| AoS note: when a blogger like Malkin cites a news item and then blogs about it, provide us with the news link, not the blogger's. |
On a party-line vote, the House Appropriations subcommittee that oversees public lands voted 9 to 6 against the drilling plan.
The proposal by Rep. John Peterson, R-Pa., would allow for drilling between 50 miles and 200 miles of the nation's coastlines. Peterson, who is retiring next year, said offshore drilling could provide enough oil to replace Middle East oil imports for 35 years. He said the plan would also yield an 18-year supply of natural gas.
A 27-year-old federal moratorium has prevented offshore drilling in most coastal waters except parts of the Gulf of Mexico.
Virginia lawmakers have expressed interest in pursuing drilling, particularly for natural gas.
"There is no valid reason for Congress to continue keeping Americans from the offshore resources they own," Peterson said.
But Democrats, who control Congress, said offshore drilling would have no immediate effect on the price of gasoline and would do little to lower the world price of oil. "We are kidding ourselves, as we routinely do in this town, if we think we can drill our way out of this problem," said Rep. Dave Obey, D-Wis.
| If we'd started drilling 20 years ago you might be saying something different today. The Brits and Norweigans started drilling the North Sea even though it was estimated not to be enough to replace their other imports. Today they're glad they did. |
| Open the other areas and you'll have new estimates soon enough from the new exploration. |
Republicans may get another shot at offshore drilling as early as next week, when the spending bill funding the Interior Department goes to the full Appropriations Committee. "This is going to end up being an energy bill whether we like it or not," Lewis said.
But so far, offshore drilling has triggered a partisan response in Congress, with Democrats lined up squarely against it.