The Arctic Refuge and American politics 101: What happens next?
April 2005
The American Congress' vote to open the calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou herd for oil development has been a hard blow.
Based on extensive review of traditional knowledge and scientific research, the Porcupine Caribou Management Board has determined that development on the calving grounds would pose a significant threat to the herd.
Any development-related decline in the herd's population, in turn, jeopardizes the eons-old caribou traditions of northern peoples within the herd's range. But until the oil rigs are erected on that land, there is still hope for the herd and the First Nations. Today this hope remains realistic.
Although it's a yawner, a brief lesson in American politics will help make sense of the situation.
In 1980, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (P.L. 96-487), abbreviated as ANILCA became law.
Section 1002(b)(1) of that act set out the legal boundaries of a region in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge that has both potential for oil and high environmental significance. Coincidentally, this land comprises much of the concentrated calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou herd. This section number is why some people refer to the calving grounds as the "1002 lands".
Section 1002 also provides for analyzing the potential for oil and gas development and requires wildlife studies to be done to analyze impacts of development.
It also requires development of regulations that establish guidelines for oil exploration activities "in a manner that avoids significant adverse effects on the fish and wildlife and other resources."
The studies are done, but the guidelines have never been established. Lack of guidelines would be a major concern in the event of oil leasing in that area.
Section 1003 of that same act bans leasing or production of oil and gas from the 1002 lands until an act of Congress is passed to permit it, and this is what the budget debates are trying to accomplish.
Since the 1980s, numerous bills have been tabled that would variously open the Refuge to oil exploration or permanently protect the calving grounds. Not all were debated, and none were signed into law.
The recent votes in Congress that have received much attention were this year's budget resolutions. The two divisions of Congress, the House of Representatives (the House) and the Senate, both debated budget resolutions. However, the two bodies' resolutions typically have different wording, and in this case the wording was dramatically different.
The Senate's version of the budget contained a resolution to open the 1002 lands to oil leasing, thereby creating revenue.
The House's version did not address development in the Refuge, but it could potentially allow development later in the legislative process – the reconciliation bill – which will be explained shortly.
Opponents of budget resolutions cannot filibuster, a stalling tactic used in the Senate that requires 60 votes to stop. Thus a budget bill only requires a majority vote to pass.
Environmentalists consider this resolution's inclusion in the budget bill a sneak attack because proponents of drilling don't have the votes to pass this legislation directly. Environmentalists feel that any issue this controversial should be discussed and voted on entirely on its own merits. Some say the proposed revenues are speculative, which makes their inclusion in the budget fiscally irresponsible.
The Senate resolution, including specific language to open the calving the calving grounds to oil exploration, passed by a narrow majority: 51 to 49.
The House resolution also passed with a similarly narrow majority: 218 to 214.
There were other controversial measures that passed in the Senate vote, any one of which might make the budget fail when the House and Senate attempt to agree on the wording of the budgets.
Congress has recently reconvened following a two-week recess. It is expected that a Conference Committee will be struck to resolve the differences between the wording of the two budgets.
The Conference Committee will probably consist of six Senators and Representatives, but the names have not yet been announced.
Resistance to developing the Refuge is not expected from the House. Nonetheless, lobbyists on both sides are still hard at work.
A majority vote within the Conference Committee can approve the wording of the budget, which is then referred to as the "conference report."
Next, the full House and Senate vote on the conference report. At this stage, amendments may not be proposed.
Once this budget reconciliation bill is passed, all the laws are amended to conform to the resolutions that have passed. For example, the ANILCA would be amended to permit development in the Refuge.
This final bill then is sent to the President where it becomes law, if signed, or sent back to the Congress, if vetoed by the President.
Budgets are not guaranteed to pass, and in fact last year's budget did not.
Because this year's budget contains language that raises contentious political issues, it might not pass, either.
When budgets do not pass, the budget from the previous year is carried over.
Even if this budget passes and opens the Refuge to oil leases, oil companies still have to buy into the leases before the Refuge is damaged.
While oil companies have apparently abandoned their lobbying efforts directed at drilling in the calving grounds, they would probably pursue the leases if they have the opportunity. After all, there is currently nearby drilling taking place.
Environmental groups have repeatedly stated that they will continue to fight every step of the way to protect the calving grounds. They have also made it clear that they will not view any negative outcome in the budget process as a sign of defeat.
In the meantime, two wilderness bills were introduced last month in both the House and the Senate that seek to permanently protect the calving grounds. If the budget passes, these bills will be moot. If the budget fails, these bills will remain active.
No one expects that these bills would achieve a majority required to become law. But by consistently tabling such wilderness bills, legislators are building strength for their cause and demonstrating their seriousness in posing a strong opposition to drilling.
Although this budget is the biggest threat the calving grounds has ever faced, drilling in the Refuge is by no means a done deal.
The Porcupine Caribou Management Board supports efforts to protect the 1002 lands as critical habitat of the Porcupine Caribou herd.
The Board's focus for the past year has been on the development of a community-driven, multi-year Management Plan and Harvest Management Strategy that will consider among other things harm reduction in the unfortunate event that drilling does take place. Now, more than ever, there must be a collaboration of efforts to protect the calving grounds from oil exploration and development, for the sake of the caribou and for the sake of the people who rely on them.
UPDATES MENU
|