An attempt to open Alaska’s ANWR arctic refuge to oil drilling has been nixed by a narrow vote in the Senate — a vote underscored by anger over an attempt to lump in the proposal with a critical defense spending bill.
Several things are clear from this 56 to 44 vote:
- The tactic, stemming from the drilling provision super-glued into the defense bill in the House, did not win friends and influence wavering Senators. If anything, many of them were outraged by the tactic.
- The idea isn’t totally dead. The narrowness of the vote means the White House — and the oil industry — could get its wish if it can peel off a few Democratic Senators.
- It’s unlikely environmental groups will drop their vigilance on this issue given the attempt to tack this onto a military bill so that those who would vote against it would be seen as not caring about troops or Hurricane Katrina victims.
The Associated Press reports:
It was a stinging defeat for Sen. Ted Stevens (news, bio, voting record), R-Alaska, one of the Senate’s most powerful members, who had given senators a choice to support the Alaska drilling measure, or risk the political fallout of voting against money for American troops and for victims of Hurricane Katrina.
Democrats accused Stevens, the senior Republican in the Senate, of holding the defense bill hostage to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
“It took a lot of guts for a lot of people to stand up,” Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., said after the vote.
The Washington Post has some more tidbits — and a point Lieberman made that echoes one we made earlier (is he a TMV reader?):
Voting to block the bill were 40 Democrats, one independent and three Republicans — Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Mike DeWine of Ohio and Bill Frist of Tennessee. Frist, the Senate majority leader, had supported passage, but once the voting numbers became clear, he cast a “no” vote for procedural reasons so that he could bring up the drilling issue for another vote.
The four Democrats who split with their colleagues and voted to cut off debate were Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Ben Nelson of Nebraska.
In debate before the cloture vote, Stevens told fellow senators, “We know this Arctic. You don’t know the Arctic at all.” At issue, he said, was “2,000 acres of the Arctic,” the amount of land in the refuge that would be opened for drilling. “Is that worth this fight?”
Stevens also denied Democratic charges that he violated a Senate rule to get the drilling provision inserted into the defense appropriations bill. “There’s nothing I’ve done here that violated the rules,” he said.
Yes, and a fat guy in a red suit who should get on the Atkins Diet will slide down your chimney this Christmas and deliver toys to all the good little girls and boys. MORE:
Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) charged on the Senate floor, “Our military is being held hostage by this issue, Arctic drilling.” Calling the provision “another gift to special interests,” he said, “It’s time we said no to an abuse of power.”
Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.) said that even though the bill provides vital defense funding, he was joining the filibuster on principle to prevent attachments such as the drilling provision. “If we yield to this tactic on ANWR,” he said, “next year it will be someone else’s pet project attached to the defense spending bill.”
That’s one of the key points here. If the issue of ANWR drilling must come up, then let it: the losing side can gripe about the short-sightedness of the victorious side. But no one can claim in a vote on the merits of this proposal that it was shoved through in a sleazy, smelly manner. If this had gone through, then Lieberman (as we have said) is right.
If this had gone through, what will prevent a future Democratic Congress to stick in controversial provisions that conservatives don’t like (like more funds to abortion clinics, a huge increase in Headstart funds, perhaps a revival of some kind of mega-welfare)?
Republican leaders fell four votes short of getting the required 60 votes to avoid a threatened filibuster of the defense measure over the oil drilling issue. The vote prompted GOP leaders to huddle in private over their next move.
And, indeed, a Reuters report notes that the issue is FAR from dead:
Today the Senate gave the oil industry and (Sen.) Stevens the lump of coal they deserved,” said Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club. It and other green groups say the same amount of oil recoverable from ANWR could be conserved if Congress imposed stricter fuel standards on new vehicles.
The White House, which sees ANWR drilling as crucial to the U.S. oil supply, said it was not giving up.
“We’ll continue to push to get that provision passed,” White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.
Republican Pete Domenici from the oil state of New Mexico said he would try again to unlock ANWR in spring legislation.
“I fear our gasoline prices will begin climbing again next year and I’m certain our reliance on foreign oil will continue to climb in the coming years if we don’t act soon to produce more of our own oil,” Domenici said.
Spring legislation? That will be right at the height of the Congressional mid-term elections…and it’ll put many politicos on the hot seat.
Additional facts about the Arctic refuge can be found here.