WSJ: Drilling for Dollars

[question everything]

The Wall Street Journal

Drilling for Dollars
May 24, 2005; Page A12

Lawmakers long ago gave up reading every word of the bills they pass, but maybe they should be forced to read things like the energy bill that passed the House last month, 249-183, and runs to more than 1,000 pages. Certainly as the bill moves to the Senate, somebody should look at a curious amendment called Section 2053, also known as the Domestic Offshore Energy Reinvestment Program. It's a lesson in miniature in what's gone wrong with the GOP Congress.

Section 2053 requires the Treasury to set aside a portion of the royalties the government earns from its offshore oil- and gas-drilling leases to the "Coastal Energy States" -- primarily Louisiana and Texas -- ostensibly for coastal restoration. As the bill is now written, the funds appear to be trivial: No more than $500 million over the next 10 years.

But in 2016, something happens: The formula changes radically, from $50 million a year to an annual sum equivalent to 25% of all "Continental Shelf revenues" received in 2015. The House Budget Committee estimates this to be about $1.75 billion a year, and calls it "a new permanent entitlement." No wonder Louisiana's Congressional delegation is jumping for joy: Republican Bobby Jindal expects the Bayou state alone to rake in $1 billion annually in this particular "reinvestment." Much of the rest will go to Texas, not least to coastal districts like Tom DeLay's, which includes the port of Galveston.

(snip)

And that's not all. In case you're wondering what's so magical about the date 2016, it happens to be one year beyond the Congressional Budget Office's 10-year scoring window. This legislative contrivance allows the CBO to score the provision at "no cost"; it also allows House leaders to claim they've stayed within the Bush Administration's spending guidelines.

(snip)

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB111689262629041211,00.html

[rodeodance]

1. WSJ--taking a swipe at the GOP--nice

[question everything]

2. The "benefit" of being the ruling party

controlling the purse strings.

It was very much against the Medicare agreement last year and, of course, does not like the deficit