Florida’s delegation is losing its unity in opposition — but it may not even matter.
By WES ALLISON, Times Staff Writer
Published June 25, 2006
WASHINGTON — Just like last year, when they killed a plan to open much of the eastern Gulf of Mexico to energy exploration, some key members of Florida’s congressional delegation are balking at a compromise on drilling.
This time, however, their protests may not matter so much.
As U.S. House leaders prepare to vote this week on a plan to allow oil and gas
The Deal Key elements of the deal brokered by Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Bartow, and House Resources Chairman Richard Pombo, R-Calif.
0 to 50 miles: No drilling, unless state legislatures ask the Interior Department to allow it. States that do stand to gain millions of dollars in royalty payments each year.
50 to 100 miles: Drilling, unless state legislatures ask the Interior Department to ban it. States have one year to act to ban natural gas drilling and three years to act to ban oil drilling.
Past 100 miles: Open to drilling, with proceeds going partly to states and new federal funds encouraging alternative fuels research and coastal environmental monitoring.
Who’s on board: The Republican leadership of the U.S. House, business and manufacturing interests; Gov. Jeb Bush; Florida Reps. Adam Putnam, Mario Diaz-Balart, Dave Mica and others. All are Republicans.
Who’s not: Reps. C.W. Bill Young, Jim Davis, Clay Shaw, and others; U.S. Sens. Mel Martinez and Bill Nelson; the environmental lobby.
drilling 100 miles off the nation’s shores, and closer if states permit it, lawmakers and lobbyists say winning the support of the Florida delegation is no longer crucial to passing the bill.
Instead, rising energy costs, strong lobbying by industry and labor groups, and divisions within the delegations of other coastal states, especially California, mean that the bill’s sponsors are counting on broad, bipartisan support that will help them prevail even with only partial backing from Florida’s 25 House members.
“It doesn’t matter if Florida stays united on this issue. The pressure is building around the country on other members,” said Rep. Jeff Miller, a Panhandle Republican who supports the bill.
“Their constituents are talking about high gas prices, high natural gas prices, and they cannot stand with Florida anymore to protect the Gulf of Mexico for us.”
Rep. Adam Putnam of Bartow, the fifth-ranking House Republican, negotiated the deal with House Resources Committee Chairman Richmond Pombo, R-Calif., and several Republicans and Democrats, but the division within the Florida delegation is deep.
All seven of the state’s Democrats appear likely to oppose it. Among Republicans, at least six — including Reps. C.W. Bill Young of Pinellas County, Clay Shaw of Fort Lauderdale, and Connie Mack of Fort Myers — oppose it, on grounds that it doesn’t provide enough protection.
Six have expressed support for the bill, as has Gov. Jeb Bush, on grounds that Florida is losing its leverage to stop drilling, and should take the best deal it can get.
Opponents worry that even 100 miles is too close, with oceanographers warning that an oil spill in the gulf at that range could damage west and east coast beaches, and the government’s own reports acknowledging that even drilling for natural gas puts heavy metals into the water near well heads.
The lack of unanimous support seems to have taken some by surprise, and the Florida delegation has scheduled a meeting to discuss the bill this afternoon.
Environmental lobbyists and lawmakers who oppose the plan, including Rep. Jim Davis, D-Tampa, counter that the only way Florida can protect its shores is for its congressional delegation to stick together. Mark Ferrulo, director of the Florida Public Interest Research Group, faulted Putnam and other proponents for failing to be as aggressive as pro-drilling forces.
“Admittedly, it’s a tough fight,” Ferrulo said. “We’d have a better chance if our delegation were united.”
But much has changed since November, when dissenting Florida Republicans forced Pombo to abandon a provision that would have allowed drilling 125 miles off the state’s coast.
Last year’s deal was part of a massive budget bill that included several controversial measures, including cuts to some social services and drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
With moderate Republicans and most Democrats against it, House leaders couldn’t afford to lose even a few Florida Republicans unhappy about the drilling plan. So it was withdrawn, and the budget bill passed.
This year, the Pombo plan is a stand-alone bill.
Meanwhile, the price of natural gas and oil remains high, and a diverse group of industries, from agriculture to chemicalmakers to heavy manufacturers, has spent the year pushing members of Congress to back more domestic energy production.
So have the AFL-CIO and several member unions, which are lobbying Rust Belt Democrats who usually back environmental causes. Farm state Democrats also are getting pressure from farmers, who are paying record prices for fertilizer, which is made with natural gas.
“As long as you’ve got delegations split and people making their own calls, and people expressing their own views … you’re in a better stead,” said Frank Maisano, an energy lobbyist with Bracewell & Guiliani.
“If you have the entire California delegation or Florida delegation lockstep against it, or you have one party versus another party, you a lot of times have hardening of positions.
''If you can avoid that, that sends a signal to people who aren’t necessarily immediately affected by it … to take a look at the larger picture.”
The result has been wide bipartisan support for increasing domestic energy production. Consider:
More than half the Democrats on the Resources Committee voted to approve the Putnam-Pombo deal last week, which passed easily, 29-9.
A bill by Reps. John Peterson, R-Pa., and Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, to allow natural gas drilling within 20 miles of the nation’s coasts counts 169 sponsors, including 29 Democrats. Both men are co-sponsors of the Pombo plan.
And last month, the Florida delegation narrowly defeated an attempt to lift a congressional moratorium on offshore drilling. This would have allowed rigs just 3 miles from the Atlantic and Pacific coasts and 9 miles from Florida’s gulf coast.
The vote was 217 to 203, with 38 Democrats voting against the Florida delegation.
“On a bipartisan level, they can roll us,” said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Miami, who supports the Pombo plan and urges colleagues to do the same.
“What we heard consistently was that I’ll support you on the 3 miles, but that’s it; I will vote for 20. Twenty is not protection, 20 is devastating; and that’s what unfortunately has legs.”
What’s happening in the House is in stark contrast to the Senate, where a bill to open most of Lease-Sale Area 181, just 100 miles off the Panhandle, has been stalled after passing the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee this year.
Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., is negotiating for a deal to bring the bill to the floor with Florida’s senators, Republican Mel Martinez and Democrat Bill Nelson, as well as Sen. Mary Landrieu, a Louisiana Democrat who favors more drilling but also wants states that allow off-shore drilling to collect more royalty payments.
A spokeswoman for Domenici said the committee is watching what happens to the Pombo bill in the House, but wouldn’t take it up unless it passes the committee.
Nelson and Martinez, who sits on the committee, have opposed the Pombo plan.
Meanwhile, the Interior Department already has proposed opening a large swath of Lease-Sale Area 181 to drilling next year, and there is little Congress can do about it.
At least the Pombo-Putnam bill, known as the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act, provides the 100-mile buffer for Florida’s southern and eastern coasts, which are currently unprotected, advocates say.
The bill offers something for many. States that opt to drill within 100 miles can get 50 percent of the royalties energy companies pay the government for mineral rights; Virginia and Georgia have expressed interest.
It establishes federal funds for alternative energy research, environmental monitoring and coastal restoration. And, to draw western state lawmakers, some of the money generated by new drilling will go toward schools in poor rural areas.
Environmentalists have launched a countercampaign, aimed largely at coastal state lawmakers in the South who may be tempted to vote for drilling. The Sierra Club is buying ads in small North Carolina and South Carolina papers, while the Natural Resources Defense Council and other groups are sending lawmakers daily bulletins about ways to decrease the nation’s dependence on fossil fuels.
But several lawmakers and lobbyists, including those for the environmentalists, say they face a tough sell, at least in the House.
The push to open the eastern gulf to drilling gained new impetus last year, after hurricanes Katrina and Rita shut down much of the Gulf Coast oil and gas operation.
Maisano, the energy lobbyist, said Florida will be under the same pressure next time, when lawmakers hearing the howls of constituents again look at the map of drilling rigs in the Gulf of Mexico.
“You see the same maps and you have all the dots west of the Alabama border and no dots east of the Alabama border, you get yourself in that same position: People asking, 'Hmm, I wonder why we don’t have any dots east of the Alabama line?’ ”
