Nancy's Cynical Summer - The Speaker's Energy Obstructionism

[The Bare Knuckled Pundit]

While American families continue to struggle with record high oil and gas prices, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi cynically plays politics with national energy policy. Responding to rising rhetorical pressure from House Republicans calling for increased drilling in ANWAR and the Outer Continental Shelf, the California Democrat has colluded with vulnerable party colleagues in the House in a surreptitious exercise in political good cop/bad cop.

Encouraging vulnerable and freshman Democratic House members to display their independence on the energy issue if it benefits them politically, Pelosi has positioned herself to take the burn on behalf of her party with her dogged refusal to allow a vote on what is a growing national consensus calling for expanded oil and gas drilling.

And why has the Speaker set herself up to be the lightning rod in the political storm over energy? Simple - the numbers are on her side; both in her home district and nationally. Moreover, she sleeps soundly at night, secure in the knowledge her San Fransican constituents has the same contemptuous view of Middle America she currently displays.

Accordingly, biding their time for what they believe will be Democratic domination of both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue as well as both houses of Congress; Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership sees no need to compromise with Republicans and have opted instead to wait until a new president and Congress is sworn in.

Based on their anticipated victories in the upcoming election, they believe they will be able to pass a comprehensive energy bill that stays true to the Democratic principals of limited drilling, increased funding for alternative energy and a windfall profits tax on big oil.

“The reality is we will have a new president in three months, and what Bush and the Republicans are trying to do amounts to a land grab for the oil companies. I don’t think we have to give in at all pre-election — we have many more options postelection,” Martin Kady II and Patrick O’Conner quoted one senior House Democratic aide involved with party strategy in a piece at Politico.com.

In the interim, the Democrats’ unconscionable and cynical ploy will cost American families billions of dollars as record oil and gas prices continue to create inflationary ripples throughout the economy. Worse still, struggling to stay afloat amidst recessionary conditions, many may find themselves overwhelmed by what are projected to be record heating oil and natural gas prices this coming winter.

With cost of living increases failing to keep pace with the inflationary impact of the rise in these critical commodity prices, the elderly and those on fixed incomes in the Northeast feel particularly exposed in the face of what may be the hardships of a harsh winter; both meteorologically and financially.

Instead of providing political cover for her party compatriots, what Speaker Pelosi has done is cast a pall over them. At this point, one cannot help but view pro-drilling Democratic candidates with a high degree of suspicion, if not outright contempt. This includes the supposed compromise of Senate Democrats in the so-called Gang of Ten.

However, what the cynically Machiavellian tactics of the Speaker have produced is a rare opportunity for Senator Barack Obama.

Putting his political capital where his mouth is, Senator Obama should immediately choose leadership over partisanship and condemn the Speaker’s tactics for what they are; reprehensible partisan political gain at the expense of American families and businesses. This would be a true demonstration of leadership as well as a tangible and historic example of the change the junior Senator from Illinois has so eloquently spoken of.

The time has come for the Senator’s deeds to equal his lofty rhetoric. Let him firmly grasp the mantle of leadership before him and clearly put nation before party. In the process he will become the legendary figure so many already mistakenly believe him to be.

The time for change has indeed come, faithful readers. And clearly that change is needed in the leadership of the House. Stay tuned for further updates as events warrant and the cynicism grows.

[KingKnuckleDragger]

The silly thing about this whole "drilling for oil" quick fix concept is that we Americans would not see a single drop of any new oil they found before the NEXT presidents first term was over.

It's also just more money for the oil industry, more dependancy for US, and no solution for the future.

[Peter1469]

If you don’t start drilling for new oil you won’t get new oil.  If you don’t start research into alternatives you won’t get alternatives. 

This is part of America’s problem:  If you don’t see results in real life as quickly as you see it in a Sitcom you discount it. 

We should have started drilling in these areas 10 years ago.  We should be pushing alternatives such as alcohol fuels.  The goal should be nothing less than energy independence. 

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

If you don’t start drilling for new oil you won’t get new oil.  If you don’t start research into alternatives you won’t get alternatives. 

This is part of America’s problem:  If you don’t see results in real life as quickly as you see it in a Sitcom you discount it. 

We should have started drilling in these areas 10 years ago.  We should be pushing alternatives such as alcohol fuels.  The goal should be nothing less than energy independence. 

the argument has already been made that we can and should be doing everything with regard to energy exploitation and development.  the left won't buy it.  petroleum is evil and there is a magic fuel in back pocket of big oil to make everything just go away.  no credible argument can be made against drilling, responsibly developing the known resources within our grasp while making a market driven switch to alternative and competitive fuels for our vehicles and nuclear for our cities.  with regard to increased domestic production; little mac is a johnny come lately, bo is being dragged there by the polls and would much rather be in germany apologizing and the dem congress is on vacation while the reps protest in an unlit room.....the president should be on national television daily, demanding action by the congress with very specific proposals of his own.  this nation is without real leadership and the people have been trained to respond to a fast food fix.

[Gunit Hussein Sangh]

If it's so urgent to start drilling ... why aren't the oil companies drilling in the 68 million acres of leases they currently have

I think I can answer that ... they are spending over 55% of their profits on stock buy-backs and dividends while expenditures on exploration has remained relatively constant in the mid single-digits. Since they are investing such a tiny percentage of their profits in exploration, they will not be able to supply the offshore rigs necessary to drill and extract the oil from the ocean.

imho ... what this is REALLY all about is they can read the hand-writing on the wall. They know that after the greed and corruption exhibited by dear leader and his merry band of rubber stampers, they will be banned to the desert for 40 years. They are trying to get this passed before the next administration takes office, because once passed ... it's difficult (politically) to repeal something.

[Peter1469]

Any chance that the current lease-holds have less available oil (physical and economic) that other lands that they wish to drill in?  Why does everything come down to Shrub with you? 

Bucket- carrier. 

I hope that you are at least getting a discount on some left-wing rag for all of your work at attacking logic and reality. 

[conley]

If it's so urgent to start drilling ... why aren't the oil companies drilling in the 68 million acres of leases they currently have

BINGO!

[conley]

Any chance that the current lease-holds have less available oil (physical and economic) that other lands that they wish to drill in?  Why does everything come down to Shrub with you? 

so if i have a diamond mine, but there's another diamond mine in alaska with twice as many diamonds in it, i'm not going to dig up diamonds in my mine because i want the one in alaska??

[Wowster]

If it's so urgent to start drilling ... why aren't the oil companies drilling in the 68 million acres of leases they currently have

BINGO!

Do you think all leases are for drilling for oil?
Do you think all leases have oil deposits?
<snicker>

[conley]

If it's so urgent to start drilling ... why aren't the oil companies drilling in the 68 million acres of leases they currently have

BINGO!

Do you think all leases are for drilling for oil?
Do you think all leases have oil deposits?
<snicker>

no
no
good candy bar.

[Peter1469]

Oil is not diamonds.  Some oil is very easy and cheap to extract- light sweet crude for example.  We used to have it in Texas but pretty much used it up.  The Middle East is mostly light sweet.  The remaining stocks in the US are either shale oil (we need better technology to mine it) and deep sea oil which is, well, really deep making it expensive to drill. 

I suspect that much of the current lease-holds are expensive-drill oil finds.  The oil companies want to get cheaper fields.  Those fuckers. 

[conley]

Washington, D.C. - In an effort to compel oil and gas companies to produce on the 68 million acres of federal lands, both onshore and offshore, that are leased but sitting idle, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick J. Rahall (D-WV) today introduced legislation that gives Big Oil one option - either "use it or lose it."

"Big Oil, as many Americans already suspect, are perfectly fine with high gasoline prices at the pump while they hold back domestic production on federal leases and enjoy world record profits.  I am calling them on the carpet. I am calling their bluff.  We are not going to continue to allow them to speculate and profiteer with public resources to the detriment of the American people," Rahall said.

The Responsible Federal Oil and Gas Lease Act of 2008 (H.R. 6251) is a direct response to the facts outlined in the recent House Natural Resources Committee Majority Staff report, "The Truth About America's Energy: Big Oil Stockpiles Supplies and Pockets Profits", that illustrate how energy companies are not using the federal lands and waters that are already open to drilling.  The legislation is co-sponsored by Reps. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Ed Markey (D-MA), and John Yarmuth (D-KY).

The 68 million acres of leased but inactive federal land have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day.  This would nearly double total U.S. oil production, and increase natural gas production by 75 percent.  It would also cut U.S. oil imports by more than one-third, reducing America's dependency on foreign oil.

The Rahall bill would force oil and gas companies to either produce or give up federal onshore and offshore leases they are stockpiling by barring the companies from obtaining any more leases unless they can demonstrate that they are producing oil and gas, or are diligently developing the leases they already hold, during the initial term of the leases.

Coal companies, which are issued leases for 20-year terms, are required, as a result of the Federal Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 1976 to show that they are diligently developing their leases during the initial lease term.  The law was enacted in an effort to end rampant speculation on federal coal as a result of the energy crises of the 1970's.

Oil and gas companies, however, are not required to demonstrate diligent development.   Because of this, oil and gas companies have been allowed to stockpile leases in a non-producing status, while leaving millions of acres of leased land untouched.  The Rahall legislation directs the Secretary of the Interior to define what constitutes diligent development for oil and gas leases.

Companies could avoid this new lease prohibition by relinquishing their non-producing leases, thus creating an opportunity for another company to explore for and perhaps produce oil and gas.

"As long as oil companies hold oil hostage, they will continue to get away with charging high prices and demanding a greater share of the public's land.  This bill forces their hand by compelling them to produce or hand the over their idle leases for someone who will," Rahall said.

http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=389&Itemid=1

[conley]

it doesn't seem like too much to ask. if the land is so useless, why do you think the oil companies are leasing them?

[conley]

i know you all hate Feingold, but if you're interesting in looking at the issue objectively...

"All we're saying is that oil companies should produce - or show they are making progress in developing - on the federal lands they already lease before we give them more. But oil companies are arguing that all their leases are "active" or that current law already forces companies to give up the lands they're not using.

The truth is that current federal law allows oil companies to sit on leases for the entire length of the lease term, which is typically 10 years, and there are no requirements that they develop the lands.

Coal companies already comply with requirements that they diligently develop federally leased lands - why should oil companies be given special treatment? My bill would create industrywide accountability standards, which many of the oil companies say they are already capable of meeting. So why are they putting up such a fight?

After all, the quickest way to produce more oil is to develop lands already under lease since exploration is underway, leases and many drilling permits are ready to go and the infrastructure, including miles and miles of pipeline, is already in place. "

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=774062

[Peter1469]

I have no problem taking the land back from oil companies if they do not develop it.  Of course, I would give back the money for the lease- pro-rata. 

But I have zero faith that politicians and the media have the correct data on the unused oil-lands. 

In the meantime- Congress must pass a law mandating that every car sold in the US after Jan 1 2009 is a flex fuel engine that can run off gas, ethanol, or methanol in any combination.  That will kick start the market into a path that will make oil as relevant as the horse-and-buggy.  Then we don't have to worry much about whether these leased lands are being properly utilized.