Senate and House committees last week launched hearings on whether to open for exploration the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) Coastal Plain in Northeast Alaska.
The desolate region, just east of supergiant Prudhoe Bay field, appears to be the oil industry's last best hope to find major oil reserves in the U.S. and supplant declining Prudhoe Bay production.
Leasing proponents are using the congressional budget process to leverage passage of ANWR leasing, much in the same way environmentalists used the budget process for a decade to forestall leasing off several states.
Budget committees have assumed ANWR leasing would net the government $1.3 billion, an action that requires congressional energy committees to pass bills by September to meet the collection goal.
VETO AND DOUBTS
Although President Clinton steadfastly opposes ANWR development, leasing proponents are betting he won't veto the federal budget over the issue.
But there are strong reasons to doubt that Republican legislators will stand behind ANWR leasing.
One hint came in June when the House appropriations panel voted to retain bans on offshore leasing in a spending bill.
Because no sales were scheduled in affected areas, the vote was largely symbolic. It was just a way for a congressman to show whether he was more concerned about the environment or energy supplies.
Republicans hold a comfortable 32-24 on the appropriations committee, but the vote was 33-20 to retain the moratoria.
Another indication of Republicans' proenvironmental mood surfaced last week in an Environmental Protection Agency appropriations bill.
An amendment would have blocked some harsh EPA actions, including a rule to impose tough toxics emissions requirements on refiners (see story, p. 34).
Again, the vote was symbolic. Clinton had pledged a veto, and no one expected the Senate to approve the amendment.
Perhaps not surprisingly, Democrats and moderate Republicans combined to kill the amendment 212-206. When the leadership forced a second ballot, the amendment died on a 210210 tie vote. But remarkedly, not a single Republican changed his vote against the amendment.
THE FOLKS BACK HOME
When Republicans won control of Congress late last year, environmentalists feared a rollback of environmental laws enacted during the past decade.
True, Republicans have pushed bills to make some laws like the Clean Water Act and Superfund more reasonable. But existence of a GOP majority does not mean all are "Wall Street Republicans," voting in lockstep for every measure that will help big business.
More accurately, many GOP congressmen are "Main Street Republicans."
These legislators may pledge allegiance to their party's philosophies. But when it comes to key environmental issues, they vote to improve their image back home on Main Street.
Copyright 1995 Oil & Gas Journal. All Rights Reserved.