Bush hammers, Pelosi strikes back on off-shore oil

To drill or not to drill?

The debate continued today into the afternoon.

President Bush began the day with a renewed pitch to Congress to join him in dropping the ban on offshore exploration for oil. To listen to him, it is only the Democratic-led Congress that is holding up drilling--and thus, by his reasoning, holding up oil prices.

Hours later, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) fired back: "The president knows, as his own administration has stated, that the impact of any new drilling will be insignificant--promising savings of  only pennies per gallon many years down the road."

And for those who say that the drilling would be beyond the horizon, perhaps 50 miles offshore, she added: "What Americans should realize is that what the president is calling for is drilling as close as three miles off of America's pristine beaches and in other protected areas."

Next up? The president speaks Thursday in West Virginia. No ocean beaches there--but there is plenty of coal.

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said Bush would talk about using technology to make coal a cleaner source of energy and the expansion of nuclear power.

--James Gerstenzang

Photo: William Colgin / Associated Press

Comments

[drew]

Bush is trying to help old sorry McCain win but he want. Bush is the worst presindent every.

[okie]

Nancy P. Most of the beaches in California are dirty and stinking now. Why don't you let the Representative of each state decide. What are you afraid of. Nearly 75% of people polled beleive we should drill, are you afraid you can't control your own Democrats. I wish I could vote against you, Chuck Schumer and our beloved Harry Reid. When Las Vegas starts hollering, Harry will change his tune. You are trying to run the country down and don't have the guts to even let the rest of the country speak. Where is all of the work together you promised when you took over as speaker of the dysfunctional house of representatives. Resign for the good of the country.

[Steve Ruyle]

Let them drill. but modify the lease to say that 1. Every drop of oil, every cc of gas, every bit of any product that comes from any lease on federal property, may only be sold in the USA. Under no circumstances may any of it be sold overseas. and 2. Any spill will be completely cleaned up. not partially paid for, not, we did the best we can do, Completely cleaned up, if it takes the last dime in the CEO's personal bank account. Completely cleaned up.

[Richard Arguile]

I'm a Democrat for offshore drilling PROVIDED that the voters in each coastal state are able to hold a referendum on the matter - that allows drilling off their state's shore. If Californians want offshore platforms viewable from Santa Barbara, Oxnard, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach etc. and thus ruin their views of the Pacific then they can vote for it! Ditto Floridians, and everyone else with coastal property!

[cP]

Yeah.. it makes total sense to go drilling offshore in order to save pennies at the gas tank. Apparently people couldn't care less about the state of the environment. When people say things like, it's already dirty, let's risk making it dirtier, it honestly sounds like a joke to me. . I really don't think it's realistic to say, it's okay if we have off shore drilling as long as they clean all of it up. How about instead, we don't drill offshore, and we find cleaner and more effective ways to deal with the problems we are facing. and 75%.. yeah right. Even if the figure were correct, it doesn't make it a good idea. It just means most of those people are mal-informed or ignorant.

[average joe]

Yeah! The Republicans have managed to put forward yet another contrived and disingenuous argument for the scoring of political points and, as usual, with the aiding of the media seem to be getting away with it. I notice that same incompetent media has failed to point out a bill to force drilling on over 8700 unused existing leases that was effectively killed within the last few weeks has again went completely unmentioned. Eight thousand seven hundred available leases to drill on but they refuse and the media again gives the air of legitimacy to a republican argument. Just let them keep repeating "Drill more use less" without pointing out that they refuse to make big oil "drill more". I notice the media's complete failure to point out that this has been done to yet again effectively obstruct legislation to close the "Enron loophole" to reign in speculation and most likely halve the price of oil. For Christ's sake whatever you do don't point out the fact that it is being used as political black mail to get Bush's big oil band standers even more monopolized control over available supplies, oil that will be sold on the open market and never used for domestic consumption, to insure continuing record profits for oil companies, one way or another. What a complete and utter failing of logic we have turned this country into. What a manipulated, misinformed public we have allowed ourselves to become. What a contrivance of failure.

[Steve]

Most people seem to miss the larger, more strategic picture. It's not whether we drill offshore, in Alaska, in the Rockies, or not. Just saying we would will help short-term market psychology, and would help long-term supplies, if done in an environmentally friendly way. Conservation would also help, but I don't see individuals doing it. Just driving slower on the highway would save up to 10 percent immediately (70 vs. 55), let alone fewer emissions.

The argument that there are 8700 leases that haven't been drilled yet shows an ignorance of how the oil business works. Probably 90 percent of those leases are not economically feasible, as most oil leases aren't. Our family owns mineral rights on 400,000 acres of West Texas land, but less than 10 percent are worth even exploring, let alone productive (about 1 percent). And that land is not good for anything else, except for solar and/or wind (large projects are now in the works).

Short-term we can't do without oil. Our long-term goal should be to gradually reduce our reliance on this substance, before it become a crisis.

The real problem is that we send $700 billion of our hard-earned dollars to foreign governments every year that could stay at home. The fact that we rely so heavy on imports for our day-to-day lives should make everyone nervous.

So short-term we need to drill and exploit our own resources to the maximum that we can. Long-term we need to find other means.

But with Washington D.C. in deadlock, that won't happen soon. Right now, the Republicans have the better, more comprehensive plan. Democrats should join in, so a compromise can be reached where everyone wins.

[Robert NYC]

Gee - we have an ultra liberal senator from california that wont let America drill her own oil because the beaches of her state wont look 'pristine'?

Not in my backyard?

Hey - speaker of the house - do you care about anyone struggling to pay for gas in Montana? Oklahoma? Missouri? Nebraska? Nevada? the Dakotas? Minnesota?

In other words you eco-nazi funded self interested wothless leader - do you care about what it costs the rest of us to live while you march around all pious like?

pathetic!

[eliana]

Listen, anybody who's against offshore drilling clearly hasn't thought of the countless problems that it would solve. For example,

Problem: pollutants increase nationwide. Your kid has asthma attacks on a daily basis. On "bad air days" he can’t go outside.
Solution: You're going to need some cheap fuel to drive him back and forth to the hospital. Try drilling in the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge. Also, you should gut the clean air regulations. Actually, you have enough to worry about. Let us do it for you.
See more reasons why offshore drilling will save the world: http://www.236.com/news/2008/07/30/poor_depressed_impotent_offsho_8035.php

[EyesWideOpen]

"The real problem is that we send $700 billion of our hard-earned dollars to foreign governments every year that could stay at home."

Not sure of your numbers but, I couldn't agree more. And I've read recently that at least some of our poor, struggling Donees won't even accept their "Aid" in Dollars anymore. Now the Honorless Needy demand it be paid only in Euro's so they can profit on our Dollar's collapse! Natually this costs the "Stupid Americans" (fill in your own accent) even more. Moreover, I suspect that this is only one of the myriad ways that the extremely "creative financing " of this "Aid" costs the American taxpayer much, much more then what is declared on papers signed by the suits.

[Frank25]

We knew of this problem since 1973, and told then we would use up all fossil fuel reserves in next 10 years. So Presidents and Congress signed executive orders and passed environmental laws to prevent us from exploring, or developing our assets. Rest of world took warning, built nuclear plants (Gee, what do they do with thier waste fuel)? They drilled their continental shelf, off-shore areas, and within their countries, WHILE also looking for alternates. Centuries ago, 2 miles off coast was limit, since cannons could fire cannon ball 2 miles. Later, the limit became 20 miles with new cannons and weapons. So where and when did Governors get power to tell U.S. government what would happen in international waters? We use our Navy, Coast Guard, satellites to monitor, and military to enfore free passage, while restricting others from getting too close. So I have n sympathy for Governors who overstep their authority, and public opinion never trumps National Security. We have a crisis now, and just as we control nuclear fuel, computers (except when Clinton sold to China) and our Military Weapons or Equipment. Nancy, Harry, Obama, and others complain about President Bush, but they are the obstructionists putting U.S. citizens at risk. I served 26 years and Retired. But I want a Commander in Chief, who can make a decision, coordinate with allies, and stick to the decision. No flip-flopper with finger in the wind, but one who has experience, knowledge, been there and done that, instead of someone who just talks about it. We already tried that and Iran, Iraq, Panama, Cuba, North Vietnam, North Korea, and other countries have been problems for decades.