Nick wrote on Jun 19, 2008 1:34 AM:Instead of wrecking our coastlines I say you jail all of the A holes responsible for all of the specualtion prices on oil. That will bring the prices back to within reason. Outlaw Speculating and fine the A holes who profited from it. Please NCT print this.The Republicans and all of the crooks know their time is short so they are making one final grab to clean everything out before they are kicked to the curb. We can stop this right now. Ban Speculation!!!

Good News wrote on Jun 19, 2008 5:07 AM:Good! It will keep oil money out of terrorist hands while buying us time to develop alternative fuels and better mass transit.

what a joke wrote on Jun 19, 2008 6:39 AM:It will take at least 10 years for this oil to affect us. Technology exist right now to produce electric vehicles that as good as the one me and you drive. The problem? The technology was patent by Chevron and they won't release it to the auto makers. What a shame!

Mr. Bush uses the "National Security" theme for everything else, why doesn't he take the patent from chevron under the "National Security" theme?

The Solution is to get away from using oil, not to depend on more oil!

gimmeabreak wrote on Jun 19, 2008 6:41 AM:Yeah, the payback for his oil company enablers. Create panic then get stressed people to back up this stupid idea. Smells like Iraq WMD to me. And what's with "buying time?" Did everyone forget the gas lines of 1973, or 1979? Obviously, otherwise GM and Ford would've come up with hybrids and electric cars in the 80s, instead of 3 ton land-yacht SUVs. No more corporate welfare for the oil companies. Invest in companies who really are researching and developing alternative, renewable energy sources.

Bad News wrote on Jun 19, 2008 6:46 AM:Are prices at the pump going to plummet because we've increased the global supply by 1%?

VoteofNoConfidence wrote on Jun 19, 2008 7:08 AM:Someone muzzle the Commander in Chief before he does any more lasting damage to the planet!His heir McCain thinks similarly and now wants to blanket our air, soil and water supplies with dozens of nuclear power plants! These people are a threat to public safety. The emperors have no clothes already! Uncle!

Larry wrote on Jun 19, 2008 7:12 AM:I've been a Republican most of my life and I am neither a crook or an "A hole" although because of my political bent Nick would probably paint me as both without knowing me, or where I stand on this issue. That being said, there is a common ground that needs to be found that will give us relief at the pump without being "hard headed" or making uninformed comments.

PleaseLeaveEarly wrote on Jun 19, 2008 7:18 AM:Funny, but high gas prices would seem to indicate that demand is up and supply is down, if I remember my Econ 101 correctly. Except that overall demand is down and there is no interruption in supply. Drilling offshore will not help gas prices in the short term -- it's reigning in the oil futures speculators and having a sound energy policy NOT crafted by the oil companies that will help. Please, Mr. Bush, do us all a favor and take an early and extended vacation, extending from now until January 09.

John E wrote on Jun 19, 2008 7:21 AM:We need to put the current oil scenario in a long range perspective. The longer we can hold our domestic oil reserves in the ground, the more they will be worth, and the more efficiently, economically, and environmentally safely they can be extracted. Let's drain the Middle East, Venezuela, etc. first, then 25 years from now enjoy having domestic oil reserves worth at least $400/barrel.

High gasoline prices are finally enticing people to carpool, to walk or to ride bicycles for their many short trips, to ride mass transit, and to consider fuel efficiency when shopping for a new vehicle. We were warned in 1973 and again in 1979, but John Q. Public rapidly forgot the painful lessons learned back then. This time, with rising oil demand in BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China, etc.) and gradually declining production, the problem is permanent. Our current gasoline prices may be a temporary spike, but the underlying long term upward trendline is undeniable -- get used to it.

For the short term, the smartest thing we can do is to conserve energy aggressively (a win-win for the economy, politics, public health, and the environment) and to invest in research and development of a broad spectrum of energy sources, including biomass, solar, nuclear (fission as a temporary bridge, fusion as a long-term solution), coal (in-situ conversion to liquid and/or gas), oil shale, wind, etc.

Go Larry wrote on Jun 19, 2008 7:30 AM:You've already taken the first step by admitting you're a Republican. Now you need to join Republicans Anonymous. Don't give up. Take it one day at a time.

John wrote on Jun 19, 2008 7:32 AM:The Rich Democrats who are opposed to oil drilling here live in large fancy homes, and often own several other homes and a large garage filled with expensive cars don’t want to let us drill for oil. They and their environmentalist buddies want the price of gasoline to go so high we will all have to move to big crowded cities, live in tiny condos and apartments and take a bus to work. They will still have large fancy homes and multiple expensive cars, plus a $100,000 electric car (requiring $40,000 battery every few years) to show off how greenthey are. Some will have a $500,000 hydrogen car to show off in, but no! We must not allow oil to be drilled here. That will allow the masses to live too well. In the past the oil supply has allowed the people of our country to use about 25% of the world’s oil production, while producing about 25% of the world’s food supplies and living much better that if we had now oil. Never in history has there been as great an amount of oir reserves still in the ground. Some would have you believe it is about to run out. That is NOT TRUE!
Meanwhile the papers have said almost nothing about the cost of everything else made of petroleum products other than retailers are experiencing increasing transportation costs. It will soon substantially increase the manufacturing costs too. Enough to soon lower the living standard for all of us except the elite wealthy. Oh yeah! Some persons will be able to increase their pay due to strong unions, or other reasons. Then the rest of us will have to be further burdened by paying more for their services too. There was an article that said Dow Chemical announced a 20% increase on nearly everything they make, and one that said cereal companies are making the boxes smaller now instead of raising prices now. We need to get those guys and women out of office as soon as possible and get in some people who will let us maintain and improve our standard of living. We also need to drill for oil here now, even though it will take several years to ramp up production. It will take decades to improve and refine the alternatives. A few well placed bombs in the gulf between Iran and Saudi Arabia by Iran, or rebels, or terrorists could greatly reduce the volume of oil available on the world market for months or even years. WE should demand to have more drilling here immediately, and put in in the oil leases that it cannot be sold abroad if it is needed here.

Drill and drill now wrote on Jun 19, 2008 7:40 AM:I say drill and give Californians dividens from oil drilling and eliminate California state tax.

terry wrote on Jun 19, 2008 7:46 AM:the libs,dems and rest of you left wingers are the reson for high gas prices.You havent let the oil companies build a new rifinery in over thirty years,and say no to nuculer power.this is what you get.Its not bush and big oil.its you libs!!wake up !!

BOB wrote on Jun 19, 2008 7:50 AM:In November vote no on drilling off the California coast!

Vote no on John Mc Cain!

Vote no on Brian Bilbray!

All three are bad for California.

go bush wrote on Jun 19, 2008 8:29 AM:It's about time. All of you Liberals and Democrats are against it but you keep complaining about high gas prices. Your not going to see alot of these so called vehicles that run on electricity. The gas companies won't allow it. Obama will not be able to do anything about it. He says he will have a windfall tax on the gas companies but who is going to pay for it? Start drilling and let's lower the gas prices. Sure, it may take a few years but if we don't what will the gas prices be in 5-10 years? McCain 08.

omg wrote on Jun 19, 2008 8:35 AM:to terry - the "libs" are responsible for the current oil crisis? Please. When GWB first became president the cost of gas per gallon was around $1.47. Dick Cheney warned that if we didn't go into Iraq we'd be paying $60 per barrel (compared to the $30 per barrel at the time, which is now about $135 per barrel, or $4.60 per gallon). Congress was dominated by the Republicans until 18 months ago. How in the world could the Democrats be the cause of this fiasco?

For the past 7 1/2 years, two former oil men have run this country, invaded a sovereign nation for more oil control, given no-bid contracts to companies (like Haliburton) with oil ties, and are now accusing the Democrats as the cause for the rise in oil prices? Oh yeah, and what about the Enron connection? There is way too strong a theme here. I wouldn't trust anything that Bush or Cheney is trying to push right now - especially when it has oil at its core. Bush is just now saying we need to lift the ban on offshore drilling? Why wasn't this a priority 7 1/2 years when he first became president. You know, when Cheney was working with big oil on the "energy" policy?

There is another interesting article in today's paper about the big 4 oil companies winning no bid contracts in Iraq to help the Iraqis with their oil production. Give me a break!!

Follow the money and learn the truth. Republicans are supposed to be fiscally conservative. This administration has been anything but. Democrats are accused of being the "tax and spend" party. This administration has been the "charge and spend" party. It's better to pay as you go.

John E - you are right on!

Drill More wrote on Jun 19, 2008 8:39 AM:The next run will be toward $10.00 a gallon. Think the average citizen can afford to pay that? I don't think so. Yet those opposed to drilling keep their head in the sand thinking a miracle alternate for oil will appear tomorrow. Seems to me the only ones against drilling are those who can afford to pay $5 plus a gallon. Is it going to help immediately? Of course not but just think if we would have been dilling 10 years ago we might not be where we are. To all these Bush haters, what happened to your stance that Bush and his buddies invaded Iraq for cheap oil? Your theory there is as good as your theory not to drill. Think Arnie cares about the working folks while he flies around in his private jet? No. He isn't looking out for us by saying no to drilling. The worst hurricane in history that hit New Orleans went through the gulf. Guess where the oil deerecks are folks? The gulf and not one had a spill. The technology is so far advanced spills are very unlikely. Also, think you can see an oil derreck 50 miles out? No. The horizon is 20 miles. So really no excuse. DRILL MORE and become independent from OPEC!

What about existing leases wrote on Jun 19, 2008 8:50 AM:Why aren't the existing leases purchased by oil companies being developed? Why offer up more to them when they haven't used what they've already purchased?

Just another way to make oil people (namely Bush and Cheney) uber rich.

All I know is wrote on Jun 19, 2008 8:50 AM:that families and companies are suffering because of the gas prices. Something needs to be done to fix it for the long haul. What will our children pay for gas? It will be too expensive for them to even drive to work if it keeps going the way it is. And the hybrid cars won't fix the fact that the cost of food will keep going up because it's so expensive to get the food here in those massive trucks. What will fix that? A hybrid big rig? We're in trouble! I can see the U.S. imploding because of this. The gas prices, coupled with the housing crisis and the fact that the wages can't catch up equals trouble and major trouble for our kids.

Leases wrote on Jun 19, 2008 8:53 AM:What about the current leases owned by oil companies that are not being developed? Shouldn't those be exhausted first before risky offshore drilling?

Just another attempt to line the pockets of oil men - namely Bush and Cheney.

Senior wrote on Jun 19, 2008 9:06 AM:The libs are throwing out false data about ANWR too. The park is larger than several of our smaller states put together, and the location for drilling is hundreds of miles away from the pretty pictures the libs show in their ads to not drill there. The location looks like barren nearly flat wasteland near the north coast. The area in which drilling will occur is about the size of a major city airport with most of the oil drilling and pumping equipment inside a large building with the wells inside the building and slant drilled out in all directions. Few people visit there the whole park, and if they did go to see the sight they likely would not be within hundreds of miles from the oil production. This is so far north that it is dark for 58 days a year. Native people already live in the nearby community. The argument that it only has enough oil to supply the USA for six months is not a valid consideration: It is an absurdity. The oil would come out over many years. It would not take ten years to get a substantial flow. It would not have to wait until a new pipeline is built. There will be room starting out in the existing pipeline from the North Slope since it production from there has decreased. The supply at ANWR is probably at least four times greater than the libs say. Those were old numbers from when oil was selling for $20 or $30 a barrel. At even $60 per bbl a much larger quantity is available to be pumped out.
Each day's supply in the USA comes from thousands off wells all over the country. No one is saying, drill in ANWR and we don't need any other oil wells. So we get a million barrels a day from ANWR and another million a day from a little ways offshore there, and more from other places. The daily supply from there is at least as much as comes from several of the other countries we buy oil from. Except for the top several. It is significant and there is no good reason to not use it. Remember congress passed a bill to allow it to be used but a Democrat President Bill Clinton vetoed the bill. Since then the Congress has almost passed it again several times. A majority of the Senate would have voted for it several years and President Bush would have signed it. That was known. But the Senate has this strange rule allowing a few senators to say this will require a 60-vote majority to allow it to come to the floor to be voted on. Senator Kennedy, Schumer, Boxer, and Feinstein were successful in holding it back from being voted on. You should be blaming them for the present problems, not the oil companies.

The Real Concern wrote on Jun 19, 2008 9:13 AM:People need to be paying a lot more attention to the relationship between the big corporations and government. Watch the movie "Who Killed the Electric Car" and get a clue. If we are going to continue using gasoline and not consider alternative methods, why can't cars be made with more efficient mileage? It can be done, it just needs to be legislated. Gerald Ford had a practical, reasonable plan of attack to the oil problem back in 1975, but unfortunately it was never followed. Had it been, we'd probably be free from international oil dependency right now, and free from a war costing us dearly in blood and treasure.

The bottom line is that it's not being done and impediments are in place so that those making a fortune off of gasoline can continue to do so. It's about profit maximization by a few.

As someone noted earlier, this has a whole lot more to do with unfettered loopholes and speculation than it does supply and demand.

Crazy wrote on Jun 19, 2008 9:32 AM:You people are crazy. Just drill the oil already. We will need it at some point and the sooner we start, the sooner we as a nation will reap the benefits. At the same time we need to start using (improving existing) alternative vehicles.

Theotis wrote on Jun 19, 2008 9:46 AM:It's about time! We'd not be in the situation where we presently are if Mr. CLINTON had not vetoed the notion of DOMESTIC drilling back in the 1990's. The rationale then was the same as we see on this page....it'll take ten years before we see the benefits. Well Mr. CLINTON, if you hadn't been such a bonehead, we'd be deriving those benefits right now! What are we waiting for?? Let the drilling begin! American oil for American consumers!!

wake up wrote on Jun 19, 2008 9:54 AM:How can you possibly believe these people. The oil companies have enough land to explore for oil, yet they are not drilling for oil there. Now Bush said we need more offshore drilling and you guys fall for it! unbelievable!

FYI to Bush Haters wrote on Jun 19, 2008 10:13 AM:Senior Bush first signed the no drill Executive order. Clinton extended it through 2012. Current Bush could repeal and sign his own Executive order to open it up. He is not doing that yet. I hope he does. BTW what happened to your belief he invaded Iraq for cheap oil? Suggestion, research for yourself. When you depend on the Move On crowd for your intelligence you will be shown to be a couple pints short of a full gallon.

black gold wrote on Jun 19, 2008 10:19 AM:tap that oil, come on, the technology we have now is awesome .the enviroment
will be safe . so go cry some where else
bob and nick

Nature Lover wrote on Jun 19, 2008 10:43 AM:I love nature for providing us with all this oil energy that enables us to have a greatly more pleasant and comfortable lifestyle. If the libs and extreme environmentalists had not obstructed every thing Bush and Cheney planned to do to increase our supply of reasonably priced oil we would not be in this situation. They wanted us to have an adequate supply. They wanted to have the country pursue an energy policy that would provide more oil and lower prices than we have now. Blame the libs in the State legislature, the environmental pressure groups and their lawyers, and the libs in Congress, not Bush and Cheney.
The libs kept doing things to hinder their efforts. In California the overly lib legislature and the liberal governor wonder why they are having budget problems. Well it is because they have driven so much of our income manufacturing, timber, mining, aircraft and auto assembly out of the state with high taxes and unreasonably strict emissions restrictions, plus their regulating many things like requiring school children from kindergarten up through high school to be indoctrinated with the material put out by the promoters of homosexual behavior, or they keep trying dozens of things like that. Then they wonder why state income is so low. What to do? Why of course, raise taxes some more. So anyway now they will all rally to prevent Oil Companies from drilling off shore. I think other countries like Norway and maybe its Sweden have drilled off their shores. Russia is or is planning to soon. England drilled a lot in the North Sea. Mexico has a huge amount of off shore oil but lacks the money to drill for it. Cuba has contracted with China to drill in waters closer to Florida than US companies are allowed to drill. Brazil has been lauded for becoming energy independent. They make a lot of ethanol from plants that are a lot more efficient than our ineffective attempt to make it from corn kernels. BUT first they drilled a lot of oil wells on land and offshore, then added ethanol to be independent. Most recently they have identified huge deposits of oil offshore that can make them one of the worlds major oil producers. And here we sit with enough known oil to supply all our fuel energy needs for at least 60 years and these libs are saying no! We won’t let you drill.
Well you guys! Quit blaming Bush and Cheney. It is not their fault. It is these libs that are all over the place messing things up for the rest of us.

Hey Theotis wrote on Jun 19, 2008 10:57 AM:You must have missed part of this article. BEFORE Clinton extended this ban to 2012, Daddy Bush wrote the Executive Order banning offshore drilling in 1990. Better get your facts straight before you start blaming.

This is about money. If you follow the money, you will find the truth. And the truth is legislative loopholes were passed by the Republican-dominated Congress in the 1990s that opened the door to unfettered speculation. This is about lining the pockets of those involved in the oil industry, including GW and Cheney.

Gerald Ford proposed a comprehensive, no-nonsense, reasonable approach to the oil shortage problem back in 1975, but unfortunately it was not followed. It did not ensure billions in windfall profits for the oil industry.

to FYI wrote on Jun 19, 2008 11:03 AM:The same argument could be made to people who rely on Rush Limbaugh (those of you who keep referring to the "libs") and Bill O'Reilly. Anything but fair and balanced, or "no spin." I have a really hard time understanding how people fall for that BS hook, line and sinker. I guess it's easier to rely on others to do the thinking for you.

Ron wrote on Jun 19, 2008 11:09 AM:You know what is really missing from this discussion, "All I know is"
@8:50 AM: "the little guy." Remember him?
But, this is exactly wht you get when you talk to a lib. Out of one side of their mouths, they say "X", and in their actions they do "Y".
In the mean time, the little guy, the minimum wage worker gets hit, hard.
What's hi or her option? They can't afford a new hybrid, a solar array sittin on top their home, if they own a home. What are THEY to do? Oh, that's right... mass transit. Yeah, easy for you to say. In fact, do you know notice, as I do, that liberals are particularly good at telling other people how to run their own lives?
Afterall, it won't be them sittin at the bus stop, waiting for the bus, wondering if their kid got home safe.
And it won't be them who'll be having to hoof it, or take another bus to grocery shop, carrying home those loads of groceries. And it won't be them who'll have to take their sick child on the bus to see a doctor. No, it won't be them. So, what do they really care?
they are proving each & everyday they could give a rat's "you know what" about the little guy. I think the oil companies are thinking more about the little guy, than anyone else.

Janet wrote on Jun 19, 2008 11:17 AM:You know, you can argue politics or you can look in the mirror. We are all responsible for this mess because we let politicians of all stripes get away with pandering to special interests. We also waste resources, including oil, as if there was no end to it. Are we going to have our shores cluttered with oil rigs and risk spills because we don't want to cut back on usage and develop alternative energy sources? Based on history, the answer seems to be yes. If you want energy to be cheaper, start with what you control. Sure, there is some gouging, but if you (and lots of others) reduce your usage, it will get better. Don't build your life around cheap energy by buying big vehicles, living a long way from work, building oversized homes, etc. Expect that the cost of energy will keep going up for political, world market and other conditions.

To Nature Lover wrote on Jun 19, 2008 11:19 AM:You say that we wouldn't be in the situation we currently find ourselves in if only we'd allowed Bush and Cheney to puruse their energy policies? Do you follow politics? Because I'm pretty sure Congress aided and abetted them in pursuing their energy policies, and look where it got us. This is the dream child of the Neocons (aka chickenhawks).

What would GHWB say wrote on Jun 19, 2008 11:21 AM:I wonder what GHW Bush thinks about the idea to repeal his original ban.

Dont forget about Issa wrote on Jun 19, 2008 11:47 AM:Vote no on Issa, too! I'm tired of having a congressman who fails to use his brain when voting - just using a stamp approval when representing me.

to to FYI wrote on Jun 19, 2008 12:00 PM:Obviously your reading skills are somewhat lacking. No mention of Rush or Bill in my post "FYI to Bush haters". I got most my info from the article above that obviuosly you and many posting did not read. Again, try something other then Move On sound bites for your information. Reading and research will do wonders.

Your all nutz wrote on Jun 19, 2008 12:02 PM:Your all nutz. Nothing bad will happen if they drill. Just a few rigs for a few years, and then nothing once they clean up. More oil LEAKS NATURALLY into the ocean off of Santa Barbara then has been spilled along this coast, so come on, let's take advantage of this!

Helen wrote on Jun 19, 2008 12:15 PM:We've got oil men running this administration. Of course they are not going to support clean, renewable and sustainable sources of energy.

Tap Issa wrote on Jun 19, 2008 12:33 PM:Open the oil reserves. Darrell Issa has enough o=n his hair to power 10 SUV's

BOB wrote on Jun 19, 2008 12:44 PM:Say no to black gold.

Say no to John Mc Cain!

Say no to Daryl Issa!

Say no to Brian Bilbray!

Vote for change in November!

Preserve and protect California.

To Janet wrote on Jun 19, 2008 12:54 PM:What a load of dribble. I live where I do because I could never have been able to afford a house for my family anywhere near where I work. I am sure most people are in the same boat. And in the USA we have a right to buy whatever we choose to drive. Mass transit is bad or nonexistent for about 95% of California citizens. Oversized homes? how many people have oversized homes. Who here has an oversized house. Only people in the top 5% income bracket. And what about our governor? Flying from his oversized house in L.A. to Sacramento everyday? And he wants us to suffer while he can afford to survive this morass? Everbody wants to put the blame somewhere. Do you think Bush did all this by himself? It took 30+ years of stupid knee jerk reactions and actions to get us where we are today. We have allowed the U.S. to be held hostage by any foreign country that has a drop of oil to sell. Has anyone ever gave thought that maybe all the oil speculation could be a form of financial terrorism? We have enough foreign enemies out there with enough funding that could actually bring down our country financially. It has been said before that if they could not beat us on the battlefield they would beat us on an economic front. And guess what? they are winning. Oh by the way I am getting 33+ miles to the gallon in my oversized sedan.

richmanpoorman wrote on Jun 19, 2008 1:21 PM:Issa needs to go!

Want to bring down the cost of oil?

Revoke the corporate licenses of these price gougers.

Oh right, we are supposed to believe their record profits have NOTHING to do with the record prices they collude to charge us. And only by gifting more PUBLIC assets to these thugs will we see relief...

ENOUGH! They have long ago broken the good faith on which they are ALLOWED to operate. I say shut them down.

Anne wrote on Jun 19, 2008 1:27 PM:Lets start at home by voting out the local pols who agree with Bush!!!!!!! Vote out Issa and Bilbray and save our Coast. I lived in Santa Barbara County in 1969-you wouldn't have wanted to see it!

DRILL wrote on Jun 19, 2008 1:43 PM:Or no one is going to be able to afford to go to work nor pay their bills. Gonna brew your own coffee at Starbucks? You expecting the President of your bank to be working the counter? Who is going to be answering your phone calls? DRILL!!! WHO IS GOING TO DELIEVER YOUR NEWSPAPER OR UPDATE WEB SITES???

So Cal Native wrote on Jun 19, 2008 2:09 PM:Anyone who thinks drilling off our coast is definitly not from California. Back in the day, Huntington Beach used to be the drill capital on the coast and it was an ugly sight! I sure dont want to see that along our precious coast. It will be only a matter of time before a major spill occurs and it will not impact the current cost of our gas gouge! VOTE NO ON THIS PROP!!

to FYI wrote on Jun 19, 2008 2:31 PM:My reading skills are fine, but thanks for asking. You missed my point. You said that people who rely on Move on for their information "will be shown to be a couple pints short of a full gallon." I was echoing that notion and simply applying it to those who rely on Rush and Bill for their information. BTW - I don't ever go on Move on, and I am not a Democrat.

To BOB wrote on Jun 19, 2008 2:33 PM:Yep look what change brought us in Congress last election. Democrat control, higher unemployment, mortgage crises, energy crisis, talk of higher taxes, economy in the tank. HOORAY for CHANGE!!

Bilbray wrote on Jun 19, 2008 2:34 PM:If I recall correctly, didn't Brian Bilbray run on an environmental platform a couple of decades ago? Since he was a surfer, he stood for protecting the ocean. Does anyone remember?

To To Janet wrote on Jun 19, 2008 2:36 PM:As far as 30 years of knee jerk reactions hindering a good energy policy, most of those (5 of the 8) were during Republican admiinistrations.

To To Bob wrote on Jun 19, 2008 2:48 PM:Bad argument. The Democrats inherited the mess that Bush and his cronies made the first 6 years of his term. Trying to do anything to rectify the damage done (like making it ridiculously easy to become a new homeowner just so you can brag about the increase in homeownership since you became president) is a lesson in patience because Bush vetoes any meangingful legislation - and when you have partisan figures in Congress to back up and rubber stamp those vetoes -you get gridlock.

Bush vetoed only 1 bill in his first 6 years while enjoying the power of a Republican-dominated Congress. Checks and balances are a great thing, but there can still be stagnation when people vote their party and not in the best interests of their constituents.

To To To Bob wrote on Jun 19, 2008 3:56 PM:Ok so using your logic, Clinton inherited the good economy he had from Bush Senior and Bush junior inherited the poor security that helped cause 9/11. I see your point.

Andrews Facts wrote on Jun 19, 2008 4:19 PM:1.) The presidential order that established the ban was executed by GHWB.

2.) This drilling will not have much affect on gas prices. Oil is a global market. Why would oil companies sell the oil here at a lower price, if they could ship it to China where it would fetch a higher price? The truth is, the supply and demand equasion is global, and offshore drilling here is not big enough to move the global production needle.

3.) China is subsidizing petro, so the average Chinese citizen has no incentive to use less. China's economic growth is creating a demand boom that would more than offset any supply increase from increased drilling here. By the way, China is not alone. India, Malasia, and other developing countries are growing and subsidizing--creating a big boom in demand.

4.) Speculators are not the problem. The futures market is rationally reacting to flattening global production (Hubbert Peak), and booming demand. In futures markets, you can buy a contract to purchase a quantity of oil at a fixed price on a future date. If it looks like demand is going to outstrip supply in the future, the value of the contracts gets bid up. The bidding on future contracts affects the price today. Here's why: If you knew from futures trading that sand was going to be very valuable in the future, you would likely go get some today. If everyone starts buying sand today, that's increased demand. So the price rises in anticipation of a shortage.

5.) The real answer is alternative energy development. The thing about most alternative energy, like solar and wind, is that it is local--disconnected from the global market. If we develop more supply that can only be used locally, we drive down prices here.

To So Cal Native wrote on Jun 19, 2008 4:22 PM:As a resident of California I do value the environment we enjoy, and can continue to enjoy with modern drilling techniques which are much safer. However, when did this coastline become the sole property of Californians? It belongs to all Americans. The majority of current off-shore drilling is done off the Texas and Louisiana coasts. If Californians are unwilling to drill then I say the Texans and Louisianans should get to keep what they drill. On the other hand all Americans should consume oil products responsibly. Just because someone can afford the gas for their monster vehicle doesn’t mean they should continue to drive it when they are the only one in it. Furthermore, efforts to develop other energy means must be funded and proceed.

Lets get real wrote on Jun 19, 2008 4:41 PM:There is a lot of inane finger-pointing on these boards, but something that "Theotis" said above raises an interesting point. He said "American oil for American consumers!!" What makes any of you pro-drilling chumps think that drilling in the US means more oil ONLY for the US? The fact is that the oil companies are in the business of making money, thus any oil that they extract from ANWR or anywhere else in the US will be sold on the open market to the highest bidder (namely China and India). There is little to no chance that Chevron or ExxonMobil could be convinced to "sell only to US refiners", so even if we could start drilling tomorrow the impact on gas prices would be absolutely zero. Consider that before you offer support for drilling off our precious coastline.

Stop the Bleeding wrote on Jun 19, 2008 4:58 PM:Families, businesses and the economy are all suffering with the high prices of gas and food and the bad housing market. Saying that we shouldn't look into using the oil resources that we already have is equivalent to your doctor telling you, "Well, you're going to die of cancer in a few years, so we won't bother to treat your gunshot wound..."

Something has to be done to stop the bleeding of money into OPEC. Sure, hybrid and hydrogen fuel cell technology can be improved and more vehicles made available but this will take years. If we keep getting scr*wed at the gas pump, no one will be able to afford the new improved hybrid cars anyway.

Most Americans live in the suburbs and can't sell their house and buy a downtown condo closer to where they work, especially with the housing market in toilet. And people can't spend 4 times as long taking public transportation to get to work if they want to keep their jobs. Plus, if businesses have to keep raising prices for stuff that consumers can't afford anyway, there will not be enough employment for people to work on all the new environmentally friendly technology.

In the past 2 years, there have been fires, tsunamis, hurricanes, tornadoes, and now floods. Are some oil wells placed out in the middle of nothing really going to make the environment that much worse for humans than it already is?

Stop the bleeding at the pump, then we can work on curing the cancer of dependence on foreign oil!

I can not believe wrote on Jun 19, 2008 5:30 PM:that antbody can sit here and say not to drill. I can not afford the gas, food, everything else that is increasing daily. If I had kids wow. You people all need to take a look in the mirror and then look outside at neighbors we are all suffering and you don't want to do anything???? get real! Drill and build. Let's start fixing the country from the do-nothing crowd.

Catch wrote on Jun 19, 2008 5:34 PM:To John E. – I’ve read the article an all the posts and your post is most excellent in facts and unbiased, sound reasons for not drilling. Common sense rings out in you writing. I think the most important thing you said that a lot of people don’t (or won’t) understand is that “the problem is permanent”.

If every oil producing nation on earth agreed to sell us all the oil we want for 10 cents a barrel, and we allowed every company in the US that wanted to drill for oil here without any restrictions, the problem wouldn’t go away. The oil problem is permanent.

Seeing human nature though, I’m leaning more towards allowing the drilling to begin as soon as possible. This whole oil game is slow torture, I want to say drill it, pump it, sell it cheap and spill it all into the atmosphere with big cars, trucks and factories and spill it into the oceans with accidents and not worry about it. Get it over with.

Pessimistic I know, but I believe this is the only way this planet is going to move towards alternatives like you and others have mentioned.

Vista Resident wrote on Jun 19, 2008 5:36 PM:During the California energy crisis, oil was being shipped from Alaska to Asia. So, home grown energy provides the US with no energy security or dependable price relief.

Real energy security will only be achieved as our sources of energy are diversified via alternative energy and decentralized in locally produced energy.

Oil has just finished achieving its immediate objectives in the US Congress via Republican filibuster...
1) Tax incentives for alternative energy businesses are not being extended this year.
2) A windfall tax on oil was defeated. "The oil companies could avoid the tax by using their "windfall" to push alternative energy programs or refinery expansions..." -- NCTimes.com

Now the oil industry is asking its government to supply them with the last item on its wish list -- drilling on the American coastline. You'll see newspapers publishing phony polls showing increased public support for this -- similar to the phony polls published before on illegal immigration.

To be fair, it's not just Republicans that supply oil industry wish list items. During the Clinton administration, oil leases were given away at no charge -- accidentally, Clinton claims.

If we really want energy prices to eventually come down, we must provide economic protection to the development of alternative energy. What monopolies do is periodically undercut the price of their product in order to throw competitors out of business. The next time that happens, we must tax the oil sold in this country so that our energy monopoly does not succeed in anti-competitive business practices.

No Band Aids wrote on Jun 19, 2008 5:55 PM:'Stop the Bleeding' tells it like it is...

To To Bob wrote on Jun 19, 2008 6:00 PM:Actually, Clinton inherited an economy in the middle of a recession when he became president in 1993. It was he who left Bush II with a surplus. And Bush ignored the important briefing about Osama Bin Laden's desire to strike the US from the inside, just one month before 9/11.

Clifford wrote on Jun 19, 2008 8:16 PM:READ THIS!

FROM AN ARTICLE IN THE "GULF NEWS" (Mid-East Newspaper.) (June 9, 2008)
OPEC President Chakib Khelil said that had it not been for the weak dollar, political tensions and speculation, oil prices
would probably be around $70 a barrel. “In terms of fundamentals, there is no problem of supply and demand. There
is much more a bubble due to speculation, which is based on a depreciating dollar and geopolitical tensions,”
Khelil said yesterday. (OPEC only supplies 37% of the US oil anyway!)

Bush, McCain, and the "Oil and Gas Party" are lying through their teeth!
AND WE DON'T EVEN GET A KISS!!!!!

Clifford wrote on Jun 19, 2008 8:20 PM:California is THE ONLY State that does not get paid
by the Oil Companies for drilling here.

Janet wrote on Jun 19, 2008 8:31 PM:I deeply feel for people who have little control, such as those who can't replace their cars or move. But as a gal who grew up in a 1100 sq. ft. house for a family of 7 (3 bdrm and a path), I'm not buying that most homes aren't large or that you have to live a long way from work to afford it. (Mine is around 900 sq. ft. and plenty of room for two. I'm in Escondido and I have used AC twice in 6 years. I have a small car. I do try to practice what I preach!) Absolutely, some do not have good choices, but many do and go for the larger house 10 miles farther out and the big SUV. And when it is your personal choice, I'm not sorry for you. And when it isn't, I am very sorry because believe me, I know what it is to be poor. But producing more oil isn't going to solve the problem of greed and waste.

Senior wrote on Jun 20, 2008 2:07 AM:I see several comments blaming the oil shortage on carmakers. First of all auto makers have made available small cars every year since cars were invented. Many of them are displayed year by year in large auto museums. Some people bought them, but most buyers wanted larger cars, and some wanted high-powered full sized cars. A carmaker has to make the size car that people want to but to stay in business. But small cars were available every year.

Senior wrote on Jun 20, 2008 2:17 AM:Several comments are about electric cars as an alternative energy user replacing oil and gasoline. Car manufactures do not have a problem making an electric car. They can make the car body, electric motor and controllers for electric cars. The problem is a practical battery to provide adequate range and acceleration at a price people will accept. If a large number of electric cars were to be mass produced there will be a serious problem obtaining enough copper from the world market and the cost of it will go way up. . In anticipation one of the major carmakers has a total design ready and tested waiting for the batteries technology to catch up. Many contracts are in play to design and build suitable affordable batteries. For years hobbyists have modified regular cars to run on batteries, usually a lot of regular car batteries hocked together. This is ok for hobbyists but not for a practical car for the general public. They usually have a shorter range or slower acceleration than is required for production cars. Currently there is a nice electric car with long range and very good acceleration. The drawback is that it is not family sized and I have read that it uses 6,000 rechargeable batteries made for laptop computers. That is interesting for a demonstration project, but far too expensive for a mass produced car. The major car company will probably produce the car that is ready to be put into production within a year or two with whatever battery is available at that time. At first the production rate will be low, But after several years suppose they got up to one million a year. They will have trouble obtaining material for one million of the batteries a year. It would take decades to replace the one hundred million existing cars. Therefore it is important to quit overusing the mantra about alternative energy and drill a lot of oil wells ASAP to use during the decades that will be required to make the transactions.

Bob wrote on Jun 20, 2008 6:54 AM:I believe that this is all a "pressure play" on the American people, to get them to support big greedy oil and allow drilling. They want to drill in the Rocky Mountains, Alaska and off our coasts. If you are blind, deaf and stupid, you may not have noticed that we are in big trouble. The environment has been trashed and the bill is coming due. We have a growing dead hole in the gulf of mexico. We have ice caps melting, extreme flooding, bee die off, global warming. Get a clue folks. You people that have kids, if you love them and care about their future, you better be mad about what is going on. All this garbage about drilling is about greed. Bush is an oil man and that's it. If they drill, we will continue down this road and at the same time lose what can't be replaced. Wake up folks, the price won't go down, whatever increase in profits takes place isn't going into your pocket. I mean, haven't you seen enough? What more do you need to see? They can't keep oil in the barges, they can't keep it in the trucks and off the ground. When they screw up, it's passed on to us.

Send those who dont want wrote on Jun 20, 2008 7:43 AM:drilling off California coast to Siberia to live, hey you won't have to worry about mother nature then, if you can stay alive in the weather there. Oh I forgot Al Gore said there is global warming so I would imagine it will get warmer there maybe in a couple of billion years?

Bottom Line wrote on Jun 20, 2008 9:03 AM:Bob is absolutely right. GWB (more accurately, Dick Cheney) came into office with an agenda, and that agenda has been realized thanks to much complicity by Congress, and apathy on the part of its constituency.

We've allowed ourselves to be distracted by things like ipods and the latest technological toys. Too busy to pay attention to what is going on. We've accepted the mantra of "patriotism," and "fighting them abroad so we don't have to fight them in our own back yard," hook, line and sinker. Shame on us for not paying attention!

When GW and Cheney leave office on January 20, 2009, I'm sure they will have some nice CEO jobs waiting for them in the oil industry. The spoils system continued.

JR wrote on Jun 20, 2008 1:21 PM:Umm... Am I the only one who thinks we should move on NOW to alternative energy sources and leave OUR stategic oil reserves in the ground until WE really need them? They're only going to get more valuable, let's not waste them on freaking obese SUVs...

JRs right wrote on Jun 20, 2008 2:10 PM:No - you're not the only one who holds those beliefs. You are right on target!

Senior wrote on Jun 21, 2008 4:53 AM:To JR and others. Good news and bad news for you guys. Honda is sending over some new fuel cell cars to lease. They plan to make a total of about 200 of them to try out in the USA and Japan during the next three years. Chevy plans to start production of their Chevrolet Volt electric car in 2010 with whatever batteries they can get by then. Daimier has made a fleet of 100 Smart electric cars being tried out now in London, They are improving them and plan to manufacture them in 2010. They are planning to make one model of Mercedes electric powered starting in 2010. Now the bad news for you: It will take decades to manufacture enough electric cars to make much difference in oil consumption. There are probably 100 million gasoline cars in use. Also you should know that only about half of the oil supply is used for transportation fuels. A lot of it goes into plastics, roads, roofing, agricultural fertilizers and other things. Also a large portion of the country uses heating oil to heat their homes, stores, offices, and factories during winter.
That is not going to change overnight. It will take decades if not opposed by people who live for the purpose of opposing things. Sure add some solar panels. But on a busy day California requires 45,000 gigawatts of electricity. That is 45,000,000 megawatts, That is 45,000,000,000 kilowatts, That is 45,000,000,000,000 watts. That means power plants and transmission lines. Both are being opposed by groups. A group has set up a new method of growing biofuel. One of several problems is that if ALL farmland in the USA were converted to growing this biofuel, it would provide only a fraction of the fuel we use, and would cause world starvation since the USA exports a huge amount of food. While alternative energy is being developed, we will need lots of oil. DRILL NOW! No excuses.