Patrick O'Connor 
Should Congress Allow More Offshore Oil Exploration?
Posted by Patrick O'Connor on 6/18/08 9:53 am
Today President Bush advised Congress to lift certain bans on offshore oil exploration in existence since 1981, and accused Democrats of blocking his energy initiatives. Bush also blamed Democrats for record-high gasoline prices.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was quick to retort, saying his remarks were “another page from [an]… energy policy that was literally written by the oil industry—give away more public resources.”
Senator Barack Obama said, “This is not something that’s going to give consumers short-term relief and it is not a long-term solution to our problems with fossil fuels generally and oil in particular.”
Tell us what you think about this topic. Should Congress allow more exploration? Would doing so lower gasoline prices? Click the ‘Comments’ link below and get involved in the discussion.
To receive email updates from Navellier All Cap Blog, click here.
Comments
I don’t believe the question is “to drill or not to drill.” Obama hints at a new way of thinking: What are the short-term vs. the long-term benefits and deficits. Yes, energy independence and security are a major plus, but how will drilling affect our shoreline and the industries they support like fishing and tourism? A few other questions:
- Who will oversee the management of off-shore drilling? In forestry, the difference between a clear cut rife with utter devastation and a well-managed forestry project, where profits are kept high by striking a careful balance between harvesting and replanting, is all about oversight and management skill. The current administration has a well-deserved reputation for operational incompetence and collusion with oil and oil services companies. Also, most oil companies are multinationals who may not have our nation’s interests or the health and safety of our citizens as a high priority.
- Even if we are able to trust our government to oversee and manage these resources (our environment and our energy resources), will pumping more oil supplant and retard our efforts to look for cleaner energy resources?
- Will the damage done by further global warming outweigh the benefits derived from pumping new oil?
One more point: Anyone who reads between the lines can clearly see that this issue is being raised at this time not in the interest of pumping our economy. It will take some time to get that oil going and out to market. This issue is being raised so that public officials up for re-election can point at the legislators that vote against this and blame them for the high price of gas.
If you think the suggestion to lift the ban is going to get your Hummer a cheap drink any time in the near future...I’ve got some real-estate on Pluto I’d like to sell you!
Bottom line is that I don’t disagree with the proper use of our resources, I just think we need to get some responsible oversight in place before we end up in an energy quagmire.
BigBob,
Getting your talking points from DailyKos? Who oversees management of offshore drilling now? And how much oil was spilled when Katrina destroyed, what, about 100 rigs? None.
Bush has a “well deserved reputation for operational incompetence”? I’ll remind you Bush has quite an impressive track record for foiling Congressional Democrat schemes. Plus, recall that the Katrina disaster, and the supposed late response by FEMA and Bush was actually due to improper actions and responses by Mayor Nagin and Gov. Blanco. Under the rules at the time, FEMA could not enter an area unless requested by the local authorities. Blanco is on tape refusing assistance. And Nagin ignored his city’s emergency response plans, and let about 200 school busses sit in a lot and become flooded, busses that could have, and should have, been used to evacuate citizens. He, too, is on tape right after Katrina’s passing saying, “We dodged a bullet.”
So you need to provide a factual example of your accusations.
Global warming? Hah! You mean that scam invented by Gore so he could peddle offset credits and thereby line his own pockets? 30 years ago, the Chicken Littles were all atwitter about the coming ice age, as an argument to control emmissions of sulphur dioxide and other gasses. So are you saying all we have to do to fight this supposed global warming is pump out more smog? Gee, why not let a volcano do it, as they do a much better job of it.
Sea buoy data does not support the hypothesis. Plus, it is hubris to assume that even if there is a slight warming of the planet over the past 50 years or so that man has anything to do with it. Mars has warmed as well, and last I checked, there are no Hummers on Mars. Gee, you think it might be fluctuations in the sun’s output?
Isn’t that always the argument, that government actions today won’t bear fruit for several years? Gee, Clinton vetoed ANWR drilling in 1995, saying the oil wouldn’t flow for 10 years, so it wouldn’t do any good. Well, now some 13 years down the road, that oil would come in handy. One has to plan ahead, and it is quite obvious the Democrats are awful at the task.
We heard the same thing for earlier drilling in Alaska, that it wouldn’t provide much oil and would take too long to get it up and running. Well, its been going strong for 30 years or so, and polar bear and caribou populations are skyrocketing due to the additional warmth in that desolate land.
The only quagmire in sight is of Pelosi’s and Reid’s making. They’ve done such a great job, promising to lower gas prices from about $2 a gallon. What is it now, a year and a half later?
Why is it that those wailing the loudest about “outsourcing” are also the ones ensuring we outsource our power supplies? We are the Saudi Arabia of coal. We have more oil in the shales than the entire Middle East combined.
Carter tried the alternative energy and windfall profits taxes 30 years ago. What happened? Our domestic production went from about 60% to less than 40%. And Synfuels went bust. Why would we repeat the experiment and hope for different results? That’s Santayana’s definition of insanity. Got your cardigan sweater handy?
Regards,
DWD
I have to agree with Barack.
This would at best only be a band aid approach.
Sad to say our government has to be put into a crisis situation before any true action is taken. If you noticed nothing of any substance is being talked about.
It’s too bad Governments at both the state and federal level cannot be proactive instead of reactive.
My question is, what is the US short and long term “Energy Policy”; what viable ideas are being considered; who at the Federal level is driving this discussion so it includes all stakeholders, ie. government and private; most of all, will there be Transparency of all discussions?
Now we will see who is a real viable Leader!
DWD,
Hmmm...let’s see...DWD...I suppose anyone who disagrees with you gets their talking points from some “liberal blog” and wears a cardigan sweater. Poor you...since a majority of our nation and the world finally understands that:
- Global warming is not something invented by liberal, commie tree huggers, but agreed upon by the vast majority of scientific community.
- We are not winning in Iraq and it is a quagmire.
- Our economy is not fine and Bush is not doing a “hellofajob”
- Brownie did not do a “hellofajob” and the ensuing disaster was not caused by local government. (That’s why B lost his job.)
- God did not plant dinosaur bones and trilobite fossils to test our faith in the creation story.
(BTW I never said I was against drilling. I am for it, but would like to see it done with proper oversight.)
Fortunately, folks like you that are long on rhetoric and name calling and short on verifiable fact are a pitiful minority.
I wonder where you are getting your sketchy talking points (O’Reilly Factor?) and would love to make good on my offer to sell you real estate on Pluto. I can even arrange for plenty of free parking for you and your Hummer.
BigBob
BigBob,
Uh, no, the vast majority of the scientific community does NOT agree man is causing global warming, or even the extent of global warming. Heck, the globe’s been warming, slightly, since the Little Ice Age. Check your facts while you’re busy name calling while simultaneously accusing me of such.
Uh, yes, we are winning in Iraq. Check the latest statistics. AQI is almost totally defeated, Anbar is peaceful, Sunnis are joining the Malaki government, Sadr renounced violence, the list goes on and on.
The economy was doing fine until the Democrats won both houses of Congress, and all you’d hear from Rangel and Schumer was strategies to increase taxes and kill the economy. Who’s going to invest in plant, equipment, and people in that environment?
Again, check your facts. FEMA was prevented from entering until and unless the local authorities requested help. These rules were in place to preserve at least the fig leaf of state’s rights and local control, to avoid the federal government becoming all powerful. Blanco and Nagin refused, so Bush and Brownie were stuck on the sidelines. By law. Only after the levees broke and it was too late to prevent a disaster did those two scream for assistance, and then have the audacity to point fingers elsewhere.
Creation story? Now, where’d that come from? You don’t have a clue what my beliefs are. But here’s a Vanna momemt for you and it won’t cost you a quarter: I’m not a creationist.
Sir, it is your memory and grasp of facts and timelines that is the problem, not mine, for I have documentation, and not solely from O’Reilly. I suggest you widen your horizons. Investor’s Business Daily would provide a good start for you. Heck, even the WSJ would help, as would turning that dial to something more educational, like History Channel.
Facts are a funny thing, Bob. You should get some.
Regards
DWD
All Cap Portfolios
View Top 10 Stock Holdings, News, Charts and Fundamentals
Quick Links
Subscribe to this Blog
Sign up to get updates by email
