U.S. House Votes to Lift Offshore Oil Drilling Ban

By J.R. Pegg

WASHINGTON, DC, June 30, 2006 (ENS) - The U.S. House of Representatives approved legislation Thursday that lifts a 25 year ban on oil and natural gas drilling off most of the Pacific and Atlantic coasts and the eastern part of the Gulf of Mexico. The legislation, which passed by a vote of 232-187, controversially offers states billions of dollars in federal revenues if they allow drilling off their coasts.

Proponents said the measure is needed to boost domestic supplies of oil and natural gas and to revise an outdated ban on drilling in much of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).

The federal moratorium was based on "the false notion that energy production and environmental protection were mutually exclusive," said House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo, a California Republican and co-author of the bill. "The now universally accepted truth is that we can, and must, have both. This bill will finally bring federal policy in line with reality."

Offshore drilling rig. Under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, the Minerals Management Service implements an OCS oil and gas exploration and development program that provides the nation with 30 percent of its domestic oil production and 21 percent of its domestic natural gas production. (Photo courtesy MMS)

"This bill is not a perfect bill," said Representative Adam Putnam, a Florida Republican. "But it gives Florida protections she does not now enjoy. It gives Floridians control over Florida's coasts."

Most states currently have jurisdiction that extends only about three miles from their coasts - Texas and the Gulf coast of Florida control more than nine miles.

But Representative Alcee Hastings, a Florida Democrat, said the bill would be "bad for the environment, bad for tourism, bad for business and a black eye for generations to come."

The legislation is "fiscally irresponsible," according to House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi.

"We do not know what the cost to the federal treasury will be in the long run, but we know it will be huge," said Pelosi, a California Democrat.

Pombo took issue with criticism that the bill would cost too much - he said estimates show it will cost about $3.6 billion over 10 years.

Congressman Richard Pombo chairs the House Resources Committee. (Photo courtesy Office of the Congressman)

"How is that a budget breaker?" Peterson asked.

But Pelosi and other critics found a rare voice of support for their critique of the fiscal impact of the bill - the Bush administration. Although the White House supports the overall goal of the legislation, it released a statement opposing the revenue sharing outlined in the bill, which would apply to both new and existing leases.

The administration criticized those provisions for failing to incentivize production and said they "would reduce federal receipts by several hundred billion dollars over 60 years.

Massachusetts Democrat Ed Markey said the legislation would divert some $600 billion from the federal treasury to four states - Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas - where offshore drilling is already permitted.

"This is about a raid on the federal treasury by four states," said Markey.

The bill is unnecessary, Markey added, because oil and gas companies have plenty of access to offshore reserves.

Congressman Ed Markey displays a chart showing his view of the financial impact of the bill passed Thursday by the House of Representatives. (Photo courtesy Office of the Congressman)

Representative Lois Capps, a California Democrat, took issue with the legislative process that brought the bill to the floor and governed debate on the measure. The final text of the bill was completed just before debate began and only a handful of amendments - and none that addressed curbing American energy consumption - were permitted.

The bill was "furiously rewritten in the dead of night," Capps said.

"Time and time again this leadership brings bills to the floor with rules that skew our choices," said Capps. "It is undemocratic, it is cowardly and it is wrecking America."

The limited debate and rush to vote meant that many House members had not read the bill and many likely did not understand its potential impact, according to Representative Sherwood Boehlert, a New York Republican, who said the manner in which the legislation was considered "pretty much defines travesty."

"It is a complex bill with many unprecedented provisions that most members know nothing about," he said. "This bill does far more than just lift the longstanding moratoriums on drilling. This bill basically hands over our coastal waters to oil interests and makes it hard for states or citizens to do anything about it."

Proponents argue the nation desperately needs to boost its domestic energy supplies and that doing so will help the economy and create jobs. It is a good compromise, said Representative Neil Abercrombie, a Hawaii Democrat.

"It represents a significant step toward energy independence, preserves states' authority over the coastlines, and respects the environment," Abercrombie said. "It is a significant achievement."

The prospects for the House bill are uncertain - the Senate is considering a bill that only targets a portion of the Gulf of Mexico currently under the moratorium. The legislation specifically orders the Interior Department Secretary to open 2.9 million acres of a portion of the Gulf known as Area 181 within one year and bans leasing within 100 miles of the Florida coast.

It passed the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in March, but has been held up by disagreement over revenue sharing and the buffer zone.