Senate narrowly rejects oil drilling in Alaska refuge

WASHINGTON -- The Senate narrowly rejected oil drilling in an Alaska wildlife refuge Wednesday as eight Republicans defied party leaders and the White House on an issue at the core of President Bush's energy agenda.

Drilling advocates said the plan was probably dead for this Congress.

Despite intense lobbying by pro-drilling senators and the Bush administration, Democrats mustered the support needed to strip an oil drilling provision from a budget resolution expected to be approved later this week.

An amendment offered by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., to scrap the provision passed 52-48.

Development of the millions of barrels of oil beneath the 100-mile coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in northeastern Alaska has been at the heart of Bush's energy plans. Environmentalists contend drilling there would jeopardize a pristine area valued for its wildlife, while the administration views the oil as key to curtailing America's dependence on imports.

All but five Democrats voted against refuge drilling, but eight Republicans bucked their party. Congress set aside the refuge in 1960 and declared the oil off limits unless a measure specifically lifted the ban.

'Missed an opportunity'

"It's unfortunate that the Senate missed an opportunity to increase America's energy independence at a critical time," White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said.

With one or two senators holding the balance, both sides knew the vote would be close and stepped up their lobbying to try to sway anyone thinking of shifting.

Only hours before the vote, freshman Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., under intense pressure, signaled he might change his mind and vote in favor of drilling. In the end, Coleman, who succeeded the late Sen. Paul Wellstone, an ardent drilling foe, sided with the Democrats after it became clear that the pro-drilling side was two votes short of victory. He said he did so "with mixed emotions."

Drilling supporters last year couldn't get 60 votes to overcome a Democratic filibuster in the Senate, although the House approved the measure. "This was our best shot," said Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., after Wednesday's vote. Unlike legislation, a budget resolution cannot be filibustered.

Leading the pro-drilling charge was Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who has substantial power as chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

"People who vote against this today are voting against me and I will not forget," he declared, appearing to aim his remarks at Boxer in particular but also to wavering GOP senators.

"When one of the most powerful senators says he takes it personally, and he's keeping a list. ... Well, my heart really started to beat faster," Boxer later remarked in an interview.

Stevens and other drilling supporters insisted that with government restrictions and modern technology the oil could be pumped without harming wildlife. "We're not using a lot of land," said Stevens, maintaining that the "footprint" of the oil wells would be less than 2,000 acres.

But environmentalists countered that the footprint would be scattered over 1.5 million acres of coastal tundra, disturbing polar bears in their dens, affecting calving grounds for caribou and interfering with millions of migratory birds that swoop down on the plain each summer.

With war looming in Iraq, much of the debate focused on energy security. Proponents argued the ANWR oil would help America reduce its reliance on precarious foreign supplies.

Democrats said the oil was not nearly enough to significantly affect imports.

"While endangering one of the most pristine areas in the world, drilling in the (refuge) would do nothing to make our country more energy independent," said Democratic leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota. He said none of the oil would flow out of the refuge for 10 years.

Boxer said that the United States could save more oil than the refuge would produce "by just getting the SUVs to have the same fuel economy as autos."

How much oil is beneath the refuge's coastal plain is uncertain because only one exploratory well has been drilled and its results have not been made public. The Interior Department estimates that the plain could have anywhere from 5.7 billion barrels to 16 billion barrels.

Environmentalists argue that no more than about 3.2 billion barrels is likely to be economical for oil companies to pursue and that some major oil companies have begun to lose interest in the refuge.

The United States uses about 20 million barrels of oil a day.

Democrats who voted against Boxer's amendment and for drilling were John Breaux and Mary Landrieu, both of Louisiana; Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye, both of Hawaii, and Zell Miller of Georgia. All five had voted in favor of drilling last year as well.

The eight Republicans who voted against oil development were Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine; Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island; Gordon Smith of Oregon; Mike DeWine of Ohio; Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois; John McCain of Arizona, and Coleman.

------

On the Net:

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: http://www.r7.fws.gov/nwr/arctic/

Arctic Power: http://www.anwr.org/

Alaska Wilderness League: http://www.alaskawild.org/