http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20100321/OPINION/3211023/2198/OPINION?Title=Access-to-federal-waters-may-be-the-real-goal-of-legislative-proponents
Herald Tribune
Sarasota, Florida
Opinion
Access to federal waters may be the real goal of legislative proponents
Published: Sunday, March 21, 2010 at 1:00 a.m.
Last Modified: Friday, March 19, 2010 at 5:52 p.m.
The Texas oil men behind the proposal to drill off Florida’s Gulf Coast beaches are neither stupid nor dreamy-eyed optimists. So the information in a draft report presented Monday to a Florida House committee surely came as no surprise.
The report, by a commission the Legislature created five years ago to study Florida’s long-term future, largely shoots down many of the drilling proponents’ arguments.
It says that the minuscule amount of petroleum under the state’s near-shore waters would have almost no effect on gas prices or the nation’s dependence on foreign oil. Efforts to extract the oil would eventually provide relatively few jobs for Florida and provide little revenue to the state.
So why was Dean Cannon smiling?
Maybe because Cannon — who is chairman of the House committee that heard testimony on the report, and is the Legislature’s chief proponent of coastal drilling — sees the big picture.
The debate over Gulf drilling is not really about passing state legislation this year, and might not be about drilling near Florida’s west coast at all. The big picture involves the ban on drilling in federal waters in the eastern Gulf — a longtime target of the oil and gas industry.
The industry wants the federal ban removed — despite the damage that drilling could do to Florida’s environment and economy — and Cannon appears ready to help.
Wait till next year
Cannon told reporters Monday that, after hearing from the Century Commission and many other experts, he still thinks drilling is worthwhile. “Nobody really knows how much is out there until you actually drill,” he said.
He said he expects his committee, the Select Policy Council on Strategic and Economic Planning, to introduce within two weeks legislation to remove Florida’s 20-year-old moratorium on coastal drilling.
The Florida Senate, led by offshore drilling skeptic Jeff Atwater, appears unlikely to pass such a bill this year — something, the Tallahassee Democrat reported, “Cannon acknowledges with a smile.”
Cannon, in fact, said Friday that he is not concerned about the bill passing this year because he will come back next year “with an even better bill.”
And next year, Cannon will be speaker of the Florida House, while Mike Haridopolos will replace Atwater as Senate president. Haridopolos has already introduced a bill in the Senate that would allow near-coast drilling.
Next year, with Cannon and Haridopolos occupying the two most powerful positions in the Legislature, passage of oil-drilling legislation would be practically a done deal. Even if the next governor were to veto the legislation, an important statement will be made:
If the Legislature is willing to allow drilling in state waters — three to 10 miles from shore — why should Congress maintain the federal ban, which forbids drilling within 125 miles of the Florida peninsula?
The Century Commission’s report acknowledges this risk: “Because a major reason for the imposition of moratoriums off Florida is due to political pressure from the state, lifting the state moratorium would undoubtedly weaken political and legal support for the federal moratorium.”
But there are good reasons for that “political pressure from the state” — applied for decades by both Republican and Democratic leaders — and they are just as pertinent for the eastern Gulf as they are for Florida’s near-coast:
While there is likely to be more oil under federal waters than there is close to the coast, numerous federal studies have shown — and the Century Commission confirmed — that there is too little in the eastern Gulf to ever have much, if any, effect on gas prices or the global supply.
An oil spill in the eastern Gulf could be disastrous for Florida’s coastal environment and tourism-based economy. “Accidental oil spills are low-probability events,” the commission reported, “but they have the potential to significantly impact coastal ecosystems and economies.” That is a risk that Florida cannot afford to take.
The potential revenue and jobs to be gained from eastern Gulf drilling do not justify the risks involved. The commission cites a recent study that found that federal and state revenues from that drilling “would amount to hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 20 years.” Florida’s share might be “roughly $20 million to $40 million a year,” depending on federal drilling legislation and production volumes. The number of total jobs resulting from the drilling are estimated to be 10,000 over 20 years, “with Florida securing 1,000 to 2,500 of them.”
Compare that with the financial impact of Florida tourism, an industry that generates some $65 billion per year for the state and employs 1 million workers.
Who benefits?
So what is offshore oil drilling — either in state or federal waters — worth to Florida? Not enough to warrant the risks involved.
What is removing the state ban on drilling worth to the anonymous Texas oil men who, under the name Florida Energy Associates, promote the plan? Potentially billions if it opens up the eastern Gulf, or if they hold Gulf leases until the price of oil skyrockets.
But the real issue may be: What is all of this worth to Dean Cannon and other legislators working on the oil men’s behalf? That’s a question that Florida voters should ask.
Special thanks to Richard Charter