Search Our Site

Search form

social

Senate Votes to Allow Arctic Drilling

March 16, 2005 | Environment

by David Stout
The New York Times (Published: March 16, 2005)

WASHINGTON, March 16 - The Senate endorsed oil-drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge today, giving President Bush and others who favor exploration of the Alaska wilderness a major victory.

The 51-to-49 vote was in favor of a budget resolution that assumes revenues of some $5 billion from drilling fees over the next decade, with the federal government and the state of Alaska to split the money.

While this afternoon's vote is not the final word on the issue, it nevertheless made drilling in the wilds of Alaska - an idea favored by the oil industry and fiercely opposed by environmental groups - far more likely than before.

For drilling to take place, the Senate will later have to pass a measure explicitly authorizing the opening of the wildlife refuge to drilling, something that until now has been prohibited. Then the House of Representatives would have to explicitly authorize drilling as well.

But the Senate has long been the biggest obstacle, since opponents have used the chamber's parliamentary devices - notably, the threat of a filibuster, a stalling tactic that requires 60 of the Senate's 100 votes to overcome - to frustrate proponents of drilling.

This afternoon's vote came on an amendment sponsored by Senator Maria Cantwell, Democrat of Washington. It would have removed language in the budget resolution for 2006 that assumes that drilling will take place.

Senator Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican who supports drilling, noted just before the vote that "the price of oil just jumped up to 56 bucks a barrel this morning."

The closeness of this afternoon's vote could be a prelude to bitter debate ahead. President Bush and many Republicans say drilling in the refuge would help make the United States less dependent on foreign sources of oil.

Opponents, who include most Democrats and some Republican moderates, contend that drilling in the refuge would endanger one of the last unspoiled regions of wilderness in North America, and that in the long run it would not be the answer to America's energy problems.

The debate focuses on about 1.5 million acres of coastal plain within the 19-million acre refuge. Oil industry representatives have said that drilling would be confined to only about 2,000 acres within the 1.5 million acres, and that it can be done with a minimum of environmental damage.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

Against Drilling

YEAs -- 49

Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
McCain (R-AZ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)

For Drilling

NAYs -- 51

Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)

Comments

I am outraged at this decision...yet some how not surprised that Big Business is calling the shots once again. Do we not see the long term impact of wasting such a beautiful landscape for a TEMPORARY solution to our oil problems? Our course we do, but do we care? Probably not. Why not invest our hard earned money into a solution...such as an alternative energy source that would provide better more efficient sources of energy/oil without sacrificing our environment. There are other answers. We can invest. IT may take time and money but in the long run we will all win. For once...please do the right thing.

What we are doing to this world just makes me depressed. If we keep letting money and profit get in the way of what matters the most -life- our future generations will suffer greatly. We are already seeing the impacts of industrialization in the Arctic, do people really think drilling holes into the ground won't hurt the environment?

I am a very Christian, Bible-believing Republican. I am also against oil drilling. It's terrible and irresponsible! God told us to take care of the Earth, not exploit it! No matter what they say about oil drilling not hurting the wildlife, there really isn't a way to avoid that. We are going to destroy the world that God has entrusted to us. It's shameful. Shame on some of us humans...

I've been on this earth for 14 years, all Ii ask from the ones before me is one favor, don't kill my earth, it's the only one I've got

Pages

Add new comment