Jump to content
Washington DC Message Boards

Artic National Wildlife Refuge


Human
 Share

Recommended Posts

Can we say ( here we go again?) Well to register your complaint to the White House, please call 1-202-456-1111

 

Just because I am a Republican, does not mean that my head is in the sand.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

http://www.adn.com/front/story/5747187p-5681237c.html

 

SENATE: GOP election victories give backers new hope to pass bill allowing drilling in refuge.

 

 

By DON HUNTER

Anchorage Daily News

 

(Published: November 5, 2004)

Buoyed by victories in U.S. Senate races Tuesday, Senate Republicans are expected to try again to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to petroleum exploration early next year.

 

Marnie Funk, spokeswoman for the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and its chairman, Sen. Pete Domenici of New Mexico, said Republicans likely will try to make ANWR drilling part of a budget bill, a strategy that requires only 50 votes for passage and cannot be filibustered.

 

The tactic was tried at least twice before. In 1995, President Bill Clinton vetoed a budget bill that included ANWR exploration, and last year the Senate fell two votes short of including it in a budget bill.

Interest in reviving the ANWR fight has "only increased with oil at $50 a barrel," Funk said.

 

ANWR drilling accounted for a significant measure of the rhetoric in the Senate campaign that ended here on Tuesday. Newly elected Sen. Lisa Murkowski said at a press conference Wednesday that pushing for an ANWR bill would be her first order of business when Congress convenes next year.

In a written statement, she said, "I have been fielding phone calls all morning from my colleagues in the Senate, and in all of the conversations I have had, we were talking about ANWR."

 

"The most likely scenario is, it would be during the budget reconciliation process, when we only need 50 votes," Murkowski campaign spokeswoman Kristin Pugh said Thursday. "It now appears we will be able to reach that hurdle."

Attempts to reach Sen. Ted Stevens for comment on this matter Wednesday and Thursday were unsuccessful.

 

While drilling supporters were enthusiastic, they were not as happy as when President Bush was first elected and listed opening ANWR as one of his energy priorities.

 

"The net effect of (this) election is positive," said Kevin Hand, executive director of the pro-development lobbying group Arctic Power. "It doesn't provide any assurances by any means ... but considering the condition we could have been in if various folks had won, it's quite optimistic."

 

Republicans will have 55 seats in the next U.S. Senate, and they also expanded their majority in the House. With three seats still undecided Thursday, Republicans had won 231 of the 435 seats in the House.

Congressman Don Young said Wednesday he is excited about the prospects for ANWR legislation next session. "I think there is a strong possibility of this occurring," he said.

 

"I think this changes the whole demographics of the program," he said, adding that prospects also look good for additional gas pipeline legislation with Stevens chairing the Senate Commerce Committee.

But opposition to drilling in ANWR won't fade away.

Alaska Conservation Foundation executive director Deborah Williams said she continues to believe most Americans want the Arctic refuge protected. "We believe that level of support will ultimately prevail," she said.

 

"We're analyzing our options right now in terms of senators whom we believe will understand the critical values associated with protecting America's most precious Arctic coastal plain area," she said.

Williams emphasized that the environmental community isn't opposed to all development in Alaska.

 

"We support oil and gas development on state lands," she said. "We support balanced oil and gas development in the National Petroleum Reserve. We support the gas pipeline. And at the same time, we believe balance requires protecting some areas."

 

Republicans claimed Senate seats in North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida and, perhaps most significantly, in South Dakota, where Tom Daschle, the Senate's minority leader and an ardent ANWR opponent, was upset by John Thune, a former Republican congressman who used the issue in his campaign.

"We did end with a net gain in terms of senators in support of development in ANWR," said Hand, of Arctic Power. "But by no means do we have the ability to just roll through."

 

Arctic Power is focused on getting the level of support in the Senate to 60 members, the number needed to defeat a filibuster, he said. "That way, we know that when the time comes, we have what it takes despite whatever vehicle is used on Congress."

Daily News reporter Don Hunter can be reached at dhunter@adn.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Human,

I am with you on this one. Do Americans want to surrender our Nation’s largest and most pristine arctic wilderness refuge to exploitation by oil companies.

 

Here is a picture of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for to you to decide.

arcticnationalwildliferefuge.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Democrats trying to head off the opening of an Alaskan wildlife refuge for oil exploration lost the year's first skirmish Thursday as the Senate Budget Committee voted to clear the way for drilling.

 

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would satisfy only six months' worth of the nation's oil needs while oil drilling would "destroy" a wilderness that is calving ground to the 150,000 animals of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, former President Carter said yesterday.

 

A Georgian with Alaska on his mind, the former president used a telephone interview to vigorously dispute arguments by Vice President Dick Cheney and other drilling advocates that oil exploration would have minimal effects and leave only a "tiny footprint" on the coastal plain of the 19 million-acre refuge.

 

"(Cheney) may think it's a tiny footprint but the animals up there are not likely to react that way," Carter said. "Would we want to make a minimum impact with an oil well in Yellowstone National Park? Would an oil well in the bottom of the Grand Canyon leave a tiny imprint?"

AlaskaOilDrilingMap.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Human

I am staying out of these next elections, for the simple reason that my group "republicans" needs a dose of reality. In other words the power is going to their heads.

 

Now If my counter parts were to do the same, (when political power were to go the democrats’ heads) we would ALL be far better off "People."

 

Now it doesn't mean that I wont call out your side "Democrats" of the Isle on some of the issues out there where you are misleading the public, or when your side is just doing it just to get even with the republicans "such as in Latin America."

 

This is contrary to the United States interests in Latin America, but to be fair neither side “Clinton Administration, nor the Bush Administration” has paid much attention to Latin America till NOW.

 

That's the God's Honest Truth People.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Kerry

Yesterday, we saw a relentless Republican attack on one of our most treasured natural wonders sneak through the Senate on a 51 to 49 vote. But, we also saw more than 260,000 Americans act in less than 24 hours to add their names to our Citizens' Roll Call in favor of protecting the Arctic Refuge.

 

It was the first time ever that I or anyone else could stand on the Senate floor and announce that, in a day's time, a quarter of a million Americans had gone online to express their passionate support for a given course of action.

 

That awesome display of grassroots power rattled our opponents. They even railed against my e-mail message on the Senate floor and entered its text into the Senate record. So, think of it this way. The Republican leaders of the Senate have 51 reasons to celebrate today, but you and I have 260,000 reasons to do the same.

 

If we keep working together - committed pro-environment Senators and a powerful grassroots movement all pulling in the same direction - we can still stop the plan for drilling in the Arctic from making it the rest of the way through Congress. And we can win the larger battle over two very different visions of America's energy future.

 

George W. Bush and the Washington Republicans have a plan to sell off our public lands to powerful special interests. As a result of their ruthless drive to undermine America's most beautiful natural treasures, the oil rigs are closer to the Arctic Refuge than they have ever been. But, the Bush administration's own scientists and economists admit that the Republicans' plan will not make us less dependent on foreign oil and will not lower prices at the pump. We have to put America's energy future in the hands of Americans - by inventing our way to real energy independence and having energy sources that create jobs and lower prices.

 

With your help, we will continue to wholeheartedly resist their special interest-funded partisan agenda. And, if we act with the same energy and determination as we have on this critical Arctic Refuge vote, sooner than later, our power and commitment will carry the day. I know you will be with me every step of the way and I thank you for the passion and energy that you bring to our work together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To strike section 201(a)(4) relative to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

 

Vote Counts:

 

YEAs 49

NAYs 51

 

 

Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Nay

Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Nay Stevens (R-AK), Nay

Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Nay McCain (R-AZ), Yea

Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Yea Pryor (D-AR), Yea

California: Boxer (D-CA), Yea Feinstein (D-CA), Yea

Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Nay Salazar (D-CO), Yea

Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Yea Lieberman (D-CT), Yea

Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Yea Carper (D-DE), Yea

Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Nay Nelson (D-FL), Yea

Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Nay Isakson (R-GA), Nay

Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay

Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Nay Crapo (R-ID), Nay

Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Yea Obama (D-IL), Yea

Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Nay

Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Nay Harkin (D-IA), Yea

Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Nay Roberts (R-KS), Nay

Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Nay McConnell (R-KY), Nay

Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Nay Vitter (R-LA), Nay

Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea

Maryland: Mikulski (D-MD), Yea Sarbanes (D-MD), Yea

Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Yea Kerry (D-MA), Yea

Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Yea Stabenow (D-MI), Yea

Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Dayton (D-MN), Yea

Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Nay Lott (R-MS), Nay

Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Nay Talent (R-MO), Nay

Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Burns (R-MT), Nay

Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Nay Nelson (D-NE), Yea

Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Nay Reid (D-NV), Yea

New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Nay Sununu (R-NH), Nay

New Jersey: Corzine (D-NJ), Yea Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea

New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Yea Domenici (R-NM), Nay

New York: Clinton (D-NY), Yea Schumer (D-NY), Yea

North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Nay Dole (R-NC), Nay

North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Yea Dorgan (D-ND), Yea

Ohio: DeWine (R-OH), Yea Voinovich (R-OH), Nay

Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Nay Inhofe (R-OK), Nay

Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea

Pennsylvania: Santorum (R-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Nay

Rhode Island: Chafee (R-RI), Yea Reed (D-RI), Yea

South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Nay Graham (R-SC), Nay

South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Yea Thune (R-SD), Nay

Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Nay Frist (R-TN), Nay

Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Nay Hutchison (R-TX), Nay

Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Nay Hatch (R-UT), Nay

Vermont: Jeffords (I-VT), Yea Leahy (D-VT), Yea

Virginia: Allen (R-VA), Nay Warner (R-VA), Nay

Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea

West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Yea Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea

Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Yea Kohl (D-WI), Yea

Wyoming: Enzi (R-WY), Nay Thomas (R-WY), Nay

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Human

This is a reply to the Legislative Aide who wrote the response for John Kerry.

 

You write well, BUT ( you know that I was going to insert a but in there somewhere) what is John Kerry's alternative to the energy crisis that we are facing, and will be facing in the future?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest John Kerry

The Bush administration’s resistance to sound science, their secret meetings with lobbyists and their head-in-the sand energy plans that have made Washington the enemy of reform. This should be another wakeup call that our dependence on Middle East oil endangers our security, that we can create good American jobs by investing in clean energy, and that today’s misguided course is damaging the environment beyond repair

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Human

Well!! thankyou for your responce. Believe it or not, a little less insults, and more "let's try to work together" goes a long way.

 

 

Yes I am a Republican.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
Guest Elizabeth Shogren

A federal appeals court in San Francisco blocks a federal plan to allow logging of backwoods areas of the Tongass national forest in southeastern Alaska. The Tongass, the largest U.S. national forest, is home to the largest unspoiled seasonal rainforest on Eart

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest Human Nature

U.S. Senators John McCain (AZ), Susan Collins (ME), Hillary Clinton (NY), and Lindsey Graham (SC), will visit the Yukon and Alaska this week, on a bi-partisan fact-finding trip to examine the effects of global climate change on the environment and on residents’ livelihoods.

 

With the effects of global warming occurring most dramatically in the northern latitudes, members of this Congressional delegation will be able to see firsthand the consequences of climate change. They will also have the opportunity to meet individuals who are living with the daily impact of these changes, and will draw upon their valuable knowledge and experience in order to inform U.S. policymaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Sen. John McCain

In past years, I've voted in support of exploring development options in ANWR as part of budget reconciliation measures. I believed that was the right vote. I was not an expert on the issue and I believed that further deliberation was warranted.

 

Unfortunately, the information presented to us consistently reveals widely varying predictions of actual oil potential and economic benefits, as well as various scenarios of possible impacts on wildlife and the environment. Even government studies are not conclusive and raise more questions than they answer. The various interpretations have already been debated by each side, and I need not rehash them now.

 

However, several factors are clear to me:

 

Oil and gas could be recovered from ANWR many years from now, but not without considerable costs to taxpayers.

 

Most scientific analyses conclude that both the land and wildlife would adversely be impacted by development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest U.S. Senator George Allen (R-VA)

There are three reasons why developing energy resources on the North Slope of Alaska will be good for the American people. Number one is security. We are overly dependent on foreign sources of energy. We should be less dependent and more self reliant for our own national security. Too often we rely on OPEC for our energy supply and that leaves us vulnerable to them. We are presently 58-percent dependent upon foreign oil and it is estimated that will rise up to 68 percent in the next 15 years. We can't let that happen and claim to be energy-secure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Senator Lisa Murkowski

According to the recent environmental impact statement for reauthorization of the Trans-Alaska oil pipeline, less than 1 percent of the vegetation of the Arctic coastal plain likely will be impacted by future oil development.

 

Some worry about the impacts on calving caribou. But Alaska's experience at the nearby Prudhoe Bay oil field, where the caribou herd has grown six-fold shows that caribou can not only tolerate, but flourish in oil fields. That is especially the case since restrictions will prevent any drilling noise during the two months when the caribou might be present.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...