WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration's plan to open an Alaskan wildlife refuge to oil drilling was approved by the House of Representatives early on Thursday, but it faces a tougher fight in the Senate, which wants U.S. energy policy to focus on conservation.
The key issue in the debate over a broad U.S. energy policy is the fate of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), a remote and pristine home to polar bears, caribou and 160 kinds of migratory birds.
While environmental groups and many Democrats view the refuge as a kind of American Serengetti, drilling proponents contend that oil and gas could be safely extracted from a relatively small portion of the area.
The Republican-led House passed, on a 240 to 189 vote, a comprehensive energy bill that included drilling in ANWR.
A separate amendment to the bill to block drilling in the refuge failed on a much closer vote, 223 to 206, handing a huge victory to the White House. The vote was a defeat for green groups, some of which had threatened to work to defeat pro-drilling lawmakers in next year's Congressional election.
Vice President Dick Cheney, a former top executive of oilfield services giant Halliburton Co, praised the House vote.
"A lot of the pundits said we'll never get an energy bill out of the Congress," Cheney told reporters. "We had, I thought, a surprisingly strong vote over here last night (in the House) for a good sound, solid, comprehensive long-term energy plan."
Lobbying by the Teamsters Union, which backs the drilling plan for the jobs it would create, helped win over three dozen Democrats. An equal number of Republicans voted to protect the refuge.
"Now our battle goes to the Senate," said Jerry Hood, the Teamsters' energy adviser. "The Teamsters have the facts and the momentum to get this legislation to President Bush's desk for his signature."
Sen. Frank Murkowski of Alaska, the top Republican on the Senate Energy Committee, said he looked forward to a debate in the Senate on drilling. "One thing is clear, reports of ANWR's demise have been greatly exaggerated," he said.
That assessment may prove to be optimistic.
The Democratic-controlled Senate will finish drafting an energy bill in September, and its version is virtually certain to focus on conservation and energy efficiency instead of more drilling on federal lands.
Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle declared drilling in ANWR dead months ago.
"I do believe the votes are there to prevent it," he repeated on Wednesday. Daschle, a South Dakota Democrat, acknowledged the promise of new jobs in the Alaskan refuge was a strong selling point for the Republicans but said the environmental risks outweighed any benefits.
"I truly believe that the vast majority of the American people want us to find our oil elsewhere. They don't want the trade off that ANWR presents," Daschle told reporters. The Alaskan refuge would provide only about six months' worth of U.S. oil needs, he said.
Democrat John Kerry of Massachusetts has vowed to filibuster any legislation that gives energy firms access to the Alaskan refuge. In addition, about half a dozen moderate record opposing drilling in ANWR.
Senate Democrats contend that stricter conservation measures -- such are requiring Detroit to make gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles that get better mileage -- would save more oil than can be drilled from ANWR.
Opening the refuge is critical to the White House's long-term goal of increasing U.S. energy supplies and reducing American imports of foreign oil.
Government estimates have said the refuge could hold up to 16 billion barrels of crude oil. The U.S. market consumes close to 20 million barrels of petroleum a day and must import about 56 percent of that amount.
The White House maintains drilling would require only about 2,000 acres of the refuge's 19 million acres and would not harm the environment.
However, green groups say that 2,000 acres would not include roads and pipelines built to support any drilling.
"The acreage for oil drilling won't be the small, compact area that some members of Congress would have you believe," said Melinda Pierce of the Sierra Club. "In reality, the oil development would be a sprawling web of destruction stretching across hundreds of square miles of prime habitat for caribou, polar bear and migratory birds."
The U.S. Public Interest Research Group said the House bill would mean more pollution and give some $33 billion in tax breaks to energy firms already earning record profits.
"We hope that when the Senate takes up the energy issue, they develop a safe energy plan to lead America to a smarter, cleaner energy future," said PIRG director Gene Karpinski.
Copyright © 2001 Reuters Limited.
