Tweet
A brake form the other oil news:
Senate Rejects Oil Drilling in Alaskan Refuge
By DAVID STOUT
WASHINGTON, March 19 — The Senate rejected the keystone of President Bush's energy plan this afternoon, narrowly defeating a proposal to begin oil drilling in the Alaska wildlife refuge.
The vote, 52 to 48 against opening the refuge to drilling, was largely along party lines. The result had been expected, since Republican vote-counters had concluded on Monday that they did not have a majority. But the result was nevertheless a stinging defeat for Mr. Bush.
Mr. Bush came into office vowing to reverse President Bill Clinton's refusal to permit drilling in the refuge. The president has argued that the United States must free itself from dependence on foreign oil. Mr. Bush and his allies in the Senate had hoped that rising oil and gasoline prices and the threat of war with Iraq — now all but certain — would lend momentum to their cause.
Mr. Bush has had wide support from oil companies and Alaska's powerful Congressional delegation. But opposition from environmental interests has been fierce.
When drilling in the refuge was rejected in the Clinton administration, Democrats narrowly controlled the Senate. Now, Republicans are in control, with 51 votes, to 48 Democrats and 1 independent. Several Democrats have supported drilling, but even more Republicans have been opposed. The Republican-controlled House has already endorsed drilling in Alaska.
Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton testified before Congress last week that the area proposed for drilling is "flat, white nothingness" and that it represented the nation's greatest potential for future oil.
But environmentalists see the "nothingness" as unspoiled nature and have said that drilling might ruin it forever.
Some proponents of drilling insist that the land can be protected with modern drilling technology and assert that environmentalists have distorted the debate.
"What's wrong with finding out how much oil we have?" Senator Conrad Burns, a Republican of Montana, said. "It's a land that we can take care of and still use the resources it provides."
But opponents of drilling have accused the other side of distortions too. "The solution to our long-term energy problems is not to just open this environmentally-sensitive area to drilling," Senator Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, said. "This does not reduce in a significant way our dependence on imported oil."
The drilling plan was included in the 2004 budget resolution that the Senate has been debating. Democrats managed today, with the 52-to-48 vote, to pass an amendment excising the drilling plan from the budget resolution.
Now that the drilling plan has been removed from the budget process, Republicans will not be able under the Senate's procedural rules to raise the issue again without gathering at least 60 votes. This is because Democrats can filibuster against it, and a filibuster requires 60 votes to shut down.
Eight Republicans voted against drilling: Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois, John S. McCain of Arizona, Gordon Smith of Oregon and Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine. So did the lone independent, James Jeffords of Vermont.
Five Democrats voted in favor of drilling: John Breaux and Mary Landrieu, both of Louisiana; Zell Miller of Georgia and Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye, both of Hawaii.
By DAVID STOUT
WASHINGTON, March 19 — The Senate rejected the keystone of President Bush's energy plan this afternoon, narrowly defeating a proposal to begin oil drilling in the Alaska wildlife refuge.
The vote, 52 to 48 against opening the refuge to drilling, was largely along party lines. The result had been expected, since Republican vote-counters had concluded on Monday that they did not have a majority. But the result was nevertheless a stinging defeat for Mr. Bush.
Mr. Bush came into office vowing to reverse President Bill Clinton's refusal to permit drilling in the refuge. The president has argued that the United States must free itself from dependence on foreign oil. Mr. Bush and his allies in the Senate had hoped that rising oil and gasoline prices and the threat of war with Iraq — now all but certain — would lend momentum to their cause.
Mr. Bush has had wide support from oil companies and Alaska's powerful Congressional delegation. But opposition from environmental interests has been fierce.
When drilling in the refuge was rejected in the Clinton administration, Democrats narrowly controlled the Senate. Now, Republicans are in control, with 51 votes, to 48 Democrats and 1 independent. Several Democrats have supported drilling, but even more Republicans have been opposed. The Republican-controlled House has already endorsed drilling in Alaska.
Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton testified before Congress last week that the area proposed for drilling is "flat, white nothingness" and that it represented the nation's greatest potential for future oil.
But environmentalists see the "nothingness" as unspoiled nature and have said that drilling might ruin it forever.
Some proponents of drilling insist that the land can be protected with modern drilling technology and assert that environmentalists have distorted the debate.
"What's wrong with finding out how much oil we have?" Senator Conrad Burns, a Republican of Montana, said. "It's a land that we can take care of and still use the resources it provides."
But opponents of drilling have accused the other side of distortions too. "The solution to our long-term energy problems is not to just open this environmentally-sensitive area to drilling," Senator Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, said. "This does not reduce in a significant way our dependence on imported oil."
The drilling plan was included in the 2004 budget resolution that the Senate has been debating. Democrats managed today, with the 52-to-48 vote, to pass an amendment excising the drilling plan from the budget resolution.
Now that the drilling plan has been removed from the budget process, Republicans will not be able under the Senate's procedural rules to raise the issue again without gathering at least 60 votes. This is because Democrats can filibuster against it, and a filibuster requires 60 votes to shut down.
Eight Republicans voted against drilling: Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois, John S. McCain of Arizona, Gordon Smith of Oregon and Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine. So did the lone independent, James Jeffords of Vermont.
Five Democrats voted in favor of drilling: John Breaux and Mary Landrieu, both of Louisiana; Zell Miller of Georgia and Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye, both of Hawaii.
It's about time we enviromentalists score a victory. 
Comment