Latest Headlines
- Escambia BOCC To Install Four Commissioners, New Chair And Vice-Chair
- Week Begins Sunny, Then Rain Before A Big Cool Down
- Homeowner Reportedly Opens Fire On Known Attackers In Bratt Assault
- FPL Seeks To Raise Bills For All Of 2025 To Cover Hurricane Costs; Here’s How Much
- Capt. Chandra Newman Assumes Command Of NAS Pensacola
- Tate Falls To Nease In Playoff Opener (With Photo Gallery)
- Byrneville Elementary School Names Students Of The Month
- High School Football Playoffs Scoreboard
- Cat Country 98.7 Is The 2024 CMA Radio Station Of The Year (With Gallery)
- Gonzalez Man Gets Two Life Sentences For Abusing Children
Proposed Amendment Would Ban Near-Shore Drilling
September 1, 2011
A Tampa Democrat has filed a Senate version of proposed constitutional amendment to ban oil drilling within about 10 miles of Florida’s coastline.
The proposed amendment (SJR 90), filed Tuesday by Sen. Arthenia Joyner, matches a House version (HJR 23) filed earlier this year by Rep. Rick Kriseman, D-St. Petersburg. It would ask voters to put into the constitution a ban on exploration, drilling, extraction or production of oil in Florida waters.
“There are people still suffering from the big spill,” Joyner said Wednesday. “Do you want to expose Florida to the possibility of another spill – but closer to our shore? I just can’t believe people want to bring it that close, after seeing what happens when it’s farther out.
“To open up our shoreline to the possibility of oil is ludicrous,” Joyner said.
The move, which would need three-fifths approval of both chambers to get the proposal before voters, comes as backers of drilling have begun again raising the prospect of new exploration for both oil and gas to combat high energy prices, as well as and reducing American dependence on foreign sources of energy.
Just over a year after the BP Deepwater Horizon spill, largest oil spill in the history of the United States, Joyner said the push for drilling is regaining strength. She pointed to suggestion this week by Republican presidential candidate Michelle Bachmann to consider new drilling in the eastern Gulf and, possibly in the Everglades, if it can be done safely. When Bachmann brought it up at a South Florida campaign stop, she was greeted by calls of “Drill Baby, Drill.”
“It seems like we need it now more than ever,” Joyner said of a constitutional ban.
Senate President Mike Haridopolos has said he has no intention of pushing for new drilling in Florida waters this year. Haridopolos, R-Merritt Island, was a backer of a bill in 2010 that would have removed a moratorium on drilling in Florida waters, but changed his stance after the BP oil spill began in April of that year. Since then, Haridopolos has said there is a need for new drilling in American waters, but has given assurances that Florida waters – which extend about 10 miles in the Gulf, and closer in the Atlantic – would remain off the agenda in the coming year.
The moratorium on drilling in Florida waters remains, but nothing would prevent lawmakers from lifting it, which is the impetus for the proposed constitutional ban. Then-Gov. Charlie Crist proposed such a ban in the wake of the spill, but the House refused to take it up.
Crist is now, along with former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Alex Sink, a backer of another push to get the idea before voters, a citizen initiative being pushed by a group called Save Our Seas, Beaches and Shores.
That group is collecting signatures to try to get the issue on the ballot. Its leader, Manley Fuller, conceded Wednesday that it doesn’t look like the grassroots group, which relies heavily on volunteers, will be able to hit its mark in time for the 2012 ballot.
“It would be extremely difficult, practically speaking, for us to make the ballot,” Fuller said. “It’s been a mom and pop operation. We’re looking for a major supporter, a major benefactor. We need some people to write some checks.
“It would be great if the Legislature would put it on the ballot,” Fuller said. “That would be wonderful.”
Gov. Rick Scott, who wouldn’t have a say because proposed amendments passed by lawmakers go straight to the ballot without the governor’s approval, has recently said he supports additional drilling if it can be shown there’s no chance of a major spill, but he hasn’t been convinced of that yet.
Opponents of drilling fear the debate over whether to allow it in Florida waters goes beyond the actual question of whether to let new exploration begin in the area. They point to an acknowledgement last year by North Dakota Sen. Byron Dorgan, a Republican backer of drilling, that the issue is in part about trying to expand drilling farther out in the Gulf, in federal waters.
Opposition to drilling in federal waters over environmental concerns would carry less weight, Dorgan has said, if Florida lawmakers were to approve drilling even closer to shore.
Another question remains how much oil and gas would be produced by new drilling. In the 1970s and ’80s, about 40 exploratory wells were drilled in the Gulf from Pensacola to Tampa Bay. Little oil was produced, and what was found was a low-grade crude – but the drilling did find large reserves of natural gas.
Backers of drilling generally have said that in the wake of the BP spill last year, the likelihood of another similar spill is greatly reduced. The Obama administration, which backs new drilling in federal waters in parts of the Gulf, said that just last week, when it approved the sale of new oil and gas leases in the Gulf.
“Since Deepwater Horizon, we have strengthened oversight at every stage of the oil and gas development process, including deepwater drilling safety, subsea blowout containment, and spill response capability,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said last week. Those leases, however, will be in the western Gulf, nearer Louisiana.
Joyner said the argument is different for Florida, where beaches are so important to the economy.
“Florida is a natural tourist attraction – why would you do something that has the potential of decimating something people come from all over the world for, it’s beautiful beaches?”
By David Royse
The News Service of Florida
Comments
11 Responses to “Proposed Amendment Would Ban Near-Shore Drilling”
I am about ready to buy me a bicycle and start acclimating myself, to the times which lay on the horizon. And a good lock and chain!
REGARDING:
“Who thinks it’s cost effective to drug test welfare recipients?”
Solely dealing with the idea of cost effectiveness, a thing is cost effective if doing it costs less than not doing it.
For a worst case scenario, let’s assume everyone who would have wanted money from the state agreed to drug testing. They said in the PNJ the other day that 2% failed the test and 2% decided not to go ahead after starting. That would be 4% of those who would have received money from the state or one out of 25.
Thus, the state pays for 24 out of 25 drug tests which would have happened. They say they hope to get drug tests down to $10 each but it looks like current costs are $30 per test. Thirty times 24 equals $720 that the state will pay out in tests of clean recipients for every one which does not become a recipient. Thus, if they would have paid out more than $720 over the course of support, the program would be cost effective in saving Florida tax payers money.
David doing the numbers
Consider other energy choices. How readily available are they? Are they cost prohibitive for the average citizen? Why?
Conspiracey?
Currently reading “The Rothschilds a Familiy Portrait” by Frederic Morton
Go ahead and drill! Give Americans jobs, take back our country, we don’t want to out source work to foreign countries and we don’t want to buy from them either. Not oil or kids toys or food or anything else. Screw the middle east we don’t need their oil. We have plenty of our own and the intelligence to develope other avenues of energy. Bring our soldiers home. Educate our children. Close our borders. Make us the strongest country in the world, hurry up before we all become an Islamic state.
Sounds good huh?
OK take back our government from all these weaslely wormy thieves we have in various offices(right down to the person at the food stamp office that is practicing racism, don’t act like you don’t know what I’m talking about) demand that intelligent choices are made that benefit the majority, not the special interests. The only people who are doing more than breaking even these days are the politicians, they play on our fears and complacency. Who wanted septic tank inspections? Who says its ok to have the government looking at what prescriptions you get? Who’s business is it? Who thinks it’s cost effective to drug test welfare recipients? The point is folks if you punish the majority who do no wrong in order to catch the few who are criminal we are no longer a free society.
If the criminals want to kill their selves with drugs let them, catch them with the laws we currently have. Its survival of the fittest, the best of us, its what makes us strong. keeps the gene pool clean.
Ok thats my rave this morning….
David I thought about it, and you are right about conspiracys, These people that think President Kennedy was the victim of a conspiracy, never stopped to think about all the millions of people, that would have had to have been compliant.
Look what happened with deep well drilling! Too deep for divers and no way to stop the flow after the accident. Makes so much more sense to drill close to shore for the same oil without the major tragedy that deep well drilling caused. You do realize many foreign countries are drilling deep well rigs inthe Gulf. At least near shore if there is an accident, it can be fixed quicker with a lot less environmental impact! I also despise the mentality that is “NOT IN MY BACK YARD”. These same people move to the country and complain that the long time farmer has no right to disturb the new residents with their late hours and smelly pigs/cows/ chickens. These same people are making much noise about the price of beef/pork/ chicken/gas etc but dont grow it in my back yard. Seems to me you cant have your cake and ice cream!
A conspiracy to hold back energy development, to hide new energy production capability would have to involve millions of people. If any of the millions decided not to go along, the whole thing would collapse.
Conclusion? Not happening
More idiot law-makers!! Near-shore oil wells are much easier to contain. Drill Baby Drill!!!
If the energy technology, that is waiting in the wings, were unleashed, it would mean the collaspe of the oil industry and all those jobs, all those profits, and all that power/leverage on the world arena. The J.P. Morgans and Rothchilds of the world are not going to let that happen.
REGARDING:
” I could not but wonder WHO in their right mind would support anything that might destroy all this.”
The key word here is “might”. Our nuclear weapons program MIGHT destroy all this. Not funding a program to deflect killer asteroids from Bluff Springs MIGHT destroy all this. Neither is very likely to destroy all this but they MIGHT.
Sometimes you have two different MIGHTs in conflict. Near shore drilling MIGHT do great destruction, but not drilling means tankers will bring in petroleum which MIGHT be spilled and do great destruction. Ship wrecks and terrorist attacks are more likely. Near shore accidents are easier and quicker to fight but closer to places you would not want damaged.
We, the people, have been paying for oil spill containment through a tax on petroleum ever since Exxon Valdez. The money was supposed to go into the Coast Guard’s ability to contain such things.
It should have.
It didn’t.
David for perfect safety
and the tooth fairy
As I walked on the gulf beaches this summer enjoying a beautiful sunset, watching a young vet and his new bride getting pictures taken (in full wedding regalia), and chatting with another lady from England, I could not but wonder WHO in their right mind would support anything that might destroy all this.
“People come from all over the World” are use to paying $8 – $10 per gallon for gas too for their cars. If Florida wants to stop oil drilling and experimental wells, then the bill should be tied to an automatic $1.00 per gallon gas tax so Florida can use the money to keep the beaches clean.
I keep saying it was too bad that Pensacola Beach was not washed away during Hurricane IVAN. Too much of what Florida has for income is tied to tourism and the 90 days between Memorial Day and Labor Day when most of tourist come to the state.
If wells were allowed to be drilled, that would be real money coming into the economy, not just the money for up north that comes in to the few that have property and come in from all over the world to pay homage to the Rat in Orlando. Bottom line, new wells mean new jobs and real money in everyones pocket, and direction towards energy independence from foriegn oil.