The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is going to move back into the crosshairs of America’s energy politics. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who will continue to chair the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, says she plans to make an early push to open it up to oil and gas exploration.
On the surface, that might seem easy with Donald Trump in the White House and Republicans in control of both chambers of Congress. But it won’t be unless all sides, including the indigenous people who live adjacent to the refuge, are open to compromise,
Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, is planning to sponsor a companion bill to Murkowski’s on the House side. He’s done it many times before. As if it’s his greatest accomplishment, he never fails to remind people how one of them passed Congress. It happened in 1995 right after Republicans captured both chambers of Congress for the first time since Dwight Eisenhower was President. The bill was later vetoed by President Bill Clinton.
The last time the House passed a bill to open ANWR was 2005 while George W. Bush occupied the White House and Republicans controlled both houses. A filibuster by senate Democrats still killed it.
These brief narratives make the Democrats sound like obstructionists. If they filibuster again to keep the lid on ANWR’’s oil, it’ll also be payback for the six years Republicans blocked almost every initiative and nomination put forth by President Obama. At least in the short term Democrats will be buoyed by the fact that Hillary Clinton bested Trump by more than a million votes.
I’m not in favor of drilling, but as we saw from the election, perception matters more in the voting booth than science and facts. Since ANWR has always been a winner-take-all sweepstakes, if it happens now, I’m worried about environmental-conscious concessions.
One such proposal that might have been environmentally beneficial was put forth by Congressman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., in 2005. In exchange for opening part of the refuge, he wanted to use the estimated $40 billion in federal leasing revenue and royalties to fund renewable energy programs. Had that happened, it might have gone a long way to giving us new technologies to slow down and mitigate the effects of climate change.
However, a compromise like that must also satisfy the Gwich’in people. Their ancestral home extends from the inland area adjacent to ANWR all the way into Canada’s Northwest Territories. They oppose developing ANWR because it’s the calving grounds of the Porcupine herd which they’re heavily dependent on for subsistence. The Gwich’in fear the network of drill rigs, pipelines and related infrastructure will disrupt the herd so much that it’ll destroy their way of life.
The other side of refuge is home to the Inupiat communities in the North Slope Borough. They support oil development in ANWR and offshore mostly because it’s funded local government and given them modern schools, hospitals, roads and utilities.
“You can be pro-development and pro-environment,” says North Slope mayor Harry K. Brower Jr. “The key will always be finding the proper balance.” That means mitigating the impacts on the land and wildlife that’s a critical part of their traditional subsistence lifestyle.
The disagreements between the Gwich’in and Inupiat reveal some interesting role reversals from the usual liberal/conservative debate.
On the one hand, the Gwich’in are anti-developers benefiting from the power of the environmental lobby. But defending their ancestral traditions is more truly a conservative value.
Meanwhile, the Inupiat are pro-oil folks who detest the outside influence from environmentalists. That may endear them with conservatives in Congress. But if it was Democrats seeking to collect taxes for infrastructure, schools and health care facilities, Republicans would call it a socialist attempt at wealth redistribution.
It’s usually Republicans who advocate for local control over government directives. So shouldn’t they let Inupiats and Gwich’in decide the fate of ANWR? If they did, could either sway the other to change their position? Is it conceivable they could reach a compromise that allows some oil development to proceed? How would such a decision be treated by the politicians, lobbyists and the general populace on the outside?
None of that matters though, because empowering locals to control their destiny is only a Republican philosophy if the likely outcome suits their national agenda. So, I’m afraid, they’ll try to open ANWR with no strings attached — and I’m hoping the Democrats will shut the door with another Senate filibuster.
• Rich Moniak is a Juneau resident and retired civil engineer with more than 25 years of experience working in the public sector.
