|
Senate Kills ANWR Drilling Proposal, for Now
Republicans Fall Short of Votes Needed to End Filibuster
 Listen to David Welna's report.
 View a photo gallery of ANWR wildlife.
April 18, 2002 -- Senate Republicans fell well short of the 60 votes needed to break a Democratic filibuster and allow a vote on an amendment to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration and drilling.
Drilling on the refuge has been a centerpiece of the Bush administration's energy agenda. But pro-drilling lawmakers fell short of even a majority in the Senate vote, and development of the refuge will probably not be possible in Congress this year.
White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said Thursday President Bush would continue to fight for drilling, but didn't say whether Bush would sign an energy bill that does not include a plan for ANWR oil.
The two Alaska senators, both Republicans, offered the ANWR drilling amendment to the energy bill. Eight Republicans joined most Democrats in opposing the drilling measure. Five Democrats supported the drilling amendment.
Drilling supporters argued ANWR oil was essential for America's energy security and drilling would create tens of thousands of jobs. But Democrats countered that no oil would flow for a decade and would have little impact in oil imports or fuel prices.
The Republican-dominated House approved ANWR drilling last summer, but needs to reconcile their vote with the Senate in negotiations before sending a compromise bill to Bush -- and the lack of support for the drilling plan in the Senate all but ends the debate until next year's budget battles begin again.
Congress has argued for nearly two decades about whether or not America's energy needs justify opening the 1.5 million acre coastal plain of the refuge, which is the calving ground for a migratory herd of more than 100,000 caribou.
The 19-million-acre chunk of tundra known as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is tucked into the northeast corner of Alaska. ANWR's rugged landscape offers essential habitat for the polar bear, the Porcupine caribou herd and hundreds more species of animals and plants.
Beneath the permafrost, petroleum deposits fuel a political debate revived by the White House and stoked by the events of Sept. 11. At the center of the debate is an area that makes up nearly 10 percent of the refuge.
No one knows how much oil may lie beneath the Wildlife Refuge's tundra. Drilling proponents cite ANWR as an important new source of domestic oil, saying recovering the deposits found there could help the U.S. reduce dependence on imports.
Opponents say the ANWR deposits offer a relatively limited source of oil and fear the long-term impact of drilling on wildlife in a largely undisturbed -- though not pristine -- wilderness area.
Wildlife advocates say drilling proponents have overestimated the amount of oil available and underestimated the amount of time it would take to produce oil from the refuge. Those who want to drill cite evidence that caribou herds have thrived around Alaska's Prudhoe Bay, where oil wells, pipelines, roads and processing facilities spread across the terrain.
But some researchers whose work is cited say the conclusions drawn by the competing camps are often oversimplified.
In Depth
Browse for other NPR stories about the energy debate.
Other Resources
• Follow the debate in the Senate and read statements by legislators at www.senate.gov.
• Read the U.S. Geological Survey's 1998 study on the potential for oil development in the 1002 Area.
• Read about ANWR and its wildlife at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Web site.
• Read arguments against drilling in ANWR at the Natural Resources Defense Council Web site.
• The Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility has been following the issue closely, pointing out discrepancies in data used for and against drilling. Visit PEER's Web site.
• Read about the Alaska Wilderness League's campaign to keep oil drilling out of ANWR.
|
