Whether or not you agree with ANWAR drilling, I support the rights of Democratic legislators to use the filibuster to block this legistlation. I find the cries of foul and populist appeals of the right ("just because a minority of senators...") very disturbing.

This is precisely what the Senate is meant to do in the system of checks and balances - kill legistlation that is not extremely popular or well reasoned. The last thing the Senate should do is rubber stamp something that a single committee negotiated with the House.

If drilling for oil in ANWAR can't get 60 votes, then it just can't get 60 votes.

-Wes Wagner NW Meridian

You forgot to mention that more Democrats than Republicans crossed the aisle and voted for opening ANWR: Akaka (HI), Nelson (NE), Inouye (HI), and Landrieu (LA). Such bipartisanship.

Wow, HI? Normally a very environmentally concerned and sensitive state. Does anyone have any insights on their motivations?

They're both very dependent upon federal dollars and have few votes to spread about in Congress, so the politicians in those two states have a long history of dealing together in DC.

Landrieu voted in favor of this bill and ANWR because money from ANWR was being earmarked for Katrina relief.

She won a tight race in her last election. Most Americans do not understand how Congress puts together bills, nor the politics involved. Imagine what she would have had to say in her next election. "Yes, I voted against Katrina Relief." Caught between a rock and a hard place...

It's not like drilling in ANWR is being rammed down the throats of the Alaskans. It's their state and they overwhelmingly want it, including the tribe that calls that icy terrain home. Where do the opponents of drilling in ANWR get off telling Alaskans what's good for them, so they can sit back and enjoy their self-righteous environmental purity?

It's not just about environmental policy in Alaska. It is MUCH bigger than that. It is about lessening out dependance on OIL, a comodity that will only last 20-40 years at the most; also a comodity that we will be competiting with China directly with in the coming years. Guess, what? In competition with China for oil.. we LOSE.

So, this is about spending money in alternative sources of energy and research; something that Republicans have loathed to do.

It is interesting that Bill uses what "Alaskans" want over the "nation", yet minority groups all over our country have been denied rights because of a majority. Is that fair? Republicans like to talk about morality, yet even their morality is not "absolute", but quite relative.

Here's a contrarian thought to consider: If oil is a finite resource, and I believe it is, shouldn't we be thinking strategically and increasing our consumption of foreign oil? Doesn't it make sense to use foreign oil now, and save our domestic oil for when it becomes increasingly scarce? That's the best argument for not drilling in ANWR now, but nobody's making it.

I think that it is a poor arguement to increase consumption of oil now, while we have it. Dependance on foreign oil has caused more problems politically. We have choosen to keep dictators in power or overthrow democratic governments that would not sell us oil cheap enough. We labeled them "Communinist".

Increasing consumption of foreign oil, just to take it all before someone else gets it is sort of like a child wanting to get all the ice cream before it is gone. Why do we have to behave like children?

The fact is that Republicans and Conservatives have denied American the opportunity to invest in new energy alternatives. We have been left behind by other nations in "green" technologies. Green technologies are the wave of the future. Investing in these newer technologies takes more than allowing the market to do it, or waiting for oil to become too expensive. It takes tax incentives and regulations to encourage companies to change to become more competitive.

Car manufacturers claim that they are only giving the public what they want with SUVs, but there is a disconnect between marketing and the desires of the public. Good marketing creates desire, which creates a market for goods. If Americans see enough commericials about how SUVs are macho, tough, "American" and safer, then they are more likely to buy these gas hogs. Meanwhile, hybrids have taken off and American automakers are left in the dust. No tax incentives... no national emission standards and no strong regulations for minimum gas mileage.

Conservative politicians say that America is great, but how great are we when we are being left behind the environmental curve?

Innovation will be the only thing that saves America. It means thinking outside of the box. It means investing in Green technologies, creating new jobs and exporting these green technologies to other countries, rather than slowly importing them. We have the ability to turn this around, but this current administration and the Republicans in Congress seem more stubborn and willing to grasp oil as the main source of our energy. We can do much better than this.

Living Earth Gatherings is bringing Richard Heinberg to Portland in January to explore the challenges and opportunities we face in the choice to bunker down or “powerdown.” Author of Powerdown: Options and Actions for a Post-Carbon World, and a highly regarded expert on the implications of the “end of oil”, Richard will offer an evening presentation, "Peak Oil: The Challenge and Opportunity of Petroleum's Waning Days," and a day-long workshop, “Peak Oil: Defining Local and Global Responses,” with Living Earth.

register here

Peak Oil: The Challenge and Opportunity of Petroleum's Waning Days Richard Heinberg's Portland Presentation Richard Heinberg, January 20, 2006, 7:30 pm First Unitarian Church, 1011 SW 12th at Main, Portland

$10.00 in advance $12.00 at event

Peak Oil: Defining Local and Global Responses Richard Heinberg's Portland Workshop

<hr/>