digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at thinkprogress.org

Bush lifts his father’s ban on offshore oil drilling.

thinkprogress.org — Just one month after John McCain flip-flopped and called for lifting the ban on offshore oil drilling, President Bush will announce later today that he too will flip-flop and “lift an executive ban on offshore drilling that has stood since his father was president.” Bush and McCain supported the ban when running for president in 2000

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Masternajee, on 07/14/2008, -91/+103It is about time.
    • qdkk, on 07/14/2008, -35/+35Allowing offshore drilling will only endanger our fragile coast lines (there are still remains of the oil spills from the 80's that get on you feet when you walk on the beaches in SoCal). There will be no falling of gas prices for at least 10 years, if at all. This is a move to benefit big oil and the loser is the people.
      • ender7074, on 07/14/2008, -23/+33Good, then you pay for my gas if its such a nonissue to you. Also, since it will take a few years (nowhere near 10) why not start now. People like you are the reason we are in this situation to begin with.
      • doctechnical, on 07/14/2008, -12/+20But if another nation drills off our shores does it there's no risk to our fragile coast lines? What spooky new oil drilling technology do they have that we don't?

        As far as the time it takes gas prices to drop - spot oil increase overnight on bad news from the Mid-East. You expect me to believe that news of our drilling would take 10 years to change prices? Please.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -10/+18I was on the beach in Seal Beach, California one day reading a book. Hundreds of people in the water and laying on the beach all around me. I wear glasses and clear oil kept fouling my glasses....so I asked the lifeguard on duty where the oil was coming from and if it was safe. "Is there an oil leak somewhere," and he said the water has been tested very frequently and the "oil" was from LA sewage and the military base on the coast. He told me it was all very safe, nothing to be alarmed about....NO oil leaks. I packed up and left.

        I think the coast is already toast. They are not treating the HUMAN EXCREMENT and any fool in the water is going to get it on themselves....don't kid yourself.

        I say drill now, learn how to treat the human waste better and then when the oil is gone take care of the coasts....we have less than fifty years of oil left. Drill now.
      • superkendall, on 07/14/2008, -9/+24So you'd selfishly rather get it from other countries where pollution controls are less rigorous than here.

        Way to destroy the environment you claim to cherish, sir.
      • philipl411, on 07/14/2008, -10/+10So what is your solution to lower prices?
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -14/+12doctechnical: You are absolutely correct. China is in Cuba at this very moment and is drilling less than 90 miles off the coast of Florida. China has no better technologies and is going to drill right into our coastal areas and there is nothing we can do about it because the lazy ass....chicken ***** Democrats are going to do nothing.
      • ausfahrt, on 07/14/2008, -11/+16You seriously think they will lower prices. You are all mad. They will just have more oil to sell us now. There is NO reason gas should be as high as it is right now. Oil companies are recording massive growth every year.
      • STARTSOMETHING, on 07/14/2008, -7/+13
        philipl411
        "So what is your solution to lower prices?"

        Alternative fuel! The electric car is a start.
      • EtherGnat, on 07/14/2008, -2/+15@philipl411

        What makes you think there is a solution that will bring about any significant and long lasting reduction in prices? We can remove all limits on drilling and it might help some for a few decades (drilling in ANWR would increase world oil supplies by 0.3% for 30 years for example) but at the end of it we're in even worse shape than when we started.

        We need to build up our Nuclear capabilities, and continue to develop renewable energy as well but I doubt either will lead to a significant reduction in energy prices. Conservation is another key--if we can reduce usage by a trivial amount it will have a greater impact than domestic drilling.
      • fluoro, on 07/14/2008, -7/+13The issue isn't even really about environmental impact yet. The thing is, there's no reason to unban the offshore drilling because the oil companies aren't even drilling on all the land that they ALREADY have access to. They're actually using a fraction of what they currently have, but they're taking advantage of the current energy crisis to try to snatch up protected land that they don't even need.

        Lifting this ban will NOT make our gas prices cheaper.
      • mrswirl, on 07/14/2008, -4/+11@QuadZeroRoute

        Too bad that this claim is patently false and has been thoroughly discredited. So sorry.

        Would you like to try for door #2?

        "GOP claim about Chinese oil drilling off Cuba is untrue"
        http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/40776.html
      • superkendall, on 07/14/2008, -8/+9Too bad you discredited yourself with your own link. The point is not so much that the CHINESE are the ones drilling, the point is that other governments CAN drill that close off the border - the very article you link to says Brazil has an agreement and is doing deep water exploration in the Gulf.

        If Brazil can drill there, why not us?
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -3/+6mrswirl, if it is a lie now for how long do you think it will remain false? If the oil problem becomes worse China will be drilling as they are now heavily in Africa. China and Cuba are tight.
      • mrswirl, on 07/14/2008, -3/+6The point is that you stated "China is in Cuba at this very moment and is drilling less than 90 miles off the coast of Florida." That statement is simply not true.

        Don't cite ***** information in order to stir up emotional responses. This China-Cuba link is simply a Republican red herring. So much so that Cheney himself was forced to retract his statement on the matter: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/40994.html

        And last I checked, Cuba is a sovereign nation with territorial waters under their control. Who ever said it is "our" oil under there in the first place?

        But thanks anyway for the straw man...
      • msheidi, on 07/15/2008, -3/+3Forget about the environment. I want to pay 1.56 a gallon for gas again. I want to drive my Jeep everywhere. ***** you all you envirowackos. If you cared about the environment, you'd jump off the cliff like a bunch of lemmings. Bunch of weenies.


      • compdude32, on 07/15/2008, -3/+1Ever hear of something called speculation?
      • compdude32, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2mrswirl

        Yes Cuba is a sovereign nation, but their off shore rigs are slant drilling into US territory.

        And you still never answered superkendall's question

        oh and finally great source on your china story, please provide a real source if you expect me to believe it.
      • cdahlkvist, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3mrswirl:

        From your own citation:

        "[W]hile there has been some concern about China’s potential involvement in offshore deepwater oil projects, to date its involvement in Cuba’s oil sector has been focused on onshore oil extraction in Pinar del Rio province through its state-run China Petroleum and Chemical Corporation."

        "[W]ith only modest energy needs and no ability of its own to drill, Cuba has negotiated lease agreements with China and other energy-hungry countries to extract resources for themselves and for Cuba."

        "China is there. They are now doing exploratory drilling."

        Yes, that’s right; China and Cuba are actively EXPLORING oil fields 50 miles from Key West, Florida while U.S. Companies are barred from working in this area because of U.S. Policy. So, instead of allowing the most environmentally responsible companies to operate there and increase our domestic supply, China , who has a dismal environmental record, is preparing to suck our close, lucrative oil reserves dry.
      • CARHINO, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1The majority of the oil comes from natural seepage.
    • lhbaker, on 07/14/2008, -23/+13It's remarkable how only four words can say so much about a person's level of ignorance.
      • ender7074, on 07/14/2008, -15/+21Level of ignorance? How so? Because he has a belief thats not yours. Someone that doesnt buy into the ***** fear mongering of the left and their lies. Nice try but the only ignorant one here is you.
      • Olfster, on 07/14/2008, -4/+8Anyone that believes either side is ignorant. In the USA it is simple to get to the truth about anything... follow the money.
      • Brownds, on 07/14/2008, -8/+2Much like 16 words...
    • chicofaraby, on 07/14/2008, -17/+18No, it's about money.
      • m6ack, on 07/14/2008, -14/+11No. It's about _my_ money, AND it's about time.
      • doctechnical, on 07/14/2008, -8/+7Yeah, more money in my pocket because of increased supply.
      • chicofaraby, on 07/14/2008, -10/+20You guys actually think this is going to lower prices at the pump?

        Damn, no wonder you vote Republican....
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -12/+9chicoMarxist, then why don't you tell us how supply and demand works.
      • Andysan, on 07/15/2008, -4/+2You damn right it is about money -- MINE. I am ready to kick some serious ass if our so-called leaders don't get off their butts and do something reasonable.
      • malex, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3QuadGullibleSuckerRoute: You mean in a perfect theoretical context, or in the actual world?

        Because in the real world, there are already 68 million acres of public lands and waters open for drilling, still waiting for exploration. You knew that, right?
      • floorman56, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4Because in the real world, there are already 68 million acres of public lands and waters open for drilling, still waiting for exploration. You knew that, right?

        That doesn't have oil ...So congress is telling them they have to spend 100 million to drill a dry hole before they will let them drill where oil is

        Is that a good business model?
      • mrswirl, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2And you know there is no oil under these 68 million acres how exactly? What makes you think there is more oil in the areas that are currently off limits?

        Last estimate I heard, there is more potential recoverable reserves under the existing leases than in ANWR and the sought after new leases combined.

        The only difference is that in order to get to it oil companies will have to do deep water drilling which is a bit more expensive. But, at $130+/barrel it is still very, very profitable so don't feel too bad for them - they're still raking it in hand over fist.

        Instead, they are seeking yet another government hand out to obtain leases to additional lands that are currently off limits. It's your basic land grab only it's out on the continental shelf. Drilling deep is, unfortunately, the cost of doing business. I personally don't feel the desire to continue to subsidize oil companies with sweetheart land deals while they are enjoying historical records profits but maybe that's just me.

      • keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3That's not entirely true, floorman. Of the areas leased to oil companies, some doesn't have oil, some doesn't have enough to justify the expense and some has enough to be extracted in sustainable quantities.
        Now the question you might be asking yourself is if that oil is there, why aren't they extracting it? It's because congress wont amend the lease agreement from exploration only to one that lets them drill.
        So, when you hear some idiot democrat saying that the oil companies aren't using the land that is already leased to them, it's because the democrats wont let them.
      • mrswirl, on 07/15/2008, -3/+2@keymanjim2 - "It's because congress wont amend the lease agreement from exploration only to one that lets them drill."

        That is such a patently absurb statement I don't even know where to begin. What exactly do you think 'exploration' means?

        http://science.howstuffworks.com/oil-drilling1.htm

      • keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3"What exactly do you think 'exploration' means?"
        Talk about patently absurd.
        The leases were for exploration ONLY. If sustainable resources were found then further negotiations would have been made to fix a price on them before they were extracted.
        When resources were found congress refused to renegotiate and the oil stayed where it was.
        And they still refuse to renegotiate to this day. Thanks dems.
        I'm taking my gas station receipts into the voting booth this November.
    • freemenow, on 07/14/2008, -24/+15No doubt. Democraps must think that the oil companies can piss oil, since they expect it to be produced cheaply, in great quantity, and without drilling.

      What morons.

      Of course the Republicraps are no better, they are just nuts on religion and constant war.

      Don't blame me, I voted Libertarian.
      • Brownds, on 07/14/2008, -5/+10I hope this makes OPEC ***** their pants. It may make them drop their oil prices if they see us starting to turn away from the Middle East oil tit.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -6/+7If you voted Libertarian you are a bigger part of the problem than the Democrats and the Republicans because you my friend are voting for NO solution at all. None of the asses that you vote for ever get in so they can NEVER do anything about any of the problems we have.
      • mrsteveman1, on 07/14/2008, -5/+7Voting for either of the 2 parties doesn't seem to change anything, so if you are going to waste a vote either way you might as well vote for who you REALLY want to get elected.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -4/+8mrsteveman1: If you want change and nobody is bringing you the change you want then you should go get involved and either manage a company that make the changes you want or get a job in politics to run the political end of it....throwing your vote away on Bob Barr of some other dumb ass(write in Ron Paul) is not going to do anything.
      • mrsteveman1, on 07/14/2008, -0/+5My point being, it's likely not gonna matter.

        Lesser of 2 evils is a valid choice yes, but at some point it gets annoying watching it happen repeatedly. One would hope that if you consistently vote for the lesser of the 2 evils eventually you get good candidates who represent peoples views, but that never seems to happen, so ***** it.
      • IllBeBack, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3Ha ha "Democraps"? How about the Repooblicans? They are no less evil.
    • BryanQ, on 07/14/2008, -13/+9Oil is traded globally and sold to the highest bidder. Are we willing to ravage our coast line so the Chinese can have more oil? Why would gas prices lower here in the states? Isn't it in the best interest of the Oil Companies to keep gas prices high?

      Truly, this is a game of Russian roulette and all six chambers are loaded with ecological disasters, soaring gas prices, and another 25 years of record profits for the Oil Companies. There are no benefits for citizens of the United States.
      • philipl411, on 07/14/2008, -8/+8again, people like you are great a bitching, but very short on solutions. How would you help resolve our dependence on foreign oil
      • p0s3r, on 07/14/2008, -2/+8If you were a company and you could sell 10 barrels of oil at $1000/barrel or you could sell 1000 barrels of oil at $20/barrel, which would you choose?
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -5/+3p0s3r, then lets force their hand and have them drill now. Unless you have some ulterior motive for us to hold on to the oil.
      • BryanQ, on 07/14/2008, -2/+6@philipI411:
        It's as simple as reducing our dependency on foreign oil in tandem with our increased investment in clean energy solutions. You're playing the part of the fool if you think our dependence on foreign oil will be impacted by off shore drilling.

        Seeing as you feel you know me - let's get to know one another. I ride a bike to work. What do you do to help our current situation?
      • BBWolf, on 07/14/2008, -5/+4To those that say 'But it will take Ten Years to get to market..." I tell you, Nope, it ain't true. It Will not take anything like 10 years to get crude flowing once the OK is given to drill. Some will be arriving at the refineries in months. And if we Don't do it, what will it be like 5-10 years from now?

        To those that say 'We don't need new leases, Look at all the leases they already have that are not used' I say All leases are not created equal...Some are profitable, some are not. Some are known to have Oil or Gas, some have none.

        To those that say 'It's only 1 mil., 2 mil, 5 mi. Barrels...whatever, and will effect nothing'. I say, Prices are set at the Margin. It is the Marginal or small increases or shortfalls in supply and demand that drive prices and a Marginal increase in Supply will defiantly drive prices downward.

        Let me say that again because it seems to get lost in all the shouting. Prices are set at the Margin.

        Small increases in supply Will Decrease the price at the pump. Is there more to do? You bet, but as the Technology is not yet able to provide a viable alternative, and will require years of research and billions in investment and infrastructure, we need to increase supply now while we create those Technologies.
      • msheidi, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1It is about global power. Why do you want to not have power over everyone else. This nation has lost its spine.


    • floorman56, on 07/14/2008, -8/+15Obama breaths a sigh of relief Now he can say "Bush did it" and Congress . He will just vote "present" again
    • sulthernao, on 07/14/2008, -7/+11It'll lower your gas by 6 cents, ten years from now. Congratulations! Oh, did you know that Exxon-Mobile and all the rest already have oil fields that they haven't taken advantage of because they are manipulating the markets to keep gas high? If you really want to lower gas prices then stop the incessant speculation.
      • SpartanErik, on 07/14/2008, -4/+6Ten years from now, gas will be double what we're paying. Any savings would alleviate the situation.

        Enough crockery about the big oil conspiracy. Oil companies make an 8% profit margin on all sales, which is slim compared to many other industries. They're clocking record profits since every developing country is consuming more and more oil. These profits also are required to invest in future technologies, whether petroleum or alternative energy related.

        We've had cheap gas for far too long, and now we're suffering the sticker shock.

        Additionally, our "incessant speculation" translates to roughly $30 per barrel according to ABC as of 2-3 weeks ago. Welcome to a free market, you can participate and make your money. Nobody is stopping you.
      • JohnGalt750, on 07/14/2008, -4/+2Speculation is the solution not the problem.

        People say "oil only costs $50-60 a barrel to produce, why are the prices at $145? EVIL SPECULATION!"

        Perhaps you don't understand the function that speculation serves. Speculators are betting that there will be a true Oil supply crunch where there isn't enough oil available. But in doing so are driving up the price of Oil before there is a supply issue. This encourages new oil exploration, and alternative energy. Who doesn't want that?

        If we fixed prices at $50 a barrel we would happly burn our way past peak oil, and right up to where there isn't oil available at any price. It one thing when you pay more for heating and travel, it's entirely different when your stranded and cold because there is no oil at all.

      • msheidi, on 07/15/2008, -3/+4they can't drill cause CONGRESS won't let them. YES your precious democrat congress is holding the balls of the oil companies.

      • CARHINO, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Just talking about it has lowered the price $20 in 3 DAYS, (went down .19c here in MI). The actual cost of production is @ $3.50-4.00 a barrel in the mid east, why does it cost $145? Because when you need something, and you are not allowed to produce it yourself, those who have it can charge whatever the market will bear! The saudis and opec are living like sultans, building palaces, driving limos, while we are wringing our hands, apologizing for OUR EVIL ways?
        And the left tried the whole "peak oil" thing in the 70's, at that time they predicted there was not enough oil to get us thru the last decade. the problem is the theory is based on KNOWN reserves, and oil accessible with current technology. I attended a PO seminar, shale oil was not factored in, nor recently new discovered fields.
    • seagoat2008, on 07/14/2008, -7/+10 Educate yourself about energy before you speak. This won't solve any shortage of oil and will only go in the pocket of the rich. If you want to listen to an oilman, look at comments by T Boone Pickens last week. It isn't about more it is about different. I think the railroad may be coming back in vogue because trucking is too expensive but oil is headed to a lesser role in our world. Change is the only certain thing in this life.
      • CARHINO, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1 T boone has drained many of his wells, and is banking on natural gas as the next solution. I agree with him in part, however he is just trying to get legislation to move to "his" preferred source.
    • Koskun, on 07/14/2008, -4/+3It has to be cleared by Congress before it is approved.

      All Bush is trying to do is make his image better for his legacy, and the perceived help that opening up offshore drilling will bring is part of that.
    • Jareth86, on 07/14/2008, -7/+8Are you ***** kidding me? The will do nothing to help gas prices, and will only ***** up our planet even more than it already is. All this will do is make Exxon's profits higher, at our expense.
    • mrswirl, on 07/14/2008, -6/+5News flash to all: This is a symbolic gesture that is meant only to pander to the right. It is just political posturing by our Numbnuts-in-Chief.

      There is still a FEDERAL BAN on offshore drilling that remains in effect!!!
    • xptoast, on 07/14/2008, -4/+2Can you guys digg it?
      • aamw1792, on 07/15/2008, -3/+0No.
      • xptoast, on 07/15/2008, -4/+1You can't eh? Well then I guess the others that can digg it burried you lol.
    • Andysan, on 07/15/2008, -6/+6The presidential ban did not in any way stop energy exploration. The obstacles are the states and the U.S. Congrees ***** all this green stuff, I need a way to get to work tomorrow.
      • locojones, on 07/15/2008, -3/+2Quit bitching and contributing to the problem of endless consumption. Do your part, carpool or take the bus.
      • keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4Yes. Submit to forced social engineering like all the smokers had to.
        What's next? Making certain thoughts illegal? (I know. I know)
    • Netwatcher, on 07/15/2008, -5/+1Drilling for oil in 2026...


      ...Another Faith Based Initiative brought to you by the George W. Bush
      • keymanjim2, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3Changing to "green" energy the way the democrats want us to is like jumping off of a bridge to change into a bird.
        Please, try it sometime.
    • Kent4jmj, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1http://www.downsizedc.org/

      http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/

      These two websites help you to write to elected officials. I personally like the Downsize DC better but both are excellent.
  • Surferess, on 07/14/2008, -69/+71This is terrible news!
    • OptionalPirate, on 07/14/2008, -20/+5Noooo, I wanted $5 gas! THIS IS *****!

      Then again, big oil is just going to keep the prices high anyway. Poor Mr. Bush, he tries to do something good for once, but he really just gave us another reason to hate him.
      • zyklon, on 07/14/2008, -3/+14Apparently you don't understand how monopolies work. Stop being an idiot.
      • SkippyDoorknob, on 07/14/2008, -2/+6I'll make you a deal. The next time you fill up, calculate the difference between what you actually pay and what you would have paid at $5/gal and send me the difference. I'll send you my Paypal info.
      • SeafoodSoop, on 07/14/2008, -7/+2How about you crack open a book and use that noggin of yours before spouting ignorant opinions in an arrogant fashion?
      • jpop, on 07/14/2008, -1/+6I recommend you move to California then. They've got plenty of high gas prices for you there. Add in the drop in MPG due to the added Ethanol and you're definitely over $5/gallon.
    • DiggGeek24, on 07/14/2008, -14/+39Why would you rather has a total economic collapse or drill our oil till we can build our renewable energy infrastructure we can not stop using oil over night.
      • jpop, on 07/14/2008, -9/+2I dugg you, even though you sound like an illiterate bumpkin. The thought is in the right place.
      • fluoro, on 07/14/2008, -3/+12This will not make oil cheaper. We have plenty of oil, it's just expensive because of speculations of war with Iran. Not only do we have plenty of oil still, we also have plenty of places that more oil can be drilled in the US right now. The oil companies just aren't using it. But they still want to get at the places that are currently banned even though they don't need to. If they're given access to all this land now, they're still not going to drill it for a long time and we're not going to see lowered gas prices.

        A conspiracy theorist might say that Bush's administration isn't really as interested in a war with Iran as they pretend, that they're doing all this just to deliberately spike the prices of oil and get the oil industry richer. And with the oil prices spiked they can claim there is a shortage of oil and deliver all this protected land to the oil companies right now, then cease with all the warmongering talk against Iran and let it appear that gas prices lowered because we gave the oil companies access to all this land that they didn't really need anyway.

        High oil prices are actually good news for long-term renewable energy development. Back in the 70s there was a big oil embargo and gas prices skyrocketed, and everyone was interested in fuel economy and such. But as soon as the gas prices lowered then nobody gave a ***** about fuel economy or wind power anymore. If oil prices were to go significantly down next week, we would no longer be seeing interest in fuel efficient cars or in solar power or other renewable energy sources. People would go back to buying ***** of SUVs and stuff.
      • gn0stik, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3Number one reason it does nothing:

        Congress still has a ban on offshore drilling.

        But your stuff was good too flouro.
      • fluoro, on 07/15/2008, -1/+6Yes, you're right gn0stik. There is still a Congressional ban. But there are a lot of people going about how great this is, and how it would lower gas prices if Congress would also remove the ban. I think it's important for them to understand why gas prices are high and why removing the bans won't lower them.
    • darkened, on 07/14/2008, -17/+17I see this as great news sir.
    • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -3/+11That's right, when even the ones who know oil say it's a bad idea it's pretty much a bad deal.

      http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/052008Master ...
    • PacManDude, on 07/14/2008, -12/+8Great news indeed
    • richlw, on 07/14/2008, -0/+1what if you say the bad news in a good way it won't sound so bad...just no laughing during said speech, please
    • BoneStamp, on 07/14/2008, -2/+7The thing that scares me most about this is how we got here. I can't help but think George Bush has something to gain from this, I mean it's not like his family is in the oil business... but there must be some way he can benefit. I can't help but think that high oil prices were create intentionally, to gain support for this bill so the oil companies could profit even more... keep the prices the same and get the oil cheaper locally.

      The world's largest producer is Exxon, they posted record profits in 2008. It's funny to look back at this article from 5 months ago when they're talking about record high gas prices at $3.23/gallon. http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/01/news/companies/exx ... let's revist their profits per gallon sold in a few years to see if they're making more, less or the same money.
      • JHB800, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4Their profits have stayed at around 10% for the last several years, and will remain that way (if not less) going forward. It is getting more and more expensive to find and extract oil, which is why their profit levels have remained the same and will remain the same in the future. As a whole, Exxon spends about $20 billion of its profit a year on more exploration and reinvesting in the company's business.
      • BoneStamp, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2@JHB800
        Sounds reasonable. Like I said, let's revisit their profit per gallons/liters sold a few years from now (or by % profit if you prefer). I'm not predicting anything here, but it'll be interesting to see what happens.
    • popfrogs, on 07/14/2008, -0/+2Actually this story is non-news so far. He wants to lift the ban but it still has to float through our rubberstamp Congress first. Which I bet it will do, with only Carl Levin saying "this is a bad idea". And he'll be right, but he'll be alone.
      • gn0stik, on 07/14/2008, -1/+2It's a done deal, it was an executive ban and he doesn't need congressional approval to lift an executive ban. However congress followed suit with his dad and made their own congressional ban, and that has not been lifted. So all in all, you are correct, this does nothing.
      • MorganMghee, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Can't leave anything to chance in this mad mad administration. Give your rep's a call just to be sure.
    • proliance, on 07/14/2008, -7/+6Flip flop? The circumstances have changed greatly since 1990. I'm sure I won't change anyone's definition of a "flip flop" but gas was about $1.00 per gallon back then. This is a decision based on a changing economy and high fuel prices are changing many people's way of life.

      Oil companies are making more money because they are simply selling more oil. They still make less off a gallon of gas then the govt. does in taxes.

      Obama's idea that producing more oil will not lower the price of gas is plain stupid. That's like saying you can't eat your way out of a famine.

      Obama will change his mind on this like he has on everything else. Then who will your messiah be?
      • thedailynar, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3This gets dugg down, stuffed in a gym bag and covered in concrete. I can't believe I'm reacting to a 13-year old's pseudointellectual ranting.
      • MorganMghee, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1Did you take the time to read any of the comments here? Investigate the opposing facts? Have you located any facts that say this is a good idea? Please share if so.
  • leetninja, on 07/14/2008, -36/+39he decided that he has made himself and his buddies rich enough? since he is almost on his way out figures "what the hell ill lettem think everything will be ok" and then when its not he will sit back in his mansion and laugh ... kind of like what he does now ... just laughs at what he has done to America ... how pathetic a country we have become under his rule ... wait until he declares martial law and becomes dictator ... he already has all the dominoes in place ... why wouldnt he knock them down? stop walking around with your eyes closed people and wake the ***** up
    • Khangwin, on 07/14/2008, -9/+11citizens arrest. needs to happen
      • floorman56, on 07/14/2008, -3/+7Then do it ...... You are a citizen right?
      • bigt8dogg, on 07/14/2008, -2/+5Hahahahahahahahah yeah right... How do you arrest someone who's literally untouchable?? Say, "Hey, Mr. Secret Service Agent, would you please let me step through the little circle you've got going around Mr. Bush so that I can proceed to perform a citizen's arrest on him?" Or would you just pretend to want to shake his hand, get close enough, and slap cuffs on him? You might get shot for that, but definitely arrested. I don't disagree with your statement, but in practicality, how would anyone actually be able to pull it off? THEY WOULDN'T.
      • Khangwin, on 07/14/2008, -2/+3folks, it was just wishful thinking.
    • freedomkeeper, on 07/14/2008, -10/+12The scariest part of your rant is the thought that you may actually vote.
      • alwilson, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3What part of democracy don't you get?
      • dOOBiEx213, on 07/14/2008, -1/+4The scariest part of your reply is the thought that YOU may actually vote.
    • vinnyvenus, on 07/14/2008, -10/+9Or maybe Bush for the first time in his presidency made the right decision after watching middle class families suffer because of stupid environmental regulation which don't make any sense.
    • leetninja, on 07/14/2008, -9/+3the scariest part of your reply is that i cant punch you in the face ... or is it that you are a complete waste of oxygen?
    • philipl411, on 07/14/2008, -7/+4You really dont know how stupid you sound?
    • MasterPain, on 07/14/2008, -6/+6Bush & his cronies stand to make alot of money off of off shore drilling, while barely touching the price of gas.
    • BoneStamp, on 07/14/2008, -2/+5There are obviously two sides to this, those who support this and those who don't... whether it's for political, environmental or financial reasons. One of these sides has been brainwashed. I don't know if I support it or not, but I like to think that if you know the right people, it's pretty easy to raise fuel prices which puts many people in a position where they care about the environment but care more about their wallet and will support this.

      If they start drilling off shore they're just going to lower their costs. If we're buying gas at this price, why would they EVER lower the price? Regardless of which way this goes... gas will only increase and the only guaranteed winner here is the group of Oil companies. I'm not saying I do or do not support this, I'm just suggesting that maybe we're being tricked into supporting it.
  • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -43/+28Call your representatives this morning!
    http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/ ...
    http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtm ...

    "Hi, my name is xxx xxx, please do not allow the ban on offshore drilling to be lifted. Thank you."

    It will take less than 5 minutes to look up the phone number and make those calls.

    The Energy Information Administration says it will do no good. (IE Will not Lower Gas Prices) http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr ...

    Mccain's campaign also says it will do no good; http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/18/top-mccain-adv ...

    No expert will back the BushCain claim; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/23/impossibl ...

    The Saudi's will pump more this year at our President's request than the entire drilling venture would contribute; http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/6/24/151852/ ...

    And here's why they are so under informed; http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/6/25/10526/4 ...

    Polls are tricky things, the questions are crucial to the outcome, and can easily be slanted. 'Are you for offshore drilling to bring down the price of oil/gas?' is hardly a slant free question, especially considering there is not one single expert that will say drilling will reduce costs. http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/6/19/124158/ ... Add to that the fact that six in 10 Americans favor environment over growth http://www.gallup.com/poll/105715/Half-Public-Favo ... and this Poll just doesn't hold water.


    It's a strange thing about polls, and counting up opinions. It really matters a lot what questions you ask. For instance, about 60% of people favor local drilling since march08 (the drastic price increase):
    "In order to combat rising gasoline prices, 60% said they favor the U.S. government helping to raise oil and gasoline supplies by encouraging domestic drilling and refinery construction. Nearly as many also support cutting demand for fuel by boosting efficiency standards (59%) and offsetting demand by encouraging the use of biofuels like ethanol and biodiesel (54%). Four in 10 (39%) said they favor the U.S. government pressuring OPEC and other big oil producers to increase their exports while 37% would encourage the government to withdraw oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to increase the supply of oil in the short term." ( http://www.zogby.com/search/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1517 )
    yet people asked if they would choose environment over growth, even in the face of current economic woes 49% said environment and 42% said growth. ( http://www.gallup.com/poll/105715/Half-Public-Favo ... )
    It's easy to twist and word a survey or poll to elicit desired results. It's easy to misinterpret the results if you don't take the time to review the exact question or series of questions asked.

    Are you for offshore drilling in sensitive area's if it will not lower the price of oil or gas?
    • ender7074, on 07/14/2008, -13/+9And you asswipes can come and pay for my gas. Idiots.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -6/+3I say we get a hold of the anti drilling pricks and kill them and make oil from their flesh. At least they will be doing something worth while.
      • inigomntoya, on 07/14/2008, -3/+2@QuadZeroRoute - Use the ones that haven't bathed in a while - they seem to have the most lubricant.
      • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -5/+4What part of 'EVERYONE SAYS IT WILL NOT LOWER GAS PRICES" do you not understand! Go look for yourself! I have provided links, you don't have to follow them, but don't just listen to BUSHCAIN. The evidence is just not there, there are no experts saying it will help.
      • xexx, on 07/14/2008, -1/+4Don't worry dickhole, you'll still be paying high gas prices because the speculators know this isn't going to make a big difference.
    • brainscab, on 07/14/2008, -6/+4thanks for the info, Im writing now
    • darkened, on 07/14/2008, -5/+5Yes i support off shore drilling creating AMERICAN JOBS, I find it highly unlikely it will ever REDUCE the price but it will REDUCE the amount purchased from the middle east even if it's 0.01% that's still 0.01% of all the business gains to use that oil going to our country instead of 100% of it going FROM our country.
      • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -2/+4I would agree with you, but drilling in area's where they already hold leases would accomplish the same thing, so why not do that?
      • superkendall, on 07/14/2008, -2/+3Because the oil there is far harder to get to. Why would you rather destroy pristine land to drill when you could drill out in the ocean with less of an effect?
    • inigomntoya, on 07/14/2008, -1/+5You go ahead and call - it won't make a lick of difference because your representative has already made up his/her mind whether he/she will vote yay/nay because of their political ties - not because you have an opinion.

      Congressional Approval Ratings are hovering at 12% right now. Wanna make a difference? Kick them out in November! Don't vote Democrat or Republican. Vote American.
      • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -3/+2Calling, writing and showing up does make a difference. I've experienced it. Some are happy to see and hear from me, some are not. But can't digg ya down, cause pt.2 is a winner!
    • superkendall, on 07/14/2008, -2/+5Call them if you are in support of the bill, to offset the supposed "environmentalists" that are trying to stop this.

      Real environmentalists would take responsibility for energy they use by bringing production closer to home where we can control environmental impact better and reduce energy used in transport of oil.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -0/+5Even the founder of Greenpeace is now pro nuclear.
      • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -3/+2Again, you are blindly trusting GW in this matter. Find me proof of your claim, how this will help.
      • superkendall, on 07/14/2008, -1/+2The claim that the U.S. has better environmental controls than CHINA!?!?!?

        Come on! Do you need proof beyond the multiple smog-filled photos of various Chinese cities?
  • beezneez, on 07/14/2008, -54/+74A step in the right direction. Now will Congress become a part of the solution, or remain a part of the problem?
    • Brownds, on 07/14/2008, -3/+14look at the track record...
    • fluoro, on 07/14/2008, -9/+13How is this a step in the right direction? It won't change the price of oil.
      • Wilma, on 07/14/2008, -3/+2http://digg.com/politics/Iran_Threatens_Unlimited_ ...
      • fluoro, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2Wilma: There is a lot of war propaganda against Iran, and they have good reason to think they will soon be attacked.

        Gas prices are so high on speculation of that attack, but once Israel or the US attacks Iran the gas will only get more expensive.
      • twomeyw23334, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4Let's make pretend you are correct and it won't change the price of oil.

        It will, decrease our trade deficit, increase government tax revenue, increase U.S. jobs, and keep money out of some of the bad guys hands.
        The best part, it WON'T increase global warming because CO2 pollution is based on oil consumption which is based on the PRICE of oil, not the location it was drilled. If oil prices double, consumption will decreases. If oil prices double, BUT it's coming from the Gulf, it's not like Joe Bob is going to buy more, the only thing Joe Bob cares about is PRICE. Therefore, by your own logic, there will be no CO2 increase, and there will be less of a shipping distance from the oil source to it's destination, meaning less of a chance of a spill and less pollution caused by shipment. Which means, in all, drum roll please.......this is BETTER for the environment. What's you excuse now?
    • Wilma, on 07/14/2008, -2/+3One of the problems is that Iran is threatening to withhold oil because of our aggressiveness towards them.
    • SpartanErik, on 07/14/2008, -4/+11Pelosi just stated that the offshore drilling providing 10 years worth of oil is a "hoax"

      He's not the brightest in the bunch, but I have to give credit to Bush for at least trying to help.. it's obvious Congress isn't.
      • popfrogs, on 07/14/2008, -11/+5The only ones he'll be helping are his Big Oil buddies. Don't even kid yourself for a minute that he's doing this for the greater good of the public. He wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire.
    • pintomp3, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3a step in the right direction would be to close the enron loophole. this might possibly drop the price of gas 3 pennies a gallon ten year from now. meanwhile much of the increase current is because of speculation. supply is not the problem.
      • JHB800, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1Speculation is PART of the problem, but it is not the ENTIRE problem. Moreover, speculation is GLOBAL, which would make regulation and restrictions next to impossible.
  • daebat, on 07/14/2008, -43/+38what do you know? george bush is ***** over america for his own personal gain...
    • zyklon, on 07/14/2008, -5/+3Amazing revelation!
    • Olfster, on 07/14/2008, -7/+8And anyone who, in the 2000 and 2004 elections, did not see that this would happen, send me your names I want to build the ultimate gullible person list for sales leads.
    • SkippyDoorknob, on 07/14/2008, -7/+4What does he have to gain? It's not like he's suddenly going to run out of money after leaving office.
      • xexx, on 07/14/2008, -0/+4Presidents by far make the most money after they leave office. He's done a lot of favors for a lot of people, he'll be expecting his return.
      • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -2/+3And neither will Ed McMahon. Money is exactly what it is about. Taking yours and giving it to them.
      • SkippyDoorknob, on 07/14/2008, -1/+1So instead of 15 gazillion dollars, he'll have 20 gazillion dollars. It's not like his lifestyle is going to change.
  • MadKennyP, on 07/14/2008, -29/+51Lower gas prices in 1 . . . 2 . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,399,385,976,398,385,298 seconds.
    • ender7074, on 07/14/2008, -16/+23So we should wait longer to start? Genius idea....
      • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -5/+7No, but we shouldn't throw money (tax money) behind a program that will not reduce gas prices, extend our dependancy on oil and eventually need to be dealt with because a majority of Americans want altnerative energy. It will only get more expensive to develope. So you choose:

        If we're going to give Republicans the full benefit of the doubt, then it is only fair to offer the same treatment to Democrats. So let's take their arguments at face value also. There will be oil spills off the coasts of Florida and California, fouling beaches, killing wildlife, and harming tourism. Unrestrained burning of fossil fuels will continue to raise global temperatures and contribute to rising sea levels and devastating extreme weather events. A plunge in the price of oil will derail the current pressing economic incentives to improve energy efficiency and channel investment into research and development of alternative energy technologies.

        And ultimately, these new oil fields will be exhausted, and the whole cycle of rising prices and economic pain will begin all over again. Only this time around, our children, or our children's children, will be in much worse shape than we are now. Environmental stresses will be higher, climate change will be further advanced, and there will be even less oil to go around. (Because, of course, while the U.S. is pumping to its heart's content on its outer continental shelf, existing oil fields around the globe will continue to peter out.) Prices will rocket even higher than our current worst nightmares. We will have sacrificed precious decades in which we could have gotten a leg up in figuring out how to maintain properity in a carbon-constrained future. And those madmen and fools who counseled a quick-fix response to humanity's biggest challenge will be excoriated as some of the stupidest, most criminal leaders in human history.

        That's all.
        http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/06/18/offshore ...
      • EtherGnat, on 07/14/2008, -1/+5To answer that question you first have to determine whether oil prices will rise more rapidly than inflation. Personally I believe they will, so it makes economic sense to wait to drill (except in cases where we might lose oil deposits to other nations) until prices are at a maximum.

        Take ANWR for example. Republicans have been pushing to drill there since the gas shortage in the 70s, and its estimated that reserves there will last for about 30 years. If Congress had allowed drilling then ANWR would be just about tapped out now, having sold all the oil at an average price of about $30 per barrel (adjusted for inflation).

        For those playing along at home that means the value of the ANWR oil reserves have increased by about a trillion dollars by doing nothing. Personally I think we're better off economically and strategically keeping domestic oil fields in reserves, but that's just my opinion.
      • MadKennyP, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2I have a better idea. Let's take steps to reduce our oil consumption.
    • hokie47, on 07/14/2008, -7/+6Actually prices can fall very fast because future drilling will be priced in immediately in the markets. If we got real about drilling more and passing strict MPG laws to drop demand, we could drop oil prices by $50 or more per barrel in no time.
      • sulthernao, on 07/14/2008, -1/+6"passing strict MPG" - that's the problem...it isn't happening. Oh, and add stricter regulation on speculation.
      • popfrogs, on 07/14/2008, -1/+4Saudi Arabia is pumping over a million more barrels per day and the market has just gone upward. What part of speculative influence do you guys not understand?
    • teh_techie, on 07/14/2008, -1/+51 399 385 976 398 385 298 seconds = 44 344 812.8 millenia

      That's a long ass time
    • BoneStamp, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2There will never be lower gas prices... the Arabs already own a really big share of the American Oil companies, they win either way... there is NO REASON for them to lower gas price if we continue to pay it. If it was all about domestic supply, then gas would be cheaper in Canada than the United States. Instead, Canada exports 60% of their oil to the United States and gas is $4.97/gallon in Canada ($1.30/liter plus currency conversion).
    • CptBuck, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1Price of Oil is down over 7 dollars to day.
      • MadKennyP, on 07/22/2008, -0/+1... almost down to the level it was 3 days earlier. Wow!
  • DeskFlyer, on 07/14/2008, -10/+64But Perino said Bush no longer wants to wait. She pinned blame on the leaders of the Democratic Congress for inaction. ”They haven’t even held a single hearing,” Perino said. ”So we are going to move forward, and hopefully that will spur action by the Congress.”

    Hahaha very funny. Our Congress is about as active as a sloth swimming in molasses.
  • lenninct, on 07/14/2008, -15/+10Black gold FTW?
    • SkippyDoorknob, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3Wednesday on TruTV, check you local listings.
      • dOOBiEx213, on 07/14/2008, -0/+1CourtTV failed as soon as it became TruTv.
  • chicofaraby, on 07/14/2008, -32/+27Nice. A pointless gesture that does nothing to change the fact that oil is going to go away as an energy source. However it does cause irreparable damage to the environment. So that will make the 24%ers happy. It also reflects Bush's commitment to cause as much stupid damage as possible before he leaves Washington to cash in on his war for profit.
    • ender7074, on 07/14/2008, -16/+17Idiocy. Thats your post in a word.
    • TJATL, on 07/14/2008, -6/+22Do you really think oil will go away as a resource anytime in the near future? 5, 10, 15, 20 years? I think you underestimate the amount of fossil fuel vehicles across the globe and the amount of production needed to make replacement vehicles, with alternative fuel sources that can travel farther then 200 miles. Not to mention, do you really think that all the people across the globe will be able to buy a new vehicle that doesn't use gas?
    • doctechnical, on 07/14/2008, -1/+4"...oil is going to go away as an energy source."

      Bring on the nukes!
      • floorman56, on 07/14/2008, -0/+2Nuclear powered cars


        Oh the humanity
    • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -3/+10ChicoMarxist, we need the oil so that we have time to build the infrastructure that we need out of electricity. It will take twenty years at least to build an infrastructure to support electric cars and trucks.

      Just how do you propose to fix the diesel truck transportation problem you Marxist!
      • chicofaraby, on 07/14/2008, -9/+6The fact that you don't know the difference between socialism and Marxism explains why you are stupid enough to think ruining the environment is going to save you money at the gas pump.

        And why you are a right wing nut...
      • akamurph, on 07/14/2008, -3/+8Um, I have to go with Chico being the nut...
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -4/+3chicoMarxist, I watch you post here all day long and I know who you are.
      • Jareth86, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Where the ***** are you people coming from? What is happening to Digg?
    • vinnyvenus, on 07/14/2008, -3/+5chicofaraby, majority of Americans overwhelming support offshore drilling. So Bush is going to make majority of Americans pretty happy with this executive order.
      http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/pol ...
  • onlyaftersunset, on 07/14/2008, -28/+16Lets see just how much damage he can do in the next six months!
  • dupswapdrop, on 07/14/2008, -29/+14I can't wait for the next dumb *ss thing he does next!
  • Carv, on 07/14/2008, -27/+16***** Bush.
  • flip, on 07/14/2008, -31/+25Can someone tell me why this jerkoff is still in a position of power?

    and WHO are those jerkoffs that voted for him the second time around?
    They should bear some of this responsibility for their being so ENTIRELY STUPID!
    We're looking straight at a serious recession or oven worse... GLOBAL DEPRESSION
    and t here are still some total assholes still spouting crap about his this guy makes "good decider stuff".

    I say that there HAS GOT to be a IQ test for anyone to reproduce, vote or hold office in this nation
    I've had enough of this.
    • Rudegar, on 07/14/2008, -0/+3hope it dont turn global we already got a recession here :S
      (here being in denmark outside of usa that is)
    • theOster, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2"I say that there HAS GOT to be a IQ test for anyone to reproduce, vote or hold office in this nation
      I've had enough of this."

      hitler had enough of it too...

      slow down, take a breath, and be an adult.
    • msheidi, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Congress has like 2% approval rating. They are lower than low. Pelosi and Reid are idiots and need to be thrown out of the congress then out of this country.


    • ikrit2006, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Can you define global depression? I'm pretty sure the money has to go somewhere.
  • zippybean, on 07/14/2008, -26/+51Drill here drill now!
  • DaDrake, on 07/14/2008, -12/+70While I doubt this will have any significant effect (certainly not in the near future) I can't logically think of any reason not to do it. If the USA doesn't drill, China will be (and has with their partnerships with South American countries). I believe the USA can drill will less of an environmental impact, not to mention... voters will be able to have a say on what types of techniques they use (we have no say on what China does).
    • vexingmodstwo, on 07/14/2008, -5/+31Level-headedness and logic are frowned upon here, man. Cut it out.
    • inigomntoya, on 07/14/2008, -2/+3"While I doubt this will have any significant effect (certainly not in the near future)"
      And FTA - Bush’s calls for expanded drilling will not “have immediate impact on prices at the pump.”
      Both true points. But, if we want to see an immediate effect at the pumps, lets let Congress sit on their asses some more. You won't like it. But it will be "change"
    • alwilson, on 07/14/2008, -1/+4Will China be able to say: "with my straw, I drink your milkshake"?
    • fluoro, on 07/14/2008, -5/+5The reason not to drill is that if we do, you will see all this interest in renewable energy go completely on hold once oil prices go down. This has happened before, and there is every reason to think it will happen again. And if the price of oil goes down now, it will certainly go back up again in the future. Why put off the inevitable? You all think "oh, let's just drill now while we develop some other solutions!" Brilliant, except it just never works that way.
      • twomeyw23334, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1The solutions clearly are in development, and NOT ready for the prime time. There is no doubt they will be within the next couple decades.
        Even if you take your stance, you should support some sort of gradual government mandated increase on the price of oil, that won't crush the economy all at once. It will allow gradual change. Simultaneously, while the price is artificially increasing, we should drill in and around America, where we can have total control of how it's done, where shipments from the source to destination would be less (meaning less pollution), where we can keep money out of the bad guys hands, decrease our trade deficit, increase tax revenue (possibly some could be used to subsidize alternative energy?) and create more American jobs.

        I would never support such a thing, I'm just pointing out that even taking your stance, there is absolutely no logical reason why we shouldn't be drilling / extracting oil in our own backyard.
    • hiikeeba, on 07/14/2008, -1/+2China is going to replace the US as the new superpower. Most of our manufacturing has been outsourced there. A recent European wine forecast predicted that due to Global Warming (Praise Gaia and her anointed profit [I meant that spelling] Al Gore. Amen!), when France can no longer produce wine, China will become the largest wine producer. They already hold the US leash because they hold most of the US debt. AND, they are the ones building 150 coal burning power plants. Not us.
      • Cuchanu, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Yep. China has it good because in America the government at least has to pretend to do our will. In China the rich and the government do whatever and have total control over their people.

        The US not being the world superpower doesn't really bother me since we didn't really do any good as the world's superpower. But I would be worried as hell if China took over as the superpower.
    • murraj2, on 07/14/2008, -2/+4Except for the fact that about 40%+ of the price of oil is driven by speculation and contracts for 10-30 years from now, which is why some want to ban speculation on oil to lower the price.

      Because banning the offshore drilling now will increase the supply in 10+ years time, it WILL lower the price of oil now. Here's hoping congress agrees will pass a bill.
  • dizilbdog, on 07/14/2008, -23/+13How about lifting the prohibition on marijuana dumbass, and using the hemp oil to make fuel for diesel cars, oh no wait let's drill instead of growing.
  • eggballs, on 07/14/2008, -13/+7Stop bitching, people, and write or call your representatives now.
    • superkendall, on 07/14/2008, -6/+6Don't forget to write to SUPPORT the move so they might actually do something.
      • eggballs, on 07/14/2008, -7/+1That's implicit, you *****.
      • fluoro, on 07/14/2008, -3/+2No. I'd call to ask them to not support it, because there's no reason for it. It won't cause oil prices to go down.
  • sportsstar67, on 07/14/2008, -43/+60This was absolutely the right choice..GWB got this one right
    • alwilson, on 07/14/2008, -13/+8I must of missed it... what did he get right? Did he resign? That the only thing I can think of that he could do right.
    • aookay, on 07/14/2008, -8/+6Not even the slightest. Despite all the reports that say the impact of lifting it would not be seen in the short term, and even in the long term wouldn't be helpful, he instead goes with his "decider" hat.

      Heaven forbid we have people who are actually educated investigate these matters and make reports to help out, only to be ignored and ultimatly leave the decision onto the person who has it all ass backwards.
      • JHB800, on 07/15/2008, -2/+4The problem with the people arguing against offshore drilling (and those who champion it, to a lesser extent) is that their focus is on lowering gas prices rather than lowering our dependence on foreign oil. The real benefit of allowing companies to pump the oil that currently is off-limits is that it will significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil, whcih is one of the biggest problems.
      • carlosos, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1@JHB800
        Are you saying that it is good to create more jobs in this country, increase oil production and reduce the import of oil and maybe selling oil like the rich Arabian countries? That sounds like a great idea that also reduces oil prices in the USA but who believes in that crazy "supply and demand" theory? :)
  • DiggGeek24, on 07/14/2008, -20/+32This great news would you rather has a total economic collapse or drill our oil till we can build our renewable energy infrastructure we can not stop using oil over night.
    • xexx, on 07/14/2008, -0/+7I don't disagree, but I'd like Bush far more if he actually did more for renewable energy than the occasional lip service a couple times a year.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -2/+1xexx, I totally agree. We need to bild the next infrastructure now....but the pressure to do so must come from capitalism. The best capitalist companies will roll out the infrastructure with the best ideas and systems for the least amount of money. We are talking about a system that will run both passenger cars and semi tractor trailers. Without the ability to recharge systems on the road we are going to be sunk.

        The systems they are coming up with now are nothing. We will need entire service industry for charging semi tractor trailers so that our food and home/commercial goods keep right on moving along.

        If the drilling takes a few years....a decade to get rolling gas prices will be seven to ten dollars a gallon and the pressure will be on to develop those new systems. This is going to be quite a fight to see if the United States can maintain its way of life or if we will become a third world country.
    • aookay, on 07/14/2008, -1/+4How about the leases the oil companies ALREADY HAVE out there, that they aren't using? Or the lack of refinineries to actually MAKE gasoline from these new sources?

      Of course we can't stop using oil overnight, but I don't think it would of resulted in a total economic collapse if this hadn't happened. In fact, that's just plain stupid.
    • cmainiac666, on 07/14/2008, -2/+1I'd rather has you write a coherent response.
    • bjornski, on 07/14/2008, -1/+5Nothing has been stopping them from drilling in the millions of acres of leases they already hold.

      Nothing has been stopping the increase in EXPORTED petroleum from US either.

      It all goes on the commodities market, the difference we see will be negligible.

      The fastest way to bring down the price of fuel is to actually have a regulated commodities market. This is a problem of not enough regulation, not too much.

      Increase the minimum investment from commodities investments from 6% cash down and insist on delivery of product after a purchase. We'd see oil prices go down by $40 a barrel within a month.
      • popfrogs, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3God damn, I'm glad someone here gets it. I was starting to lose hope.
      • JHB800, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2The oil being exported is almost exclusively used in textile and plastic manufacturing, not for refining, and is then sold back into the US at dirt cheap prices.
      • cmainiac666, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1thanks for the lecture, but my comment was more a statement on the awesomeness of the grammar the poster haves.
    • BoneStamp, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1It's a pretty sad outlook, but this movie says a lot about this situation...
      "What's finished is the idea that this great country is dedicated to the freedom and flourishing of every individual in it. It's the individual that's finished. It the single, solitary human being who's finished. It's every sing one of you out there who's finished -- Because this is no longer a nation of independent individuals. This is a nation of two hundred odd million transistorized, deodorize whiter- than-white, steel-belt bodies, totally unnecessary as human beings and as replaceable as piston rods." - Network (1976)
  • angryfirelord, on 07/14/2008, -10/+17While I will say Bush caused some new problems, it isn't wise to blame him for everything. A lot of these economic problems result from the government's "Socialist for the Rich" programs that just end up deflating the crap out of the dollar. Remove the Federal Reserve, the World Bank, any other type of central planning, restore some type of a gold standard and then you'll see the markets stabilize. Drilling may bring down the price of oil a little bit, but it certainly won't stabilize it by any means. It all depends on the value of the dollar.
    • Mwatkins, on 07/14/2008, -1/+5Can't agree more. Finally someone on here that is logical!
    • IllBeBack, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3Yes, because the gold standard worked so wonderfully last time.

      /sarcasm
  • DiggGeek24, on 07/14/2008, -19/+4This is great news would you rather has a total economic collapse or drill our oil till we can build our renewable energy infrastructure we can not stop using oil over night.
  • TJATL, on 07/14/2008, -6/+18There are far too many vehicles in the world to make oil/gas a needed resource for a long time. There is no magical wand to make a vehicle, using alternative fuel sources, that is affordable and can travel long distances. There is also no magical wand to produce millions of vehicles across the globe to replace gas burners. Even if there was, are you going to force people to buy the new vehicle even if they can't afford it? Not to mention plenty of products are reliant on oil as well, such as diapers. The plain fact is we need oil, the world needs oil and we either rely on other countries to supply us for the decades to come, or we try to be more self sufficient.
    • SkippyDoorknob, on 07/14/2008, -0/+5It'll be like the switchover to digital broadcast TV. We'll all get a $50 coupon for a new car!
    • subliminalurge, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3"There is no magical wand to make a vehicle, using alternative fuel sources, that is affordable and can travel long distances."

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLRuGUPkyh4

      It's long, but definitely worth listening to if you're at all interested in the current oil situation.
    • aookay, on 07/14/2008, -4/+3Either way, Oil will run out. It's not a renewable resource. This is not a long term solution, this is just BS posturing. Of course we need oil for more than just cars, but there is enough ideas and money at work for something past Oil that we shouldn't just give up and say "***** it, get us more oil".

      The US's need for oil is more than we can produce, there is no way to become self sufficient.
  • HotSaucePanCake, on 07/14/2008, -23/+28Good, now maybe the house, congress, and the senate can pull there heads out of there asses and let this stuff open up.

    this screams investment which is going to create JOBs and be good for the economy.

    • fluoro, on 07/14/2008, -1/+4It may create jobs if they actually drill. But it may also kill other jobs when coastal regions start losing a lot of tourist business.

      But the oil companies already have access to more than 27 million hectares that they haven't even explored for drilling. Why do you think they need all this extra coastal region, and what makes you think they'll actually drill there right now if they're not exploring and drilling on what they already have?
      • legolas68, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3Why will coastal regions lose tourist businesses? Are there other coasts we don't know about? Can the modern tourist now see more than 15 miles?
    • gn0stik, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3It will do next to nothing. It won't increase supply enough, soon enough to end the speculation now. We need the banks to pull out of commodities and start speculating on the home market instead of oil futures.
      • JHB800, on 07/15/2008, -2/+1Speculation is global dumbass. Ending the practice (or making it extremely risky to do) is next to impossible.
      • gn0stik, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Right, but a run on oil right now in american banks would spread like wildfire, and increase the value of the dollar because they'd be buying debt again, not standing pat, which would compound the drop in oil prices, if people can afford to get to work again, they don't have to save all their money for their gas tanks, which means they can buy homes.. Cause and effect, MORON, since we're using ad hominems here. You underestimate the effect one nation can have on the global economy.
  • brainscab, on 07/14/2008, -17/+18Its going to take almost ten years to get that oil. By then I want solar paneIs on my roof, and my car to be running off of Cellulosic ethanol. So lets keep the ocean ecosystems ok till then, great, thanks.
    • DiggGeek24, on 07/14/2008, -11/+10And what happens if I takes 20 year for Cellulosic ethanol or solar paneIs that people can afford to hit the market and we have a total economic collapse because gas is $15 a gallon.
      • fluoro, on 07/14/2008, -2/+2Why would it take that long if there is a serious demand?
      • bravo1995, on 07/14/2008, -0/+4@fluoro: Technological readiness. If you can't profit from an industry because of technological limitations, demand doesn't mean jack *****.
    • jpop, on 07/14/2008, -5/+7It's going to take years to do anything to affect Global Warming. You don't see Gore and them saying "Let's not bother doing anything since it's going to take years to have any affect".
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/14/2008, -3/+4If oil is going to destroy the world it would have done so already.... Global warming is a total ***** story. It has been debunked already dozens of times.
      • thedailynar, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3Do you work at the White House Quad?
    • brainscab, on 07/14/2008, -4/+4Mad Max scenario?
      no wait..public transportation will step up? yes.
      We know that the free market only makes companies hustle when forced to, if we keep supplying these oil companies oil, then they keep selling oil. If we deprive them oil, then they start looking for new solutions to keep there profits coming. the sooner the better.
      • ousthouse, on 07/14/2008, -2/+2If we deprive them oil - oil gets more expensive.
      • thejamabides, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1And who the ***** are you to deprive a private company from making and selling their product?
    • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -2/+5We are not lacking for technology, we are lacking for production. The billions handed over to the oil companies in incentives, tax breaks, loopholes and other thing's I'm sure we never hear about if flipped to these industries, would be all that is needed to kick that production up to national scale.
      But listening to MSM will not get you that information. Solar sites are coming online http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/06/15000_home ...
      or that new technology, who's production in the US is tied tightly to those energy incentives, has reduced costs (manufacturing and installation) and increased efficiency by printing solar collectors on thin film, and this technology is already operating http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/04/worlds_lar ...
      You probably don't know much if anything from your evening news about solar's big mean brother, http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/05/sunrgi-con ...
      Don't hear much about Wind power, another form of solar power, or about the increased efficiencies and designs, especially for urban settings where you are not likely to catch a straight breeze, but you are always sure to catch an updraft, or a swale off the top edge http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/06/wind-power ...
      Why? Energy sponsors the news, station, network. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E-5KivgwO4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqZxnehm4FI

      Isn't it interesting that in front of what promises to be the election of our country's history and a presumed Dem tidal wave of support, that the 2 things guaranteed to rile Reps (oil/business and WAR) have hit an hysterical crisis, meanwhile the things topping the DEM list (Healthcare and Anti-War) are put out of peoples minds in all the confusion?
  • briansearles, on 07/14/2008, -10/+16Gas prices weren't $4 back then, so the comparison is rather moot. Not that it matters to Digg (or thinkprogress).
  • buckchoris, on 07/14/2008, -23/+2This is a good news american bastards had been going around the world ,polluting and depleting the resources so that when everything ends they can start using theirs,now take that .Bush is a hero.
  • bincoder, on 07/14/2008, -18/+20Its about time.
    Should have been done when gas hit $1.50 a gallon but better late than never.
    A little legislation to stop other countries from side drilling away our resources would be nice too.
    • aookay, on 07/14/2008, -1/+6People need to stop thinking this is going to lower gas prices in the short or long term.

      factcheck.org Read
      • mfc5200, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2No, but it will add billions perhaps trillions of dollars to our economy over the next decade+. And at the same time it wont affect the price so the alternative will still have a strong competitive edge in the long run. So we make money without delaying the deployment of alternatives.
    • bravo1995, on 07/14/2008, -1/+2Looks like the Chinese Gulf of Mexico Slant Drilling Company is at it again!
    • brainscab, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1When gas was 1.50 a gallon we should have put a dollar tax on it and put that money towards renewable resources. people would have hated it, but we would be in alot better shape now.
  • JohnnyRad, on 07/14/2008, -15/+5are you ***** kidding me? who is this guy?
  • brainscab, on 07/14/2008, -20/+35ITS NOT GOING TO EFFECT THE PRICE!!!
    • ZephyrNinety, on 07/14/2008, -13/+15Yeah, it's going to affect our ***** dependence on foreign oil and decrease it. *****.
      • Taiyoryu, on 07/14/2008, -2/+12I would prefer decreasing our dependence on oil altogether. People should have more choices for their energy needs. Gasoline has its uses, but it need not be the only fuel for all vehicles.
      • jpop, on 07/14/2008, -3/+6It doesn't need to be the only fuel for vehicles, but it IS the only fuel for the forseeable future.
      • xexx, on 07/14/2008, -2/+6It won't decrease it overall at all, we'll just keep needing more and more and this will take up some of the slack, but we'll still be importing more oil than ever.
    • philipl411, on 07/14/2008, -6/+7Then what is going to affect the price? And even if it doesnt, we are paying american companies $200 a barrel not saudi the same amount.
      • fluoro, on 07/14/2008, -3/+5Saber rattling against Iran is what's affecting the oil right now. Gas isn't so expensive just because of supply and demand, it's mostly as high as it is because of speculation. And that speculation is being driven largely by all the war propaganda against Iran.
      • popfrogs, on 07/14/2008, -0/+6@fluoro: "And that speculation is being driven largely by all the war propaganda against Iran."

        ...or the crap going on in Venezuela with threatened worker strikes, or violence in Nigeria, or ...the ***** goes on forever.
      • CrackyJSquirrel, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1I dont want to give anyone $200 a barrel. I want cheaper energy, I dont care if they have to make it out of piss.. $200 a barrel to whatever ***** it is still means expensive gas for me.
    • SeraphX, on 07/14/2008, -2/+10*Affect
    • superkendall, on 07/14/2008, -2/+4It will eventually.

      Reducing carbon emissions will not immediately reduce carbon in the atmosphere. Should we not reduce emissions?

      If it's going to take you an hour to drive somewhere do you never leave the house because you cannot be there instantly?
  • Buzzpatrol, on 07/14/2008, -22/+9Someone please just punch W in the face HARD now! Fukkin retarded ***** of a president...

    Oh and also,
    when the U.S. turns into downtown Beijing with deadly air, no trees and 90% of the people have Asthma I am going back to my roots in northern Europe and laughing my ass of at all the retards that think drilling on the coastline is a good idea!
  • vinnyvenus, on 07/14/2008, -25/+19Good for him. I am sure some hippies are going to be upset about this decision but I am very happy about this. Btw, hippies and environmentalist need to die. They are the reason I am paying through the roof to fill up my car.
    • defwheezer, on 07/14/2008, -3/+8You are an idiot. GWB and the neocons' destabilization of the middle east are the culprits here. Wake up and smell the cordite (and depleted uranium).
      • legolas68, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Jimmy Carter destabilized the Middle East. Are you too young to remember when and how radical Islam came to be?
      • defwheezer, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1"how radical Islam came to be"- way before Jimmy Carter's time, don't try blaming this on JC- he is the guy (unlike *****) who negotiated a peace between Israel and Egypt in 1979.
    • dravani, on 07/14/2008, -3/+4Wrong, knucklehead. You should learn to read, do math, and extract your head from your anus. The only reason your kids will have a planet (should you so unfortunately choose to procreate and litter the world with more of your genetic stuff) worth living on is because of who? Oil companies? George W. Bush? The Reich Wingers? YOU??? Nah, son. Its the people you hate - the same people who have no direct or indirect impact on the price of gas going into your ***** hauling hunk of hater-mobile. The only thing they want to do is make sure the world stays livable a little longer. Nighty night tool boy.

    • fluoro, on 07/14/2008, -3/+6No they're not. George Bush's administration is the reason why. And you're a ***** idiot for thinking environmentalists have anything to do with it. Gas is so high because of speculation based on the talk of war with Iran.
    • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -3/+7How to recognize paid GOP trolls: Multiple ad-nauseum usage of old tire no longer relevant or accurate catch phrases. ' some hippies are going to be upset '
      • vinnyvenus, on 07/14/2008, -3/+1You joined last last month while I joined digg in 2006 and from your user history it is pretty eveident that you are Bob Barr/ Libertarion troll.
      • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -2/+2I see, you smarterer cuz you been diggn longr is that it brudda? Need to clean off ur glasses and check my profile agin...go 'head an klik on dem dere links in da upper right...c'mon bak when u figgerd out I ain't no such a thing.

    • BTime, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2The reason you're paying through the roof to fill your car is because you bought a gas guzzling SUV. STFU
  • brainscab, on 07/14/2008, -15/+9His Father signed this ban
    Ending this ban is anther effect of the oedipal complex that is destroying the nation
    • sonnybobiche, on 07/14/2008, -7/+2... His father signed it 20 years ago. When it made sense.
    • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3As was trying to out-perform daddy in Iraq
    • bravo1995, on 07/14/2008, -2/+2No it isn't and no it's not.
      • brainscab, on 07/14/2008, -0/+3Monosyliobic republican FTL
      • bravo1995, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1The word is monosyllabic, and I'm a Democrat.

        Looks like it's brainscab FTL after all.
    • brainscab, on 07/14/2008, -0/+4I know all you guys have had this pushed on you by the mainstream Media and the government screaming, but this is not about supplies, it is about profit. a few facts:
      1. we already EXPORT most of the oil recovered in this country. Why? Not enough refineries.
      2. The amount of oil is so small in this country compaired to what we consume so there is no way this will effect the price. But it will make a few companies rich.
      3. It will take a decade to research and drill most of these places. by that time I hope we are off of oil.
      IT IS TIME TO KICK THE OIL HABIT
  • pell, on 07/14/2008, -5/+8I haven't really been following this but I don't see the big deal unless it has a large environmental impact.
    • fluoro, on 07/14/2008, -0/+3There's no point. Gas prices aren't high because we have nowhere to drill. Oil companies have access to more than 27 hectares of land in the US that they're not even exploring yet.

      Gas prices are high because of speculation of a war with Iran, and the closing of the Strait of Hormuz. If we want gas prices to go down, call your senators and your congressmen and tell them to not support any war or military aggression against Iran.
      • JHB800, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Issues with Iran are only a tiny part of the reason why gas prices are so high. There are a host of other issues that are affecting it more.
  • dekuscrub, on 07/14/2008, -12/+20When gas was 70 cents a gallon this ban probably made more sense.
    But now the time has come. Even if it helps a little (i.e. not decreasing, but not increasing prices either) then it's worth it.
    • alwilson, on 07/14/2008, -4/+3Yeah, but it's not going to affect prices enough to notice a difference.
    • EtherGnat, on 07/14/2008, -0/+2Gas was last $0.70/gallon in 1979, the equivalent of $2.37 today. Gas has only been above that level for a few years.
      • JHB800, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2The price of gas is not as important as the price of a barrel of oil. That has far outpaced the adjusted costs of years ago.
      • EtherGnat, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Actually oil and gas prices seem to track pretty closely to each other. Oil was about $50 per barrel in 1979 adjusted for inflation and it's only been that high again since late 2004/early 2005. http://www.wtrg.com/oil_graphs/oilprice1947.gif
  • nycmac247, on 07/14/2008, -14/+14You know that this would only provide a couple months oil, right?
    And if there is a spill it could take a decade to recover?
    • sonnybobiche, on 07/14/2008, -6/+6Oh no! IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT that there is a spill, IT MAY take upwards of a decade for the impact on LOCAL WILDLIFE to subside.

      Contrast that with the certain and immediate impact of unaffordable energy on real Americans.
      • MorganMghee, on 07/14/2008, -5/+3Sure! I'd LOVE to! You point me to the scientific evidence that it will do that.....I've been waiting for someone to ever since this stupid idea was floated.

        I'm gonna keep sayin this till someone finds me other proof;

        The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (Official Source for US Government energy data) recently did a detailed study of the likely outcome of offshore drilling for their Annual Energy Outlook 2007, “Impacts of Increased Access to Oil and Natural Gas Resources in the Lower 48 Federal Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).” The sobering conclusion:

        The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.

        And the impact of the projected 7% (!) increase in lower-48 oil production that might result in 2030 thanks to opening the OCS is … wait for it …

        … any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.
        http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr ...

        "The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017. Total domestic production of crude oil from 2012 through 2030 in the OCS access case is projected to be 1.6 percent higher than in the reference case, and 3 percent higher in 2030 alone, at 5.6 million barrels per day. For the lower 48 OCS, annual crude oil production in 2030 is projected to be 7 percent higher—2.4 million barrels per day in the OCS access case compared with 2.2 million barrels per day in the reference case (Figure 20). Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant."

        Mccain's campaign also says it will do no good; http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/18/top-mccain-adv ...

        No expert will back the BushCain claim; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/23/impossibl ...


        The simple reality is, drilling just will never, ever do what McCain and Bush think it will.
        Here's why

        http://www.theseminal.com/2008/06/18/drilling-is-a ...


        http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/052008Master ...
        http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/gas-could-fa ...
        http://www.truthout.org/article/scientist-congress ...

        Gosh, I could just go on all day...


        "Suspended Exploratory Well Costs
        The Corporation carries as an asset exploratory well costs when the well has found a sufficient quantity of reserves to justify its completion as a producing well and where the Corporation is making sufficient progress assessing the reserves and the economic and operating viability of the project. Exploratory well costs not meeting these criteria are charged to expense. Assessing whether a project has made sufficient progress is a subjective area and requires careful consideration of the relevant facts and circumstances. The facts and circumstances that support continued capitalization of suspended wells as of year-end 2006 are disclosed in note 9 to the financial statements."
        http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/34088/00011 ...

        So, if you think you MAY be ok with those hinky income tax figures, do the math on the "expense write offs", work those in and see if your temperature doesn't rise a few degrees.

        http://seekingalpha.com/article/82729-oil-inventor ...
        Refinery usage, which had been expected to rise 0.2% this week to 89.5%, instead fell to 88.6%.
        Read the latest report and explain to me how if we just matched the pre-hurricane production of three year