“Drill Baby, Drill?” No Time Soon

Today the sign on the gas station across the street from my office reads $1.87 per gallon. A couple of months ago, none of us expected to see gas so cheap again. Now that the emphasis is on the sick economy, the price of oil has declined precipitously during the past few weeks, and we have just elected a new president, the once-important issue of offshore drilling has dropped off our collective radar screen--at least for now. But the issue is still the same, and so too the dangers facing the United States. If we continue to rely upon foreign oil produced in large measure by countries that do not like us much or, worse yet, are avowed enemies, then we remain politically, militarily, and economically vulnerable.

---

Pressure from the American public and four dollar a gallon gas has changed the politics of drilling in a major way. First, President Bush rescinded an Executive Order which banned offshore drilling, removing one obstacle to harvesting our own natural resources. Then Congress, remarkably, allowed the legislative moratorium to expire. Therefore, two of the previous three obstacles to offshore drilling and reduced dependency on foreign oil have been eliminated within the past few months. However, a third remaining obstacle which neither the new Congress nor the President Elect seem inclined to discourage--environmental litigation--promises to provide political cover for the Democrats. Certain environmental groups have filed lawsuits against the development of offshore oil resources arguing that theoretical danger to wildlife trumps the security of the United States inherent in the reduction of our dependence on foreign energy resources. Arguing that the Secretary of the Interior has not sufficiently considered the theoretical impact of offshore drilling on water quality, air quality, and the welfare of polar bears and whales, the Center for Biological Diversity has filed a lawsuit designed to tie up oil leases off the shores of Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, and Virginia. Put simply, win lose or draw, this litigation, remaining federal legislation and rules will effectively encumber the leases for years and do that which the new Congress and the new President will not need to do-- block offshore drilling by legislative fiat or presidential directive. The Left needs only to file lawsuits and tie up the leases for so many years that we are not going to reap the benefits of our own natural resources for many years--if ever. This myopic view of the development of energy resources (i.e., no fossil fuels) is not shared by the American public, disregards the rather remarkable history of offshore drilling, and is certainly not shared by one Congressman--who many consider to be the leader in the quest for development of all energy resources, including biodiesel, ethanol, wind, solar, nuclear and fossil fuels. If you thought the leader of the movement to develop all of our energy resources was some liberal legislator from California or the northeast, you would be wrong. In fact, he is Iowa’s own United States Congressman from the Fifth District of Iowa, and a leading conservative, Representative Steve King. Congressman King, just reelected by a margin of 60% to 37% in an election atypical of the rest of the country in which Democrats made significant gains in the House and Senate, bucked the tide in a big way. In fact, it likely has as much to do with his open-minded, forward thinking attitude on energy policy as it does with his own innate common sense, intelligence and keen wit. Or, his solid Midwestern values of hard work, independence and love of the land that caused him to climb down from his bulldozer, and rise to the highest levels of elected office in a few short years. Criticized by the Left as too partisan and opposed by abortion rights groups, gay rights groups, old time liberal establishment, labor and the Hate Bush crowd, King has managed to get reelected by comfortable margins in his largely rural, western Iowa district where Jeffersonian love of the land values still predominate. To meet Steve King is to be instantly impressed. His detractors often demonize him, but none can doubt his intelligence, his grasp of technical issues or his leadership in the area of renewable energy sources. He has the ability to discuss in detail the scientific aspects of human cloning, the environmental impact of terracing the land, the many ways a kernel of corn may be used, or political developments in South Ossetia with equal ease. When it comes to IQ points, he has few equals in the beltway. And, above all, he has never abandoned his down home, close to the earth common sense values shared by his fellow Iowans--who continue to reelect him overwhelmingly. On the issue of energy, he has few equals on either side of the aisle. And he has the credentials to prove it. The statistics are quite impressive, for the Fifth Congressional District of Iowa is: --Number one (out of 435) in biodiesel production with an annual production of 81 million gallons; --Number two or three in ethanol production, with an annual output of 1.1 billion gallons; and --Number two or three in the generation of electricity from wind power, producing an amazing 1,000 megawatts of electricity, enough to power 270,000 homes. Put simply, when you add up all the BTU’s of renewable energy produced by his congressional district, including biodiesel, ethanol and wind power, Congressman King’s Fifth District of Iowa is the number one renewable energy producing district in the United States. And while King is the first to credit the hard working, creative and forward thinking people of Iowa who produce the fuel, invest in the plants, build the windmills, lay the grid and risk their capital to achieve these amazing results, there can be no doubt that King’s leadership in Congress and unwavering support for the development of alternative energy sources has played a leading role in this accomplishment as well. If you watch C-SPAN then you have likely seen Steve King on the floor of the House debating energy issues and educating those who would listen, on the dangers or reliance on foreign energy and the benefits of development of our own resources here at home. While many other Congressmen and Congresswomen pay lip service to the issues for the sake of headlines, King grubs around in the minutiae. He is one of the few members of Congress who actually know what the Alaska coastal plain looks like, what environmentally friendly low profile drilling rigs actually look like (anything but rusty hulks visible from the land which the environmentalists would have us believe), and the only one who has personally calculated our national energy production and consumption and converted all of it into a common denominator – BTUs. So, who better to answer my question as to the status of offshore drilling? I interviewed Congressman King to learn what we can expect in the days ahead on the issue of offshore drilling--which has been placed on the back burner in the recent past. That is, of course, until the next oil embargo, cut in production, or international incident in the Straits of Hormuz—at which time this issue will be right back on the front burner again. When I asked him what we can expect from Congress and the President, King’s response was typically dispassionate, straightforward and, unfortunately, not encouraging for anyone who believe that we must develop our resources--all of them. We discussed the three-way hold that the Left has on the development of our own energy resources. He noted: “I really doubt that the new Congress--having recently allowed the moratorium on offshore drilling to expire--will have the nerve to pass a ban on offshore drilling and it is unlikely that President Obama will reissue the executive order that blocked drilling.”  Of course, I found this part encouraging. However, Congressman King added that neither Congress nor Obama necessarily needs to re-impose the ban, to wit: “If an act of Congress or the President were required in order to block offshore drilling, the Left would, without a doubt, push it through one way or another. However, their help is not necessary because virtually every offshore lease has been filed on by environmental groups.  They have blanket suits filed that automatically encumber future leases the moment they are approved.”  King went on to say that the radical environmentalists had a “triple hold” on offshore drilling through executive order, statute, and litigation and: “While two are temporarily gone now (the rescission of the executive order banning offshore drilling and the expiration of the congressional moratorium) the third, litigation, remains too powerful a barrier for energy companies to crack. Further, if litigation were not sufficient, the Democrats would quickly pass a statutory prohibition and or prevail upon President Obama to sign another executive order.” King believes that these political facts, plummeting crude oil prices, and a perceived softening of T. Boone Pickens’ position on alternative energy as a result of falling prices, all play into the hands of the extreme environmentalists who (as King noted with typical keen wit): “See homo sapiens as an invasive species that threatens all other species and the planet itself.” Put simply, according to Congressman King, we should not expect any further action from Congress or the President-Elect. It seems that the third arrow in the quiver of the radical left--endless environmental litigation--is enough to ensure that the United States cannot develop its own resources as every other country on the planet does, and remains dangerously reliant upon foreign oil owned by nations ruled by people who do not like us much and whose foreign policy is often in direct conflict with our own. And, all based on the theoretical possibility that someone might see an oil rig, or the possibility a bear, whale, or moose might, in theory, someday, be harmed in some way. “Drill Baby Drill?” Not likely. Maybe, but no time soon.