From Hearst Newspapers via the Duluth News Tribune, by Jennifer Dlouhy
A group of lawmakers from states surrounding the Great Lakes on Thursday urged Congress to permanently ban new oil and gas drilling in the waters.
A federal moratorium precludes new drilling operations in the lakes, but it is set to expire in 2007.
Although U.S. lawmakers from the region generally oppose opening up the waters for more drilling, they differ on the best approach.
Some, such as Reps. Mike Rogers and Candice Miller, both Michigan Republicans, want to leave drilling decisions to the states that border the lakes. They are advancing their plan through a House resolution that has 14 sponsors, all Republican but one.
Others, including Michigan Democratic Reps. Bart Stupak and Vernon Ehlers, want to take a different tack. They are leading an effort to make the federal ban permanent. Such a ban, they say, is key to keeping the lakes pristine. The five lakes are the source of drinking water for more than 30 million Americans.
Of the eight states that surround the Great Lakes, five have banned drilling: Michigan, New York, Wisconsin, Illinois and Ohio. Ohio's ban is temporary -- it was put in place by the governor but has not been approved by the Legislature. Indiana, Pennsylvania and Minnesota do not have drilling bans.
The ban dates to 1985, when the five states agreed to drilling prohibitions. Congress approved the first federal moratorium in 2001. Before the federal ban, 13 drilling operations were already in the waters. Seven of them -- all land-based "directional drilling" operations aimed at reaching oil underneath the lake -- are active. And a number of companies drill in the Canadian waters.
Stupak and others arguing for a permanent ban say that if the federal moratorium expires, any state surrounding the lakes could decide to open up their share of the waters for new drilling -- a decision that, because of environmental risks, could ultimately affect neighboring states.
Therefore, Stupak said, drilling decisions should be decided by Congress.
The risks of environmental damage are too high to justify drilling, Ehlers said. Among them are oil spills that taint the lakes and shores or the release of dangerous hydrogen sulfide from deep underground, he said.
"I certainly appreciate the interest of the states to regulate their shores and their waters," Ehlers said. "But in a case where you have a shared body of water like this, one state not performing adequately . . . controlling the resource is a problem for everyone. That's why we need federal intervention to establish the standard."
But Rogers staunchly opposes a permanent federal ban, arguing that it would unfairly strip states of the ability to control their share of the lakes. Rogers contends that making drilling a federal issue opens up the possibility that years from now, Congress could mandate drilling in the lakes.
And, Rogers argues, it could have implications for other decisions about the lakes. As more people migrate from Northern to Southern states, increasing their representation on Capitol Hill, Congress also could decide to divert lake water to dry regions.
