel for at least TEN years as a result of risky off shore drilling. The oil companies have never had it so good as they do today thanks to the Republicans and the average jerk in the street who likes being screwed at the pump by Exxon etc, yet still feel it is important that they defend big oil.