Tom Harkin doesn't want to drill for oil here at home

By most conservative estimates, the United States imported about 60% of its oil in 2007.  Some estimates are as high as 70%.  That equates to the U.S. spending at least $330 billion in oil imports.  When you figure in the cost to defend our imported oil, as well as the costs in jobs and U.S. oil industry needs sent abroad, the total would be nearly a trillion dollars.  Sadly, our rate of dependency on foreign sources of oil is growing.

Why is that, when we have recoverable oil right here at home?

Beneath the North Slope of Alaska is estimated to be between 3 and 9 billion barrels of oil. This area, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) was designated by Congress in 1981 as requiring “special study” to determine its oil and gas potential, as well environmental impact.  With significant technological advances made in oil and gas drilling, the Department of Interior recommended development in 1987.

Had we moved forward with drilling in 1987, we would be using that oil today and we wouldn’t be so highly and painfully dependent upon foreign sources.  But no, instead we ignorantly listened to liberal Democrat Senators like Tom Harkin.  He objects to drilling in ANWR, which contrary to liberal myth, oil production would NOT harm animal populations and the area drilled would be MUCH, much smaller than propagandized.  Harkin doesn’t want to 'buy here' and keep our dollars at home.  He would apparently rather give money to Saudi Arabia so they can turn around and use it to sponsor terrorism.  Harkin is not concerned with energy independence, he apparently does not care about Alaska’s economy (never mind that a booming Alaskan economy would benefit the entire country) and he obviously does not care about national security.

Harkin’s record on drilling for oil here at home:

- Voted NO on preserving budget for ANWR oil drilling. (Apr 2000) Harkin the obstructionist didn't even want to fund study of the issue.  Of course not, it was a GOP initiative.

- Voted NO on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002) Harkin didn't want to consider national security concerns...  Let's keep putting our people at risk in foreign ports huh Tom?

- Voted YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill. (Mar 2003) Harkin the obstructionist didn't even want to debate the issue.

- Voted YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. (Mar 2005) Pretty self-explanatory, Harkin doesn't want to drill here at home.  He would rather we buy oil from nations that sponsor terrorism.

- Voted YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR. (Nov 2005)  More Harkin the obstructionist.

- Co-sponsored legislation to designate ANWR area as protected wilderness. (Nov 2007) Legislation Translation:  Create a big obstacle by calling ANWR ‘protected wilderness,’ making it much tougher to approve drilling.

Source:  http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/tom_harkin.htm

For national security reasons, for energy independence reasons, for economic reasons, the United States needs to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil drilling and expand oil exploration in other states.  We’ve listened to liberal Democrats for two decades now and it is costing us.  It’s costing us at the pump, it's costing us in energy independence, it’s costing us in security.

Comments

[zap Louisiana]

Louisiana drills and produces most of the natural gas that fuels the power plants in the U.S.If a state votes against drilling Louisiana needs to cut off there supply.That state could then use liberal magic fuel to produce electricity!When everbody in Uncle Toms state is FREEZING this winter im sure next election cycle these loons will be perged!

[zap Louisiana]

Save more energy than curly light bulbs,TAX all computer use!ITs the liberal way.