Unfortunately, what we know of the bill right now suggests it’s all an illusion. Sure, it would create a scenario in which a state could petition the federal government to allow for new energy production off its coast. But under this bill, the first 50 seaward miles would be locked away forever – and the second 50 could be too if a state doesn’t act in a timely manner to free them. That means nearly 90 percent of our nation’s known offshore energy resources could remain under permanent lock-and-key if this bill were to become law, and potentially even more than that if states make the decision not to allow production.
Regrettably, if not accidentally, this bill removes the financial incentive for coastal states to team up with the federal government to break our dependence on foreign oil and bring down prices at the pump. Missing is any mention of how the revenue generated offshore might be shared with the states along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, even though Gulf Coast states already share in federal offshore revenues, and interior states across the country already receive an annual check for their share of federal onshore royalties.
By creating two separate classes of coastal states – one with a legitimate claim to a portion of offshore revenues; the other without – Democrats are ensuring that regional rivalries will be the product of their efforts, not access to new energy. That’s particularly troubling when you consider the potential revenue boost from legitimate offshore energy development could top $2.6 trillion. That’s a two, followed by a six, followed by 11 zeros.
Since gaveling open the 110th Congress last year, Democrats have done their level best to distract the American people from the real reasons for record-high energy costs – passing bills to sue OPEC for locking away its oil supply, for example, while simultaneously bringing bills to the House floor to lock away ours. The bill we expect to see next week is just another in that same vein of so-called policy-making, advanced for the sole purpose of giving cover to politically vulnerable Democrats – but failing to provide relief to the millions of Americans in need of real solutions.