The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Breaking News => Topic started by: Wretched Excess on September 16, 2008, 08:24:41 AM
-
this isn't a drilling bill. it's an attempt to kill a potentially lethal campaign issue in the general election.
House to vote on offshore drilling Tuesday
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives is expected to vote on Tuesday on a comprehensive energy package that would open most of the U.S. coastline to offshore drilling, a Democratic aide said on Monday.
The package proposed by Democrats would give states the option to allow drilling between 50 and 100 miles (80 and 160 km) off their shores. Areas more than 100 miles from the coast would be completely open to oil exploration.
Until recently, Democratic leaders in Congress strongly opposed lifting the moratorium on offshore drilling, saying drilling would have only a small impact on gasoline prices in the immediate future.
But as gasoline prices rose to levels above $4 a gallon this summer, public opinion shifted in favor of offshore drilling. Republicans made removing the ban on drilling a key campaign issue for their party in this election year.
Facing the possibility of the moratorium expiring on September 30 and the changing voter sentiments, Democrats offered support for repealing the ban as part of a larger energy package.
More (http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1533340920080916)
-
The package proposed by Democrats would give states the option to allow drilling between 50 and 100 miles (80 and 160 km) off their shores. Areas more than 100 miles from the coast would be completely open to oil exploration.
If what a TV commentator said yesterday was true it's not even a good offshore drilling bill because the parameters are 50-100 miles. Most of the oil lies from 3-50 miles. So again they are putting the oil we need off limits. :bawl: the big dumbasses.
-
The package proposed by Democrats would give states the option to allow drilling between 50 and 100 miles (80 and 160 km) off their shores. Areas more than 100 miles from the coast would be completely open to oil exploration.
If what a TV commentator said yesterday was true it's not even a good offshore drilling bill because the parameters are 50-100 miles. Most of the oil lies from 3-50 miles. So again they are putting the oil we need off limits. :bawl: the big dumbasses.
yep, this bill is a trap. some provisions of the democrats' offshore drilling bill:
Permanently ban access to about 97 percent of the undersea oil lying within 50 miles of the California coast.
Continue the ban on energy production in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico.
Impose a brand-new ban on oil and gas leases in Alaska’s coastal waters out to 50 miles.
Not allow states that approve new leases beyond 50 miles to share royalties with the federal government, thus stripping any financial incentive for states to stand up to environmental pressure groups, who will continue to agitate against any new oil and gas operations offshore.
More (http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTZkYzNiZTE3ZDFjOTI1YjRhZjQxNDMxMzVlNDcyYmM=)
-
Because 9% is not low enough? Geez. They do understand that approval ratings aren't like golf scores right?
Asshats.
-
the ban expires at the end of this month. then, as I understand it, the federal government would be free to sell offshore drilling leases to states that wish to acquire them.
I'm sure the whole thing would wind up in court, but I am equally sure that enviro groups will do everything they can to bog down in court whatever crappy piece of legislation that the current congress can manage to pass . . . .
-
as expected, the debate in the house is a tad contentious . . .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the measure a compromise that would allow more domestic energy production, while also imposing additional taxes on the largest oil companies. The bill also provides fresh support for development of alternative fuels and such technologies as plug-in hybrid cars.
But Republicans lashed out at the legislation and accused Pelosi of trying to deceive the public and simply provide cover from Democrats this election year with a vote on offshore drilling — an issue GOP presidential nominee John McCain and GOP lawmakers in general have made a key in their response to high gasoline prices.
It's a bill "written in the dark of night that won't do a damn thing about the supply of energy. ... It's a hoax on the American people," complained House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio.
Republican anger punctuated the floor debate as Democrats structured the legislation in a way to prevent amendments, including attempts by Republicans to bring up a much broader drilling proposal that would open waters as close as three miles from shore.
That brought a flurry of GOP motions for the House to adjourn, each defeated, as Republicans sought to protest the bill and stave off an eventual vote, expected later in the day.
More (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gB6bi0EyTozdEPy0KGisTQNaS2PQD937USAG0)
-
I hope the Republicans hold firm. Pelosi is such a joke.
-
it's a different situation in the senate, thank heavens.
Durbin voices doubt on extending drilling ban
Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) conceded Tuesday that Democrats might not be able to extend the nearly three-decade-old ban on offshore drilling when Congress takes up spending legislation this month.
Under election-year pressures from Republicans over rising gas prices, Democrats have dropped their resistance to new offshore drilling on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. And Democratic leaders in both chambers seem willing to concede that they lack the support to add the drilling ban to a continuing resolution that will keep the government operating past Oct. 1. Since 1981, Congress has put the drilling ban on spending legislation to prohibit the Interior Department from using federal dollars on oil and gas lease sales along the coastal United States.
Democrats had considered pushing through the stopgap resolution with the offshore drilling ban and daring the GOP to block the measure, which would shut down the federal government just weeks before Election Day. But they now seem reluctant for such a high-profile fight before Nov. 4.
"That will be hard to do, at this point," Durbin said of extending the offshore drilling ban. "As you can see, we're making some concessions on the issue."
Both chambers are taking up legislation this week to give states the authority to expand oil drilling off their coasts. However, the prospect of reaching a resolution and sending it to President Bush’s desk before the Sept. 26 target adjournment date seems murky.
More (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/durbin-voices-doubt-on-extending-drilling-ban-2008-09-16.html)
-
Look over here....look over here......................disregard the man behind the curtain..............bunch of DAMN IDJITS
-
Durbin is a lying sack of shit, and no one should believe anything he says.
If he said the sun came up this morning, I'd have to check for myself.
-
Durbin is a lying sack of shit, and no one should believe anything he says.
If he said the sun came up this morning, I'd have to check for myself.
Damn the sun did come up.....................is Dick Turbin changing his way.....................NAW
-
Burgess (R-TX) is tearing the Dem's "energy" bill a new asshole.
-
As did Dan Young (R) Alaska. He said it was a big fat Zero.
-
And J. Hensarling (R) Texas just compared Pelosi to Hugh Chavez! :lmao: :rotf:
-
Durbin is a lying sack of shit, and no one should believe anything he says.
If he said the sun came up this morning, I'd have to check for myself.
Damn the sun did come up.....................is Dick Turbin changing his way.....................NAW
apparently, the dems assume that The BarackStar! will get elected president, and the dems will retain congress . . . and then they can renew the drilling ban in the next congress. that's a little presumptuous, is it not?
-
Unless its changed, the states, who have to authorize it, would get NO revenue.
THis bill was designed to get voted down so as to make the dems look responsive and the GOP negative.
-
Unless its changed, the states, who have to authorize it, would get NO revenue.
THis bill was designed to get voted down so as to make the dems look responsive and the GOP negative.
indeed. they have no real desire to pass the thing, they just want to force a vote. the house republicans didn't see the damn thing until today.
-
Unless its changed, the states, who have to authorize it, would get NO revenue.
THis bill was designed to get voted down so as to make the dems look responsive and the GOP negative.
indeed. they have no real desire to pass the thing, they just want to force a vote. the house republicans didn't see the damn thing until today.
They got it at 9:00 last night.
-
Unless its changed, the states, who have to authorize it, would get NO revenue.
THis bill was designed to get voted down so as to make the dems look responsive and the GOP negative.
indeed. they have no real desire to pass the thing, they just want to force a vote. the house republicans didn't see the damn thing until today.
They got it at 9:00 last night.
I stand corrected. microscopic difference, though. my original point stands.
-
Unless its changed, the states, who have to authorize it, would get NO revenue.
THis bill was designed to get voted down so as to make the dems look responsive and the GOP negative.
indeed. they have no real desire to pass the thing, they just want to force a vote. the house republicans didn't see the damn thing until today.
They got it at 9:00 last night.
9:45, actually. but as I said, the actual point is unaffected by whether this legislation was dropped on the house republicans last night or this morning.
Democrats introduced a 290 page energy bill at 9:45 p.m. Monday night – a bill currently pending on the House floor. The bill reportedly did not go through any committees or subcommittees, and Democratic leaders are not allowing a single amendment to be offered.
link (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28577)
-
I think the house depends on Americans being oblivious. But I got news for them. A lot of us watch c-span. A lot.
-
Looks like it passed. We'll just have to do another one later.
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/16/democrats-pass-hoax-drilling-bill/
-
Looks like it passed. We'll just have to do another one later.
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/16/democrats-pass-hoax-drilling-bill/
It will still have to pass the in the Senate.
-
Pelosi's bill "permanently bans access to 97 percent of the undersea oil lying within 50 miles of the California coast."
* Permanently ban access to about 97 percent of the undersea oil lying within 50 miles of the California coast.
* Continue the ban on energy production in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico.
* Impose a brand-new ban on oil and gas leases in Alaska’s coastal waters out to 50 miles.
* Not allow states that approve new leases beyond 50 miles to share royalties with the federal government, thus stripping any financial incentive for states to stand up to environmental pressure groups, who will continue to agitate against any new oil and gas operations offshore.
* The plan also includes poison pill provisions that President Bush is on record as opposing, such as new taxes on oil companies and a first-ever nationwide renewable-energy production quota for the electric power sector.
Nothing puts Pelosi’s charade in clearer focus, though, than IER’s charts showing how much oil the plan would lock up off the U.S. West coast. By banning new leases out to 50 miles, the Pelosi plan would permanently deny access to 100 percent of the technically recoverable oil off the coasts of Washington, Oregon, Northern California, and Central California, plus 95 percent of the oil off the coast of Southern California.
http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTZkYzNiZTE3ZDFjOTI1YjRhZjQxNDMxMzVlNDcyYmM=
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2008/09/11/no-energy-nancys-new-energy-plan
-
Pelosi's bill "permanently bans access to 97 percent of the undersea oil lying within 50 miles of the California coast."
* Permanently ban access to about 97 percent of the undersea oil lying within 50 miles of the California coast.
* Continue the ban on energy production in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico.
* Impose a brand-new ban on oil and gas leases in Alaska’s coastal waters out to 50 miles.
* Not allow states that approve new leases beyond 50 miles to share royalties with the federal government, thus stripping any financial incentive for states to stand up to environmental pressure groups, who will continue to agitate against any new oil and gas operations offshore.
* The plan also includes poison pill provisions that President Bush is on record as opposing, such as new taxes on oil companies and a first-ever nationwide renewable-energy production quota for the electric power sector.
Nothing puts Pelosi’s charade in clearer focus, though, than IER’s charts showing how much oil the plan would lock up off the U.S. West coast. By banning new leases out to 50 miles, the Pelosi plan would permanently deny access to 100 percent of the technically recoverable oil off the coasts of Washington, Oregon, Northern California, and Central California, plus 95 percent of the oil off the coast of Southern California.
http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTZkYzNiZTE3ZDFjOTI1YjRhZjQxNDMxMzVlNDcyYmM=
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2008/09/11/no-energy-nancys-new-energy-plan
McCain will kill the Dems with this news on the campaign trail. Stupid old Nancy dosen't care what Americans want, she is blind deaf and dumb.
-
If Bush vetos the thing, provided it can get past the Senate, which looks unlikely, the ban expires anyway.
They act as if no one is watching but Democratic Underground. I would think that even they would wonder about the whole business of their leadership acting like a three card monte player.