I was afraid of this
After the GOP-controlled Congress had scheduled so few full legislative "workdays" in the coming session (11 if my memory serves), I was worried that the all-important House/Senate oil-royalty bill negotiations would fall victim to the thin schedule, which precedes the contentious political season. During his Katrina tour two weeks ago, the President paid lip service to Louisiana's need for royalties to rebuild the wetlands before quickly turning to Iraq war speeches and demands for Congress to pass clarifying legislation for the CIA's secret prisons... etc.
According to today's article in the Times Picayune, the outlook for the royalty bill seems to be grim:
With time running short on the congressional calendar, the House and Senate are engaged in a shoving match over how best to boost domestic offshore drilling, a standoff that jeopardizes Louisiana's chances of snagging a share of oil and gas royalties to pay for hurricane protection and coastal restoration. ... So tense have things gotten that some members have suggested that a post-election, lame duck session might be the best time to strike a deal. ... A growing consensus in both the House and the Senate is that a formal conference committee, where the principals hash out a deal and then take it back to their chambers for a vote, is unlikely.This is not good for the Pelican State. There are all kinds of tensions in this Energy/Royalty bill: House/Senate tension, Rep/Dem tension, and Oil Drilling/Non-drilling tensions, among others. This delicate balance seems much too involved and complicated for an election-year compromise. Perversely, perhaps, I suspect the recent giant oil find in the Gulf, which has assisted in recent oil futures and gas price drops, will actually remove some of the pressure among some "swing vote" Legislators to pass a wetlands-restoring Energy bill by election day. (They won't feel as much gas pump rage from their constituents.)
The stakes couldn't be higher, and now we have Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-LA)-- who had previously repeatedly emphasized the need to pass this royalty bill in September before the election season got in full swing-- murmuring things like "There's a school of thought that it would be easier after the election because both sides wouldn't be posturing to get the credit."
Uggh. That's not a good tea leaf to read, at all. When you see a Jindal quote that doesn't include the words "I'm hopeful" or "I'm optimistic"... you know the situation is dire. Now it appears that only massive White House support could break the crucial deadlocks and get a bill moving, but the White House will probably not twist the necessary arms among GOP House members to formulate a compromise. That's not where they will choose to spend their "political capital" during this election season-- certainly not with Islamofascistjihadistappeasenik Democrats trying to retake the House.
Speaking of those Dems, let me remind everyone that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has said that the Democratic party is committed to Category 5 flood protection for South Louisiana. Flat out. He hasn't "committed" to a dinky 3 year study about the mere possibility of Cat 5 protection. No, he has instead committed himself and his party to the real thing; rather than stringing us along, and trying to pass the buck to the next administration. Wouldn't it be beneficial to LA if someone like that were Senate Majority leader instead of Minority leader?
But Mark, what would happen if the Dems took control of the House, as well as the Senate? Well, I'm glad you asked. A recent T-P article reported:
Bills to help Katrina-stricken Gulf Coast residents by streamlining the insurance-claims process, making more affordable housing available, restoring coastal wetlands and giving states a bigger share of royalties on oil and gas produced off their coastlines will be among the first measures to be proposed if the Democrats take control of Congress in the November elections, members of that party's House caucus said Wednesday in New Orleans."Within the first 100 hours of the new Congress, you will see those things introduced," Caucus Chairman James Clyburn of South Carolina said at a news conference.
...
The briefing came at the end of a three-day trip that 25 House Democrats -- including their leader, Nancy Pelosi of California -- made at their own expense on the first anniversary of Katrina's assault to inspect the damage the storm inflicted on Louisiana and Mississippi."We were on hallowed ground, where people have lost their homes and their hearts," Pelosi said at a caucus breakfast. "This visit has convinced us that we need to do more."
So, House Minority leader Pelosi is also on record as saying we need to do more for LA, as well.
Interesting.















I fear I'm not overly optimistic about this. The Senate bill would be almost worse than nothing for Louisiana -- it would block any further negotiation on the onerous federal royalty scam because they had "done something." If Dems control the House but not the Senate after Novermber, then I still think we're in trouble.
September 13, 2006 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know. The Senate bill stinks for many reasons, but it is "something" for Louisiana-- billions-- though we don't see any real money for a decade.
As memories of Katrina fade, won't that hinder our negotiating power if we don't pass any revenue-sharing this year?
If there's a compromise that looks mostly like the Senate bill, at this point I'd say take it. LA can always address its desire for current (not new) oil revenue-sharing in future bills.
September 14, 2006 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
September 14, 2006 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink