Senate Votes for Drilling in Arctic Refuge

The Senate voted Wednesday to open part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling, marking a turning point in one of the most contentious environmental issues in the country.

Both proponents and critics of the drilling saw the action as opening the door to other areas currently off limits to energy exploration, including areas off California’s coast.

The vote in support of drilling was close -- 51 to 49. Further approvals will be required before exploration can begin.

But Republican Alaska Gov. Frank H. Murkowski, a former senator, said he was “more optimistic than ever” that the drilling would occur.

The vote also was a key victory for President Bush, who has pressed for energy exploration in the refuge since first taking office.

Environmentalists for decades have thwarted proposals to drill in the area, saying it would endanger one of the nation’s natural treasures and have a negligible effect in fulfilling America’s energy needs.

But Bush has portrayed the exploration as crucial to reducing dependence on foreign oil and stabilizing gasoline prices.

Pro-drilling forces seized on the current upward pressure on crude oil prices, which hit a record high of $56.46 a barrel Wednesday. Gasoline nationwide is nearing the record average for regular of $2.064 a gallon, set last May, according to Energy Department figures. In California, according to the American Automobile Assn., regular gas averaged $2.32 a gallon Wednesday.

“How high do gas prices have to get, and how over-a-barrel does OPEC have to get us, before we realize what the American people have realized a long time ago: that we have an energy crisis here in America today,” said Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.).

Thune was one of four Republicans elected to the Senate in November who favored drilling in ANWR; each replaced a Democrat opposed to opening the refuge to exploration.

Displaying large pictures of polar bears and caribou on the Senate floor, opponents argued that the drilling could harm wildlife in an area they call America’s equivalent of the Serengeti wildlife refuge in Africa.

“Have we reached the point when it comes to America’s energy security where we have no choice but to go into these areas that are so important and so pristine and engage in drilling and production techniques that will leave scars on the landscape forever?” asked Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.).

Drilling foes contended that tougher vehicle fuel-efficiency standards and other conservation measures would do more to reduce imports.

Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) said that opening the refuge to drilling was “not good environmental policy. But equally important to our nation, it is far from necessary to our energy policy.”

In 1995, a drilling measure passed Congress but was vetoed by President Clinton. Although the House has continued to support energy exploration in the refuge, legislation has been blocked in the Senate in recent years by Democrat-led filibusters.

Senate GOP leaders -- who previously could not get the 60 votes needed to end a filibuster -- this year attached the drilling proposal to a budget measure that can be approved by a simple majority of 51 votes. They justified the maneuver by including in the budget legislation a projected $2.5 billion in revenue from leasing a portion of the refuge for energy exploration.

Wednesday’s vote defeated a Democrat-led effort to strip the drilling provision from the budget measure.

The ANWR proposal still must survive a Senate vote on the overall budget resolution, followed by House-Senate negotiations on that measure. Other controversial items on spending and tax policy could derail the budget resolution, as happened last year.

Environmentalists have been encouraged by comments from some members of the House Budget Committee that passing the budget resolution could be difficult. But the addition of the drilling proposal is expected to provide a major incentive for GOP leaders.

Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) acknowledged the hurdles still facing the drilling plan, but called Wednesday’s vote “a big step” toward its ultimate approval.

Stevens and other drilling proponents have said that the refuge offers the single greatest prospect for onshore domestic oil production. But the amount of petroleum that can be economically recovered is in dispute.

Proponents say there could be as much as 16 billion barrels of oil beneath the tundra; opponents say that figure is exaggerated and that the oil would take years to reach markets.

The United States uses about 7 billion barrels of oil a year.

Wednesday’s vote was the latest legislative triumph for Bush. He recently signed into law a measure aimed at limiting class-action lawsuits, and is awaiting expected approval of a bill overhauling bankruptcy laws.

Roger Berliner, a Washington energy lawyer, said the vote “reaffirms the strength of the Republican majority and their commitment to take full advantage of that strength while they have it, through every means available to them.”

Environmental groups and their congressional allies called the vote a setback, but vowed to continue the fight.

“They may have cleared the first hurdle by the skin of their teeth, but this thing isn’t over -- not by a long shot,” said Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife.

Robert Dewey, the group’s vice president of government relations, said drilling opponents would redouble their efforts to rally the public -- and in turn put pressure on Congress -- to kill the measure.

“The American public overwhelmingly supports protecting the refuge,” Dewey said. A Zogby International poll taken in December found that Americans favored keeping drilling out of the refuge, 55% to 38%.

Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), a leading drilling opponent, sent an e-mail Wednesday to more than 3 million supporters of his failed presidential bid, urging them to step up their efforts to fight the drilling.

Right up until the roll call, lobbying for and against the Arctic exploration was fierce.

Former President Carter and actor Robert Redford contacted senators, urging them to oppose the drilling. Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton and representatives of the Teamsters union called on senators to support the drilling. The pro-exploration U.S. Chamber of Commerce advised senators that their votes would be highlighted on a report card sent to its 3 million business members.

Three Democrats -- Daniel K. Akaka and Daniel K. Inouye, both of Hawaii, and Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana -- joined 48 Republicans in supporting the drilling.

Inouye, explaining his vote, said: “I’ve heard many of my colleagues suggest the war in Iraq is a war on oil. If they feel so, why don’t we produce our own oil?”

California Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, both Democrats, were among those voting against exploration.

Seven Republicans also opposed the drilling: Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Susan Collins and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine, Mike DeWine of Ohio, John McCain of Arizona and Gordon H. Smith of Oregon.