Nancy Pelosi's War on Oil Drilling

So why is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi so against opening up new territory for the drilling of oil and natural gas? Her stance, which is shared by Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid, would seem to be a political loser as 73 percent of the American people favor drilling.

Nancy Pelosi has gone to extraordinary lengths to prevent legislation to end the ban on drilling of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts as well as ANWR in Alaska. Nancy Pelosi has used her considerable powers as House Speaker to block such legislation, ordering House Committee chairmen to
Nancy Pelosi's War on Oil Drilling
 adjourn meetings of House Committees to prevent pro drilling amendments from being offered. Pelosi, with the help of House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, has actually stopped the appropriations process in order to stop drilling amendments.

Nancy Pelosi's nightmare is that pro drilling legislation would actually get to the House floor. Were that to happen, such legislation would almost certainly pass as the Republican caucus is united on the issue and there are enough pro drilling Democrats in the House to put any lifting of the ban over the top.

Nancy Pelosi's hostility toward oil and natural gas drilling may already be having an effect on prospects for the Fall election. Approval of Congress is already in single digits, but a recent poll conducted by the Rasmussen organization shows that the generic lead of Democrats over Republicans for Congressional elections has been cut from 14 percent to 9 percent. Many pundits have suggested that whatever happens in the Presidential race, Congressional Republicans are in for a blood bath. But the oil drilling issue may well forestall that if Nancy Pelosi and her allies are not careful.

So why the hostility toward oil drilling? Partly that can be explained by the 1969 oil spill that fouled beaches at Santa Barbara in California and led to a ban on further development of off shore oil fields in the Pacific. This incident seems to have buttressed Nancy Pelosi's antipathy toward oil drilling. In 1996, Nancy Pelosi told a committee hearing, "We learned the hard way that oil and water do not mix on our coast."

 
Comments 1 - 10 of 17 Next >>
Comments
Type in Your Comments Below

I hope you environmentalists freeze to death in the dark!

Posted on 08/01/2008 at 3:08:21 PM

I am afraid that Speaker Pelosi does not live in the real world. It is difficult to image her just 2 steps away from the President. She would have difficulty being class president for high shool freshman class.

Posted on 07/30/2008 at 1:07:24 PM

Pelosi does not want to lower gasoline prices as well as many other Democrats it makes no sense and must get started as 75 % nof Americans say so and this means we must get started to drilling and mever lisyen to a no count in the first plac e.

Posted on 07/29/2008 at 8:07:11 PM

Where do you libs come up with these numbers designed to discourage progress & real solution? Unreal...it's garbage, "3 cents at the pump" "10 years to get the oil out of the ground". Your pulling #s out of your butt. Alternative is 30 years away, new oil production can be 3 or less. Setting up one oil rig on US soil will reduce prices immediately as it would send a message, we're not playing.

Posted on 07/29/2008 at 1:07:58 PM

Bryan, to accept your premise oil companies would NOT want to make money. But that doesn't make sense, esp. since they're evil BIG OIL, so that can't be it. Just b/c one holds lease on 68 million acres does not mean that oil is there. With oil prices at record highs, what is the logic that BIG OIL would not drill to make those big bucks. Look, it's really simple: there is little hi grade oil on those 68 million acres. Do you understand markets? Do you understand that Bush lifting the Exec. ban on OCS drilling dropped prices $20.00 a barrel in less than a week. Do you get that much of the oil we get is NOT produced by US oil? Do you get that if US oil co's had oil they would sell it at today's hi prices. Do you grasp WHY they want to drill the OCS, ANWR and turn shale into fuel? Most of the oil the US imports IS NOT FROM US COMPANIES, it's from the foreign oil companies owned by the despots of the OPEC nations. Do your research Sir!

Posted on 07/25/2008 at 12:07:12 PM

This issue is nothing more than an election year red herring. What, exactly, would be the point of giving the oil companies access to *more* land? They're already holding the papers on millions of acres, confirmed oil-rich. Billions of barrels are lying buried, all in the interests of creating an *artifical* short supply. Remember supply and demand? If I'm an oil company making record profits (which is my duty to my SHAREHOLDERS), why on Earth would I put millions of dollars into incresing the supply, which would change that? Why would any business pay money for the express purpose of making less money? If we open up ANWR and all the rest, my best is the oil companies will say "Thanks, but we're good right now." If they planned on increasing supply, why wouldn't they drill on the oil-rich land they already have? Remember, Congress can lift all the bans they want, and even give the land away, but they can't *make* the companies drill.

Posted on 07/25/2008 at 10:07:50 AM

Jon, how is this "reactionary?" Nevermind my previous question as to your agenda. Now I know. Reactionary my ass! So now the reporting of any fact you don't like is labeled as far right wing propaganda? Man, you people slay me. Do you have 1 single honest bone in your body? I have my doubts based on the 2 comments on this article alone. And when you write that article of yours let me know - I'll give it a fair read and comment. If you write a fair and factually accurate article I will say so, but you push this Leftist tripe and I'll say that too! Do you have the intestinal fortitude for the challenge? We'll see . . . .

Posted on 07/25/2008 at 9:07:38 AM

Come on -- this article has no busines being on the front page. It is limited (wow! 2 frames of careful reasoning) and biased from the gitgo. I write skewed to the left, but don't expect to be featured on the front page. As for liberal, I don't understand what most Americans mean by that, as most Americans even those who are Republican are liberal. What you assume to be liberal is of the center or more frequently center-right. The "conservatives" you have in this country are skewed so rightwing, as to be a joke. How can an idiot like John McCain, who is opposed to Social Security like Barry Goldwater, the man whose seat he took in the Senate (and whose Arizona mafia connections he shares, via his wife Cindy) even be the candidate of a major party? It's amazing. But getting back to this article, it is just crap. I write my own brand of the bully bull-bullshit, but I don't expect to be praised by the News Team. They've featured neanderthalish content on the front page before.

Posted on 07/25/2008 at 9:07:12 AM

Mark, great article! BTW, the haters are downrating you b/c they don't like your point, but I'll keep coming back and when allowed, will give you 5 stars everytime. And the truth is Pelosi, et al, are going to STALL until they win the huge majority they want. As long as they can exacerbate the miseries of the citizen they hope the blame will lay on Bush and Republicans so they can win that huge majority in November. If they win, I'll betcha they drill real soon after the new Congress is seated in January. If McCain were to somehow win, or if Cong. majorities are not huge, Pelosi and Dems will continue to stall so they can blame Congressional Republicans and Pres. McCain. Dems know no bounds in their duplicity to win the huge majorities they so seek.

Posted on 07/25/2008 at 9:07:02 AM

THIS BADLY WRITTEN REACTIONARY RANT HAS NO BUSINESS BEING FEATURED ON THE FRONT PAGE OF ASSOCIATED CONTENT.

Posted on 07/25/2008 at 9:07:55 AM

Comments 1 - 10 of 17 Next >>