Conventional wisdom says coastal property owners still have enough political muscle to scuttle any Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activity in the Lower 48 states outside the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico.
So what was Rep. John E. Peterson (R-Pa.) thinking on May 19 when he proposed amending the Department of Interior appropriations bill to lift OCS leasing moratoriums involving natural gas?
“Oil is a problem. But the crisis is natural gas,” he told me by phone the following week. “The problem is availability. Eight-five percent of the [offshore] land is locked up.”
The higher price is adding to American unemployment, he continued. “Fertilizer, petrochemical, polymer, and other industries where natural gas represents so much of their production costs have no choice but to export their jobs,” Peterson said.
Unlike some House members from largely rural districts, he and the US oil industry have something in common: Both were born in Titusville. His political career began in 1969 with 8 years on the local borough council. He came to the US House in 1996 after stints in Pennsylvania’s House and Senate.
Inventory
Peterson originally planned to propose diverting $50 million to conduct an inventory of part of the OCS when DOI’s budget request was before the Appropriations Committee. Other members asked him not to because it would have had to come from other programs.
His next effort came in the Resources Committee, where he considered submitting an amendment to look at the most promising OCS areas. “We had the votes, but we were talked out of offering it,” he said.
So Peterson decided to bring his offshore natural gas amendment before the full House. Instead of merely conducting an inventory, its aim widened to lifting the moratoriums-but for gas only. He advised House energy leaders of his plans, but they did not become involved.
“I wanted to start the discussion. Now that we have, I’m glad. We don’t have years to wait. I think we’ve opened up the real issue,” he said.
‘Very encouraged’
The amendment failed by a 262-to-157 margin. “We’re very encouraged by that,” Peterson said. “I had dozens of members apologize afterward. They were asked by their state delegations to vote that way. We believe there were at least 30 more votes.”
He particularly liked that it happened without lobbyists’ getting involved. “We were out there with a small band of members who thought it was an issue of importance for this country. I think that’s a pretty good vote when you don’t have any power-brokers working with you,” he said.
He is considering preparing a bill to give coastal states the option of reconsidering offshore gas development similar to Sen. Lamar Alexander’s (R-Tenn.) current bill. “This is a debate we can win. We ought to have it,” Peterson maintained.