Support Grist
Support nonprofit, independent environmental journalism.
Donate to Grist.
Muckraker

Caribou-Hoo-Hoo

Senate votes to open Arctic Refuge to drilling

By Amanda Griscom Little
16 Mar 2005
Tools: print | email | discuss | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS
Porcupine caribou in the arctic refuge.
Stickin' it to the porcupine caribou in the Arctic Refuge.
Photo: Ken Whitten, Wilderness Society.
Oil companies are closing in on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

In a crushing blow to those who have fought for some 25 years to preserve the unspoiled Alaskan wildland, the Senate voted today to clear the way for oil and gas drilling within the Arctic Refuge. By a 51-49 vote, they rejected an amendment by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) that would have stripped from a budget bill a provision that assumes the government will raise revenue from drilling in the refuge's coastal plain.

Opening the Arctic Refuge is not a done deal yet -- the controversial budget bill has to survive heated Republican wrangling, and some formalities must be addressed to authorize drilling -- but oil exploration in the refuge is more likely now than ever before.

For years, Senate Democrats and a handful of moderate Republicans beat back repeated efforts to get at the refuge's oil deposits. But this year, thanks to soaring oil prices and a five-vote GOP margin in the Senate, the Republican leadership saw its best chance in a decade -- since 1995 when Congress passed a budget bill with an ANWR provision that President Clinton vetoed.

Last week, Senate Budget Committee Chair Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), considered one of the more pro-environment Republicans on Capitol Hill, succumbed to pressure from the White House and Alaska's senators to attach a similar Arctic Refuge provision to the 2006 budget resolution.

Pinning the Arctic Refuge to the bill is an aggressive and controversial move because, unlike most legislative initiatives, the budget bill is exempt from filibusters and therefore needs only 51 votes to pass, not 60. "It's a desperate attempt, an abuse of the legislative system to try and push a major national policy through this backdoor strategy and avoid an open debate," said Charla Neuman, a staffer for Cantwell, a leading opponent of drilling in the refuge. "It goes to show how worried they are about getting it through in any kind of reasonable way." Desperate or not, the attempt worked remarkably well. Marnie Funk, Republican spokesperson for the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, acknowledged that passage of the budget bill is not yet guaranteed, but said, "This is our best shot ever at getting ANWR."

When GOP senators tried to open up the Arctic Refuge using the same budget-bill maneuver in 2003, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) proposed an amendment to strip out the drilling provision and triumphed by a 52-48 margin. On Tuesday, Cantwell introduced a similar amendment. Today, she found out how much times have changed.

Enviros, not surprisingly, are reeling. "Today's vote sends a terrible message about America's energy future," said Deb Callahan, head of the League of Conservation Voters. "If this is allowed to stand, we could not begin to calculate the loss to future generations." Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, said, "We deeply regret that 51 senators voted to pursue special interests instead of energy solutions." Still, he insisted, "This razor-thin vote is by no means a mandate to drill in the Arctic Refuge."

Karen Wayland, legislative director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, warned that the move could pave the way for drilling in other spots around the country. "The Arctic is a symbol for a much bigger effort to get into environmentally sensitive regions," she told Muckraker. "The Rocky Mountain [region], off the coast of Florida -- they want to drill everywhere. If they can get into the Arctic, then no place is off-limits."

Still, a saving grace for the refuge could come in the form of a congressional stalemate: Controversy over the budget bill could erupt between the House and Senate during the conference process and prevent the legislation from moving forward, given the backlash among fiscal conservatives over the monstrous deficit.

"Our best hope is not environmental lobbying at this point, but that Republicans will defeat the budget bill themselves because of irreconcilable differences over how to cope with the budget crisis," said Chris Miller, a minority staffer for the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

It's a sobering state of affairs: After zealously fighting for more than two decades to protect the Arctic Refuge, the environmental community must now accept a negligible role in the battle and hope that Republican infighting saves the day.

Tools: print | email | discuss | write to the editor | subscribe | RSS

Muck it up: We welcome rumors, whistleblowing, classified documents, or other useful tips on environmental policies, Beltway shenanigans, and the people behind them. Please send 'em to muckraker@grist.org.
Amanda Griscom Little writes Grist's Muckraker column on environmental politics and policy and interviews green luminaries for the magazine. Her articles on energy and the environment have also appeared in publications ranging from Rolling Stone to The New York Times Magazine.
< Previous | Next >
Comments: (9 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Username: Password:

Forgot your password? Enter your username and click:

Apply pressure to the oil companies

Here's a good next step on the Arctic Refuge.  http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/16/143634/267

Oil companies are starting to back away from drilling in the Arctic Refuge.  Use your power as a consumer to reward those who have decided that oil drilling and wilderness don't mix.

For the oil companies who haven't yet backed away: BOYCOTT....and let them know about it!

What now?

   How frustrating that we give in to industry and decide to explore wildlife refuges (aka "safe places") to fill the tanks of our SUVs. Don't people want to be able to give themselves a pat on the back for thinking creatively and finding/using alternative energy sources rather than getting so desperate that they have to drill the pristine boonies of ANWR?

ANWR & Hawaii's Senators

Does anyone have information on why Hawaii's two Democratic Senators BOTH voted for oil drilling in ANWR?

Friends of Ted

Hawaii's Senators are buddies with Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) and they won't cross him on this issue. But in public they say they are supporting the rights of the Kaktovic natives to drill in their lands (which are within the refuge and can't be developed unless the fed lands are developed) and earn money to improve their lives.

So sad

This is so sad and so frustrating. Once something is protected it should stay protected. A customer came into the natural food store where I work Tuesday and asked me what I thought about drilling in the Refuge. Naturally I told him I was opposed to it, and to drilling in any wilderness area regardless of where it was. "But we're running out of oil. What are we supposed to do?" he replied. "Conservation and alternatives to oil," was my response.  "Yes," he said, "But we're not there yet." And that's the crux of the problem. We aren't there yet. Never mind the fact that we'd be there now if the federal government hadn't removed tax breaks and subsidies from alternative development back in the 70s to support and subsidize big oil. Never mind the fact that there are more gas guzzlers on the road today than ever before. Never mind the fact that Americans, anyway, are building bigger houses, more roads, more malls, more of everything than ever before, all of which means more oil. The idea of "enough" hasn't yet made it into this culture's vocabulary. And so here it is over 30 years later and "we're not there yet". And so of course we must drill in the Refuge -- or anywhere. This is where most people in this country are at. In an ideal world, they oppose drilling, knowing it will destroy the environment. But since we "need" it, they latch onto so-called robotic exploration, buying into the argument that somehow our modern technololgy will make drilling in the Refuge cleaner, less destructive than, say, in Prudhoe Bay or any other Alaskan oil field. What lies. What deception!
   "We're not there yet" and certainly we couldn't be expected to make a few sacrifices, to curtail our driving, to switch to smaller cars, to use public transportation where it is available (unfortunately it isn't available at all where I live in rural Maine), to restore funding to Amtrack and public transportation, to stop building more roads, to find ways of helping homeowners add solar panels, wind mills, whatever makes sense given the specifics of place. And think of the jobs! But then these arguments have been made over and over. Unfortunately big oil benefits from none of this and so these options continue to be ignored.
   I feel like I'm living in an episode of the Twilight Zone. I pray the drilling idea goes no farther than the Senate vote. And what really needs to happen is permanent protection for the Refuge -- if we can keep it safe for the remainder of Bush's term.
   Another thing. When I was in Alaska about 15 years ago, I met with activists working to protect the Refuge. They told me that they made every effort to use the proper name -- the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge -- rather than ANWR. The whole name emphasizes what it is -- a wildlife refuge. It's easy to forget that when we say, or see, ANWR.
     

No quick fix

"Yes," he said, "But we're not there yet."

We're not "there yet" with ANWR drilling either -- it will be years before the first barrel of oil is produced.

How did your Senators vote?

Common Dreams has the answer.

Caribou-Whoo-Whoo

Alaska and oil go hand in hand lately.  Oil prices are up so Alaska is looking good.  Well after the Valdez accident maybe not, but when lately have we heard about anything of that nature up there, lately.  Looking at records on wildlife up there seems to show an increase in Caribou herds not a decrese.  What are we to believe?  We can't all go up their to look around.  Maybe we need someone, lets say a fair minded group who can represent us their, who will look into things for us??  Well, there not being a truely fair and balanced opinion, then I guess we are at a loss as to who to believe?  The fact is we need the oil till someone finally pulls the head out and pushes Hydrogen as the true savior of the environment.  Grist, maybe you should wake up the world rather than poo-hoo about Caribou.  We will not save the world environment till someone takes the BULL (BS) by the horn.

ldmstr/of/the/left
Re: no quick fix

You're right, absolutely. We won't be pumping Refuge gas into our cars any time soon, a fact that supporters of drilling fail to mention. They make it seem as though the drill goes in, the oil comes out and our problems are solved, just like that. It's all lies.
   Re: numbers of caribou. What's the point? If caribou numbers are up it's okay to drill? Talk about "BULL (BS)".  We do not "need" the oil. We have succumbed to a lifestyle that causes us to believe we need it. There are more gas guzzlers on the US roads now than ever before. More roads are being built and "improved" than  ever before. More mega commercial development than ever before, drawing people away from their town centers into the outlying areas (to which they need to drive) to buy ever-cheaper products made from and packaged in -- you guessed it -- petroleum products.
   I am always leery when someone claims they know the "true savior" of the environment, or anything else for that matter. There is no one solution, but many choices, all of which should be developed because some work best in certain places than others. Hydrogen may be part of the answer. But conservation is the biggest part which includes drastically increasing MPGs -- there's no good reason why the average US non-hybrid car shouldn't get upwards of 50 or more MPG. My 1996 Honda gets 35MPG right now. New construction should be tight and incorporate passive solar, heat sinks, etc. Existing buildings, including homes, should be retrofitted as much as possible and for folks who don't have the $ to pay for such improvements, there should be programs to help. Alternatives --  solar, wind, low-head hydro -- should receive top funding priority whether it benefits big oil or not. And with regard to electricity, I feel a regional energy grid as opposed to the increasingly complex national grid, makes more sense. Food systems need to be regionalized, too, which would minimize gas for trucking. This is not to say I'm opposed to all imports, but to be reliant on them in these times makes no sense.
   There is no excuse for drilling in the Refuge or in any other wilderness or wild or even just beautiful place. It is up to humans to rethink our "needs" and our expectations and downsize them, the material ones anyway, to fit reality. More caribou than reported? Wonderful! Let's keep it that way!

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Username: Password:

Forgot your password? Enter your username and click:

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?


Also in Grist

The Week's Most Popular



From the Archives
Let Us Now Praise Innocuous Men, by Amanda Griscom Little. Bush EPA nominee Steve Johnson garners praise and sympathy.
Heavy Metal Madness, by Amanda Griscom Little. Pombo eggs on mercury debate with controversial report.
Operation Squander, by Amanda Griscom Little. As Kyoto goes live, U.S. green groups offer tepid response.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Jobs Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcasts
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra® | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2007. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks