Congress adjourned without voting on domestic oil drilling...

So they have proven themselves ineffective and inept. My real question here is in two parts:


1) Why did President Bush wait until now to lift the ban? I don't know about him, but I, like the rest of country saw this coming months ago.


2) Why was there a ban in the first place? Did somebody think we wouldn't need more oil when they first proposed the ban?Congress adjourned without voting on domestic oil drilling...
1. Bush lifted the ban because it suddenly got popular to do so. As for you seeing this coming months ago, there are many such as myself that saw this coming in 1985.





2. The ban was placed to restrict the amount of environmental damage being done to certain regions. These regions were either too sensitive to such activity, or already too saturated by such activity.





We don't need more oil. We need to leave oil and get on with modern technology. Besides, drilling will only add a few extra buckets to the world market, unless Congress decides to nationalize the U.S. oil industry so that America can keep all the new oil we'll drill.





Gosh, sounds like a stupid idea - doesn't it?





EDIT: I noticed someone else mentioned the incredibly low gas prices paid in such places as Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Venezuela. This is because these states have nationalized the oil production industry, so they are able to control the internal price. People use these country's gas prices as an example of what could happen if we drill more oil, but it's only true if the U.S. government takes over the domestic oil business by nationalizing it so that it (we) can keep every drop we drill in the country before it goes on the open market and is subject to global price.Congress adjourned without voting on domestic oil drilling...
GOP President George H W Bush put the ban on offshore drilling. it's the republicans who are refusing to take action on our energy crisis. for the fourth time this summer, Senate conservatives blocked action on legislation that would provide tax credits to an array of renewable energy entrepreneurs. They also blocked legislation that would have extended some $18 billion worth of renewable energy tax credits. after it passed the House, the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008 was then filibustered by Senate Republicans in June.
Bush waited because the republicans have tried 20 years to get either a democratic congress or a democratic president to agree and pass off shore drilling, only in the last couple of days has the senate moved to possibly allow it and even obama may jump on board. the greater question is why did the democrats block something for years, that if they would have allowed we wouldn,t need to even be debating this we would have our own oil. you can thank the epa that have them in their pockets.
President Bush has been trying for a very long time to get congress to lift the ban-----they did not and now we have a crisis he has asked again that they do-----other countries are drilling off our shores and raping our harvest so we need to start using our oil now and innovate new technology to reduce the needs for more later----2nd part of your question---the ban was put there by liberal activists that want to ruin us under the guise of saving our planet----actually more oil leaks out on the ocean floor from natural occuring faults---we could actually make things better. The liberal control of both the house and senate has brought us to a very hard point in time----they do not care----off in their jets and limos to enjoy the good life at our expense.
Ever wondered why the paparazzi leaves the dem congress alone - They are pro UNION and they don't spill the beans that Pelosi and Reid are NOT environmentally ';green'; and they have a huge footprint, but it will remain quiet in the press.





Take a look at a Rainbow Pride Parade and see the lowest morality in the world exists in Pelosi's area, and Reid has done nothing for Nevada but had a mob museum commissioned from pork (our money), oh yes and millions for cricket killing, in case you don't know Nevada, we don't have an agriculture community, so that money went to Reid's friends. Corrupt, immoral, treasonous, unpatriotic, and definitely not public servants, they are thieves.





Have a nice eve.









1. He finally got some balls and decided to actually do something to help working Americans.





2. Environmentalists have pressured the government into making domestic drilling almost impossible. They did it with good reason, in the past the oil companies drilled without regard for the environment. However, that was 20 years ago, and there is technology in place that is environmentally friendly.
I'm glad they did. The US doesn't have untapped reserves sufficient to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, or significantly affect the global price.





The reserves we do have are a national asset of great strategic value. They should be recognized as such, and conserved by public policy.





If some Americans are convinced they will die if they can't commute eighty miles a day in upholstered farm equipment, they should be compelled to find alternate means of supporting this lifestyle.





The fastest, most effective thing that can be done to reduce prices, is to enforce fuel conservation by national policy.





The slackening of demand due to high prices has already caused a significant drop in price. We can extend this drop and ensure it is maintained, by enforced conservation.





This will ensure that affordable fuel will be available for the essential commerce on which our economy actually depends.





And yet this fastest, most effective measure, is the one thing so many ';conservative'; politicians adamantly oppose.





Well, that and regulation of the speculative markets.





Because they are not really concerned about the high price of gas, at all.





They are concerned about maintaining the oil industry's profits. Period.
1. because he knows a 1-2 percent increase in the world oil market won't drop prices by 50- percent...





2. because oil prices were $30 a barrel until about 10 years ago... they didn't really need to drill them... and even if they had drilled them 30 years ago... they could be running dry about now...





I know you people are desperate for any help... but is putting your faith in something that will barely make a dent in the problem really the answer?
Charter started the ban in 1975. Clinton added most of Alaska in 1995. Bush waited so long because it was pointless because it is in Dem hands. We all have seen the last few weeks but Dems have to disagree with Republicans. That is just how it is!
the ban ends this year in december. Bush could extend the ban or lift the ban, he made the right choice. the ban was on in the first place because the democrats are owned by the ecology ';green freaks';.
You should be asking, why did they rush to put together a housing bill that would make the taxpayers a back stop for a company with 5 trillion dollars in unknown mortgages...but not do the same for offshore drilling.
democrats banned drilling dont blame it on bush
on September 30, the Congressional Ban on Offshore Drilling Expires but Bush wanted it to be lifted immediately so we could start the drilling process immediately. this is a factor in preices dropping already and it will futher drop, if we could only start the process now.





the original ban was signed to appease the environmentalist's strong lobbiest. George Soros and his group fund many of these Organizations for his own agenda.





the china is planning to drill so if we don't they will and we will be buying our own oil from china.





i watched the so called debate in the Senate and the Dem's taking on 34 amendments that had nothing to do with oil and debate those issues rather than our crisis. their solution was to regulate speculators, the republicans said fine, but also lets drill to releive this crisis.





the dems ran out the clock, went on vacation and no solutions to our crisis. the Dems want to keep prices hight as it is the government that benefits the most while we suffer. ExxonMobile made record profits true, but also paid over 61.7 Million to the government. after taxes and expenses, ExxonMobil runs on an 8% profit margin. this is far lower than Apple or Starbucks but no one is going ofter them for making profits. we had better watch out or we will see our companies flying overseas. oh another fact, ExxonMobile is the largest oil company in the US, but is 14 in the world market. so much for big 'evil' oil companies.





punishing them for profits, is not the answer as they have to compete in the world market.





i thought capitalism was a good thing and socialism bad but i guess not to Democrats in congress.
in saudi arabia the price of gas they pay is 41 cents a gallon, in iraq even less than that., need i say more, in venezula the same , so you tell me, who controls the price of oil. other countires suffer the price, so dont tell me its because the chinese have a high demand for oil. has nothing do with that. its greed pure and simple. these countries that produce all the oil that we and some other countires have such a high dependance on is nothing more than a ploy to hurt there enemies and hurt our economy, as well as england where gas is over 9.00 a gallon, and the same in australia, it seems that our country and its allies are the ones paying the high prices. and the ones who are suffering. i personally did a drastic thing and i got rid of my car, we were a 2 car family and now down to 1, i refuse to pay those prices any more. we have resorted to living on sandwitches and soups and we dont eat out any more. got rid of our call waiting , long distance on our phone and eat very little meat. that is what middle in come and the poor have resorted in doing. sad but true, ! there is enough untapped oil in alaska and colorado (as reported on fox news) by somoene who works in the industry to supply this country for the next 200 plus years, put americans back to work , and get that drilling started before we all end up riding bikes and loosing our homes. its a real crisis and needs to be dealt with now, not 10 years from now. so i say get on with it, stop talking and get to it!
1) Well, considering that it was his father that put it into place in the first place on the executive side, Bush 43 knew that lifting the '90 moratorium would be viewed negatively by the left, so doing so would have to be a carefully calculated move.





2) Bush 41 put the bill into place in 1990, responding to concerns about protecting the coastal regions. Back then, oil price was around $20 a barrel, so the issue of supply was not on the table. China and India were not nearly as developed and the demand was not as extreme as it is today.





Interestingly enough, it had a direct effect on oil prices AND the stock market. Meanwhile, nothing happened, except a message being sent that the tide was turning.