So: if it isn't the consequence of a push by the oil companies, why ARE parts of ANWR on the verge of being opened for drilling?
Three closely related reasons come to mind. First, because the Murkowski family has a long memory. Second, because the US budgetary/legislative process is badly broken. Third, because even if the corporations are not enthusiastic, once the opening takes place there WILL be bids for the rights to drill specified parcels, and the US government badly needs new revenue streams given its state of indebtedness.
Late in the Clinton administration (back when Big Oil WAS pressing the point) the House of Representatives voted in favor of a bill to allow some drilling, and Alaskan Senator Frank Murkowski pressed for Senate passage, but couldn't pull it off. Alaska is now represented in the Senate by Lisa Murkowski, Frank's daughter, the woman portrayed above, and she is fervent about the family tradition on this point.
T o Ms Murkowski is due apparently the insight that opening ANWR is a budget issue since royalties could earn the federal government a fair chunk of money.
Senate Democrats, led by Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington State, have called the budgetary treatment of the issue a “sneak attack,” and a pretext for turning “public land over to polluters."
But Cantwell’s bill blocking the inclusion of this matter in the budget resolution failed by a party line vote, 48 to 52. Only one Democrat voted against the measure (and thus in favor of opening up part of ANWR – specifically the 1002 lands – to drilling.) That was Joe Manchin, of West Virginia.
Also, only one Republican voted in favor of the Cantwell bill. That was Susan Collins, of Maine.
I believe it was a couple of days later that the total package came to its vote in the Senate, and then (October 19), the margin was even narrower, 51-49, but the bill did pass and was sent into the hands of the House of Representatives. Susan Collins voted with the rest of the Republican caucus. The only Republican who voted "no" on October 19 was Rand Paul. Paul's reasons for that "no" vote had nothing to do with ANWR.
Comments
Post a Comment