Legislature(2003 - 2004)
02/05/2003 01:00 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HJR 6-ENDORSING ANWR LEASING CO-CHAIR CHENAULT announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 6, Urging the United States Congress to pass legislation to open the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, to oil and gas exploration, development, and production. Number 0140 REPRESENTATIVE VIC KOHRING, Alaska State Legislature, testified on behalf of the House Special Committee on Oil and Gas, the sponsor of HJR 6. He said: It's ... a resolution from the [House Special Committee] on Oil and Gas. We chose to go with that route as opposed to an individual member, because it's an all-inclusive effort; ... it's a very important piece of legislation. It's a resolution; it wouldn't have ... anything to put into effect as far as a law, but it's making a very important statement to the United States Congress, as well as the President of the United States, and other important officials that you see listed on page 2. This is a very familiar piece of legislation that we've had in the past; it's the same bill as last year that reiterates our stance on the issue of whether we should go into ANWR [Arctic National Wildlife Refuge] and open up the coastal plains for exploration, and hopefully, eventually, development - if we can find the reserves that we expect to be there. If you go through the resolution, you'll see real important points in here. It's a 1.5-million-acre area that constitutes the coastal plain, which is a very small area in all of ANWR; it's just the very northern tip on one side, so if there is any development in there, it's going to affect a very minimal area. The expected footprint, ... as far as what would be left behind if we were to develop the area, would be less than one-half of 1 percent of the coastal plain itself - only about, we predict, 2,000 to 7,000 acres of land involved. We are hopeful that we can pass this [out of the House Resources Standing Committee] and move it to the House floor, and this will be our way of sending a message to the United States Congress. As a member of the Energy Council, ... we are going to advocate strongly for ANWR again this year; we are going to travel to [Washington] D.C. for the Energy Council, and this will be ... our primary issue in advocating for the opening of the coastal plain, and hopefully we will realize some major developments that can very positively contribute to our economy, and help lessen dependence on foreign oil. REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING referred to the bill packet and said it contained additional information including the substantial number of jobs that [opening ANWR] would create. Number 0373 REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked how anybody who's concerned about the future of Alaska, economic development, and energy independence for the United States of America could possibly be opposed to opening ANWR. REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING said the question was perplexing to him, too, and he couldn't imagine anybody being opposed to it, but he did mention there had been concerns from people living in the region about the effect on the environment and wildlife populations, mainly, the Porcupine caribou herd. He said, "We're sensitive to the environment; there's reference to that in here, that we want to develop the area in a very responsible way and not ... affect the migrations or the calving grounds ... of the herd." Another point, he said, would be to look at [the results] in Prudhoe Bay: the caribou population is healthier than it was before the [area] was developed. Representative Kohring remarked, "I've seen pictures of caribou rubbing their backs on the pipeline, and it doesn't seem to affect the calving either, so, I'm ... hopeful that we're going to see little, if no, impact on the environment there, and the concerns of those in that area, along those lines, will be mitigated." REPRESENTATIVE LYNN expressed support for HJR 6. Number 0493 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK remarked, "We've seen this before us every year now, I think this is the ninth time I've seen this resolution." She recalled questions from the press about the effort the [legislature] has put into [funding the lobbying efforts of] Arctic Power and [towards opening] ANWR, and remarked, "As history says, you have to take it step by step, and have patience, and I think overall from when we first started here ... we've made quite big steps." She continued, "I think we're highlighting more on getting [ANWR] open; I think this resolution is really important, and it plays a pretty big role in our state as far as ... how we support ANWR." REPRESENTATIVE MASEK made a reference about President Bush educating the new members of Congress, and said she thought [Alaska] needed to have this type of resolution. She talked about questioning by the public and the media of the efforts of the [legislature to open ANWR] and brought attention to a newspaper article about crises occurring around the world. She said, "In Russia, ... they're one of our biggest ... competitors as far as opening any oil development, and I know in Russia they're ... facing serious trouble as to how ... they export the oil because of the lack of a pipeline, and they're going to have [to] build new [facilities] to get the oil out." She spoke about the Venezuelan government's undergoing [large] changes and remarked, "They're the next country that we're competing with [for] ... oil development. So, I think the more that we can do today to secure and show the oil companies that ... we have a very good economy here -- and it's very safe; it's not like the other countries." She said deliberations over the resolution help with the process. She expressed her support. Number 0703 REPRESENTATIVE GATTO spoke about the Persian Gulf war, particularly, the destruction of Kuwait's oil wells upon the retreat of the Iraqi army. Referring to Iraq's leader, he remarked, "He, ... essentially, took the chance to plunge us into a nuclear winter; it wouldn't be nuclear, but the idea being that he took a risk of essentially destroying the whole ... planet as we know it. " If a similar situation were to occur, he said, all of that oil in the Middle East that [the United States] imports so much of would become unavailable for a very long period of time. Representative Gatto spoke about [the United States'] need to have access to its own secure [oil] supplies, and said due to national security, [the United States] needed to have a dependable resource within the country. Representative Gatto, referring to Representative Kohring's aforementioned trip to Washington D.C., remarked, "The one message I want to get back to Washington D.C., is, there are crazy people in the world, and they do crazy things; ... if they were to cut off our ... supply, ... we need it, we depend on it, and we can't get by without it; ... if they take it away from us, I don't know ... what will happen, but I do know we will be in severe trouble." He suggested the oil supply in the Middle East could easily be taken away from the [United States]. REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING, in response to Representative Gatto, said he would take that message with him while he travels throughout Washington, D.C., and meets with various congressmen. He thanked Representative Masek for her leadership on this issue and remarked, "I know you've had this resolution yourself in the past, and we did pass the same resolution with the Twenty-Second Alaska Legislature ...." Number 0905 REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG said dialogue from either the courts or Congress said that Alaska wouldn't get [royalties at the ratio of] 90:10 [in relation to the federal government] out of ANWR coastal plain development, and would go back to 50:50. He asked Representative Kohring to expand on whether there had been any more dialog on the subject. REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING replied that he was not aware of any new dialog, but he would research the issue and present that information at a subsequent meeting. Noting that the bill did address that particular issue, he referred to page 3, lines 15- 19, which read: FURTHER RESOLVED that the Alaska State Legislature opposes any unilateral reduction in royalty revenue from exploration and development of the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, and any attempt to coerce the State of Alaska into accepting less than the 90 percent of the oil, gas, and mineral royalties from the federal land in Alaska that was promised to the state at statehood. REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING indicated he might present a resolution to the House Special Committee on Oil and Gas specifically addressing that issue. Number 1089 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK moved to report HJR 6 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal notes; she asked for unanimous consent. Number 1104 REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG objected for the purpose of offering an amendment to HJR 6. [Although Co-Chair Chenault called a brief at-ease, a motion was made immediately afterward, and thus the recording continued.] Number 1133 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK withdrew her motion to report HJR 6 out of committee. Number 1148 REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG referred to page 1, lines 13-15, which read: WHEREAS the "1002 study area" is part of the coastal plain located within the North Slope Borough, and residents of the North Slope Borough, who are predominantly Inupiat Eskimo, are supportive of development in the "1002 study area"; and REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG talked about the Gwich'in [people's] [dependence] on the [Porcupine] caribou herd, and their opposition to opening ANWR. He suggested the Gwich'in people have a completely different position [on ANWR] than the Inupiat [people], and said the interest was in not bringing that conflict into this resolution. Representative Guttenberg offered an amendment to strike [lines 13-15]; he said he thought it would strengthen the [resolution]. Number 1205 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK objected to the amendment. She told the committee that the area being discussed is in the North Slope Borough (NSB); she said she thought it was important for [lines 13-15] to remain in the resolution because they are in support of it. Number 1230 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING, in response to Representative Guttenberg's suggested amendment, said it would be helpful to demonstrate support in the affected regions. Referring to the Gwich'in [people], he said there are people who have voiced their opposition to the resolution. He suggested, however, that the majority of residents in the area, mostly Inupiat [people], are in support of the legislation. Representative Kohring remarked, "I think that would enhance and not detract from the strength of this resolution." Number 1282 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK reminded the committee that HJR 6 would be going to Congress and the President. She offered her belief that it would delineate the process to remove lines 13-15, and that it was important for the language to remain in the resolution. Number 1324 REPRESENTATIVE GATTO, discussing the importance of making the bill accurate, referred to line 14 and suggested [amending] the sentence to say, "and the Inupiat residents of the North Slope Borough are supportive." He said the outcome would be an accurate statement because it doesn't refer to other residents, only to the ones who are supportive. Number 1376 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING, responding to Representative Gatto, said [the proposed amendment] was a reasonable suggestion that he would not object to. REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE stated her belief that the language is fine, clear, and succinct, and said she didn't think it should be changed. REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG referred to the Gwich'in people and said they don't have oil on their land, don't live in the North Slope Borough, and don't have the resources to walk the halls of Congress. He remarked, "But those guys are back there pounding the halls of Congress on the [development of ANWR], and my point was not to have something that they can refute talk about that their resources are on the land, ... the caribou that are in the calving grounds or what they harvest." Representative Guttenberg reiterated his belief that removal of the section would be beneficial to deter any future opposition to the reference. CO-CHAIR FATE suggested that at one time the Gwich'in people had mounted an exploratory effort to find and develop hydrocarbons on their land. He said he was sympathetic to the lifestyle and wishes of the Gwich'in [people], but that there was a larger issue at stake, which is the economy and the State of Alaska, and proceeding with something that the state and the nation desperately need. Representative Fate concurred with the language as it exists in HJR 6. Number 1529 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK pointed out that the Gwich'in [people] had traveled to Washington, D.C., to lobby on this issue in the past. She referred to Sara James (ph), who she said was the forerunner on this issue; had received a lot of press and media attention; and had made a big presence in Washington, D.C. She offered her belief that the reason for ANWR not opening was due to the lobbying of the Gwich'in [people], and remarked, "I think we all know that they're on the opposite side of this issue." Representative Masek said the Gwich'in people have a right to speak out and say what they want, and that they have done so very eloquently. She commented, "We as a legislative body ... do have to look at the bigger picture ...." She noted her desire for the language to remain the same. Number 1632 REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG withdrew his amendment. Number 1644 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK moved to report HJR 6 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal notes; she asked for unanimous consent. There being no objection, HJR 6 was reported from the House Resources Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|