Search Our Site

Search form


Oil Drilling Stripped From Defense Spending Bill

December 21, 2005 | Environment / Take Action

Yesterday, the Senate refused to include oil drilling in a $453.5 billion defense spending bill. Senators voted 56-44 against passage. The bill, which also includes disaster relief and military funding, would have opened up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling.

This is a true victory for the ecosystem of the Refuge and the animals residing there. We at Friends of Animals thank the lawmakers and commend all people who worked quickly to oppose the troubling provision. It's now time to discuss real lifestyle changes and fresh energy policies.

Again, we thank everyone who called their senators to ask that drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge be struck from the bill.

A few people in Congress should hear from you especially. The following four people voted " yes" to the measure despite pressure from other Democrats not to do so. Especially if you live in Hawai'i, Louisiana, or Nebraska, please express your disappointment with their lack of ecological ethics to these people:

Senator Daniel Inouye D HI (202) 224-3934
Senator Daniel Akaka D HI (202) 224-6361
Senator Mary Landrieu D LA (202) 224-5824
Senator Ben Nelson D NE (202) 224-6551

Especially if you live in Rhode Island or Ohio, please thank these people for not going along with the drilling:

Senator Michael DeWine R OH (202) 224-2315
Senator Lincoln Chafee R RI (202) 224-2921

No matter where you are in the world, feel free to express your views. Because the Arctic Refuge doesn't just belong to the United States. It belongs to our global society, and most of all to the animals who are its original populace.


Lee: sorry i took so long to respond , thanks for the link. very interesting concept, not gonna fly up here, but interesting nonetheless. of course global warming is a problem and oil production adds to it. but until we start relying on alternate energy we need to get the oil from somewhere. my opinion is that if we need to have an oil field, what better place than the north slope. Pricilla stated that prudhoe was '(a hideous industrial complex)' and 'the worst example of what happens to wilderness after the oil companies intrude'. i suppose i would agree that it is a bit out of place but is it really worse than any other oil field? absolutely not. in fact it is more environmentally sound than others because of where it is. we will need the oil, its got to come from somewhere. i believe the perception that anwr will be another 'gold rush' or 'pipeline' is false. of course alaska will benefit but not nearly to the extent that most believe it will. comparatively it is not a big field.


Add new comment