The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper The Spokesman-Review
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883
Current Temperature
49°F
Current Conditions
Scattered clouds
View complete weather report

Color Scheme

Subscribe now

House to vote on lifting offshore oil drilling ban

H. Josef Hebert Associated Press

WASHINGTON – Oil and gas drilling could resume in most coastal waters after a 25-year freeze under a bill that would generate billions of dollars for four Gulf states that already welcome offshore rigs.

The House measure also would benefit energy companies that operate miles from the U.S. shore by easing environmental rules for coal and hardrock mining and production of geothermal energy.

In addition, the bill would direct nearly $6 billion over 10 years for a range of programs such as rural schools, engineering scholarships, job training and research into renewable energy sources.

The House planned a vote on the legislation today.

Currently protected waters, spanning both coasts from New England to southern Alaska, would be opened to drilling in areas beyond 50 miles unless a state acts to continue the freeze.

Opponents of the legislation say the energy development raises the risk of an oil spill in sensitive waters and near states that depend heavily on tourism and recreation.

While proponents say opening such areas to drilling would provide access to badly needed energy, states that may gain the most already have offshore drilling rigs: Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama.

An initial analysis of the legislation by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the proposed changes in oil and gas royalty sharing included in the bill would funnel $20.6 billion to states between 2006-2017; all but $1.7 billion of that money would go to those four Gulf states.

The waters off the four states account for virtually all of the country’s offshore oil and gas now. Those states stand to gain billions of dollars in increased revenue if the bill becomes law.

Gulf Coast lawmakers say that is fair and that most of the money would pay to repair coastal wetlands, barriers and flood protection.

“It’s not a windfall,” said Rep. Charlie Melancon, D-La. “We’ve paid for it through the years. … It’s something we deserve to have just like other states that provide energy and get royalties.”