Everyone but those in congress know we need more oil and that we have sufficient resources in our country to satisfy our oil needs for the foreseeable future. By meeting oil requirements of the United States we would become energy independent, add to our security and allow us to deal with foreign oil suppliers in ways that are in the country’s best interests rather than having to cow tow to Islamic enemies.
As oil and gas prices reach record highs, Republican members of Congress have sought to open up areas for oil drilling in ANWAR and off shore but have been blocked by Democrats and environmental anti-Americans. Ironically, though our government prohibits American interests from recovering oil off shore, Cuba and China are taking advantage of huge oil reservoirs in the gulf.
Pennsylvania Republican Representative John Peterson has been pushing an amendment to a spending bill that would allow exploration and drilling in U.S. waters between 50 and 200 miles off shore for drilling. To overcome state objections, the first 50 miles off shore would be left alone.
Peterson said "For 27 years, Congress has deliberately locked up vast offshore oil and natural gas reserves. With the price at the pump increasing daily — with no end in sight — and the cost of natural gas trading at record levels, Congress needs to unlock these reserves."
Most oil production and exploration has been banned since 1981.
Congressman Peters also said the U.S. Minerals Management Service estimates that 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas can be found along the U.S. outer continental shelf, the area affected by the ban.
The proposal to open up off shore oil exploration and drilling is of course opposed by environmentalists and their allies in congress. In what is a typical ridiculous statement attempting to support the indefensible, Environment Florida spokeswoman Holly Binns told the Media General news group that offshore drilling has no immediate impact on prices.
Binns said "It would take anywhere from seven to 10 years to bring those resources to shore — to have any measurable impact on supply."
Imagine, efforts to increase oil supplies should not be undertaken because it would take "seven to 10 years" to impact oil supplies? If we had started over 15 years ago when it was first proposed, we would be receiving one million barrels of oil today from ANWAR alone. If we had started to recover oil from shale as was proposed in the 1970’s we would likely be energy independent today. How ridiculous to oppose developing oil supplies because it takes time to bring the oil to market.
To further demonstrate how out of touch with reality they are, Democrats are having their own series of events to focus attention on global warming and energy independence, but oil drilling is not on the agenda. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said calls for more drilling "is the Johnny One-Note of the Republican Party." Obama himself, the Democrat political messiah, also jumped on board with Hoyer to support remedies for global warming in lieu of reaching out for oil in areas under U.S. control.
The only voice of reason in the senate was Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell who criticized Senator Barack Obama over recent comments made regarding gas prices. The comments that McConnell referred to were given during an interview with CNBC where Obama said: "I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment. The fact that this is such a shock to American pocketbooks is not a good thing", but he nonetheless did not reject the Steny Hoyer approach that addressing global warming is more important than lowering gasoline prices.
McConnell took on the Obama "gradual" price increases approach, "Obama's remarks are evidence that Obama believes "rising gas prices aren't the problem." (Sic) The problem, he (Obama) suggested, is that they've gone up too fast. He said he would prefer a gradual adjustment."
"Whether it's shutting down domestic exploration in large areas both onshore and offshore, instituting a moratorium on oil shale development, increasing the gas tax, or refusing to pursue coal to liquids (oil), Democrats long ago implemented a 'gradual adjustment' on gas prices that's reflected today in the $4.05 Americans are paying for a gallon of gas."
In what is surely to be dismissed as oil company propaganda, though nonetheless true, Greg Schnacke, President of Americans for American Energy, said in a news release, "Tapping America's huge reserve of deep ocean energy helps us fight terrorism and increases our domestic energy supply, which will help put downward pressure on gasoline prices. With Americans suffering at the gas pump and with higher energy bills, it's a no-brainer that the OCS (off shore oil) should be developed."
In my opinion just announcements that America is actually taking action to develop additional oil supplies will cause oil prices to go down because speculators don't want to be caught in the position of having to cover lower priced oil contracts with higher price priced oil, even though such oil won't be available for some time.
It is indeed a "no-brainer" that America should do all it can to become energy independent, reduce oil and gasoline prices for Americans and improve the nation’s security. Unfortunately we are led by leaders unable to recognize a "no-brainer" path for our country; what does that say about their intelligence?