Anonymous
Source: Office of Congressman Salud Carbajal
In an effort to head off last-minute efforts by the Trump Administration to expand offshore oil and gas drilling along the California coast, Rep. Carbajal joined a letter with 21 House colleagues from the California Delegation in expressing their strong opposition to any expansion of oil and gas drilling off the coast of California.
In a letter to Department of Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, co-led by Representatives Salud Carbajal (CA-24), Alan Lowenthal (CA-47), Jared Huffman (CA-2), and Mike Levin (CA-49), the Members demand the outgoing Trump Administration immediately withdraw any new oil and gas leasing off California from consideration in any future federal program.
The Members wrote, “The inevitable onshore and offshore risks associated with offshore drilling impact public health, the environment, and our climate. For these reasons, every single coastal governor along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, Republican and Democrat alike, has stood in opposition to offshore drilling. In coastal communities, where livelihoods are built around fishing, tourism, and recreation, it is critically important to guard against oil leaks or spills that could harm these ocean dependent economies and fragile marine ecosystems.”
The letter also points out that just three months ago President Trump, in response to loud outcry from coastal communities across the nation, issued a ten-year moratorium on offshore drilling in waters off Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina.
The letter highlights California’s intimate history with off shore oil drilling impacts, most notably the 1969 oil spill off the coast of Santa Barbara, California, which at the time was the largest oil spill in the United States. This tragedy killed thousands of marine mammals, fish, and birds, and oil washed up on the beaches for hundreds of miles along Central and Southern California. In the 50 years since, there have been no new oil and gas leases in California state waters and no federal leases off California for more than 35 years.
The Members also highlight that the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster just 10 years ago highlights that offshore oil drilling is no safer today than it was in 1969.
While it is unlikely that the Trump Administration would be able to formalize any new leases before the Biden Administration takes office on January 20, the Members conclude their letter by demanding Secretary Bernhardt put an immediate halt during the Trump Administration’s remaining time in office to any consideration of new oil and gas leasing off California.
Click here to read the full text of the letter.
The letter was led by Congressmen Alan Lowenthal (CA-47), Salud Carbajal (CA-24), Jared Huffman (CA-2), and Mike Levin (CA-49). In addition, the letter was cosigned by Congressmembers Mike Thompson (CA-5), Doris O. Matsui (CA-6), Ami Bera (CA-7), Jerry McNerney (CA-9), Mark DeSaulnier (CA-11), Barbara Lee (CA-13), Ro Khanna (CA-17), Anna G. Eshoo (CA-18), Jimmy Panetta (CA-20), Julia Brownley (CA-26), Adam B. Schiff (CA-28), Grace Napolitano (CA-32), Ted W. Lieu (CA-33), Jimmy Gomez (CA-34), Karen Bass (CA-37), Maxine Waters (CA-43), Nanette Diaz Barragán (CA-44), and Juan Vargas (CA-51).
Thank you!
I predict this time next year, California drivers will be paying $4.99 per gallon
Should be at least double that to properly reflect the adverse impacts.
Meanwhile, businesses are leaving or gone forever. Last time salud was in town was over a mailbox. We are dying as a community and the so called leaders don’t care.
Talk to Moscow Mitch.
The “working people” who have to commute will be paying the price. The gardners, construction workers, lyft drivers, teachers, nurses, assisted living workers …. you know, all the people the Democrats profess to “represent”… When you have no choice but to pay $5 or more for a gallon of gas , it impacts your quality of life….
Use of fossil fuels impacts the quality of *everyone’s* life.
Aren’t we the 5th biggest economy in the WORLD? What, are we going to drop down to 6th? Oh my. If we lose some businesses and people, maybe housing prices will return to some semblance of normality. Nahh. Nevah happen.
Care to put some money on that? $20 says you are wrong. Meet you back here 12/29/2021.
Were sinking faster than you can imagine. Losing businesses and people as fast as we are is a signal that its not a desirable living and working environment anymore. I’m sure housing prices will drop when interest rates go up.
This is NIMBY’ism at it’s worst. While we’re making great strides to reduce the amount of petroleum products we consume we still consume a lot of them. Instead of drilling here in California, where we have the strictest environmental standards and controls in the world, it’s drilled in some far away land where they don’t care about water quality, waste products, or environmental contamination nor paying a living wage or royalties to the impoverished local populations that are forced live near un-controlled oil extraction operations, then utilize even more petroleum resources to ship it to California/US. If you are truly “green”, want to minimize our global carbon footprint, and actually care about others in this world versus just virtue signaling from your NIMBY bubble it makes zero sense to ban local oil extraction.
I read recently that more Californians had died than moved to another state. RIP.
California’s population is 40 million. 10 or 25 or more thousands of people moving out won’t make much of a difference.
How does the outflow indicate that we’re “sinking”?! Many will be happier in their new home states, like the conservative-minded people interviewed in news stories who move to states like Idaho or Texas. I’m not sure what signal people leaving the state are giving, I just hope they’re happier where they end up.
Also, how does worries about people leaving jibe with the constant calls for people who complain about the cost of living to move where it’s more affordable?!
Research how many fortune 500 company’s left the state. Tesla and Oracle are the two latest. People move were the work is. Same is happening to New York.
The anti petroleum crowd can already feel the pan if they want to. . Head to the Mobil at
Glen Annie..
No lines to interfere with your commute to the protest.
I’m not opposed to responsible local drilling, considering it will be better regulated here and some money can stay local instead of going abroad to corrupt governments. But in the past locally, this industry has left a mess after companies go bankrupt and spilled too much. Local drilling also has very little to no relation to gas prices. Even if companies drilled to their hearts’ content in SB, we would still have the same distance from a refinery (transport costs), same taxes, and same high overhead for gas stations (real estate, higher wages). Crude oil prices are set at a national level, giving SB oil no impact on it. Literally less than a drop in the bucket in relative terms. It’s not worth the risk of permanent damage to the beautiful local ecosystem and coast, which considering your username leaves me confused.
“Muh gas prices, muh jobs.” Does anyone really believe this shtick anymore? Congrats jobs went up because now everyone needs 3 of them. Thanks Trump!!1! Muh savior
VOR your post nails it. Thanks
COASTWATCH so on point. Dems really need to run a business before they get into politics. Include minimum wage in this discussion as well – they don’t understand the impact it has on the low income population. However, they get virtue signaling points for what that is worth…
GTownie: Renters in SB on average pay more than what a mortgage would be in many other cities. Don’t get personal and angry with ignorant insults. It detracts from your arguments. Everyone is struggling, not just people with the means, background, inheritance, skills and/or bravery to take the risk and open a small business. Have you ever struggled to make rent and been on the edge of homelessness and starving? It doesn’t sound like it. Merry Christmas.
The only people I know that support California drilling are the union people working for the oil companies. They know where their bread is buttered. I would be more supportive if the companies would finally agree to pay an extraction tax like every other state in the Disunion.
GT, you are assuming all small business owners are Repubs? I doubt you can prove that. And if they voted for the Donald, they don’t have an ethical code I want to support anyway.
GT–people who use lazy jargon are worthless.
Chilling, so better to do damage elsewhere in order to protect our “beautiful local ecosystem” from the negative impacts of drilling for a resource we consume here locally? That is exactly my point, NIMBYism at at worst.
I do not approve of this game of Tit-for-Tat. Sending a letter, just in case someone else might do something. Really a waste of time. And as for drilling for gas, as long as it’s safe, what’s the fuss? If you’re really upset about it, turn in your car.
Well said A-160…..
Use of fossil fuels improves the quality of *everyone’s* life.
12:02 PM – You just don’t get it. AGW is caused by radiative forcing due to humans burning fossil fuels and adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Period. There is no argument among climate scientists about that. Only fringe elements and shills of Big Carbon maintain otherwise.
Only in a fantasy world where pumping CO2 into the atmosphere has no effect and air pollution doesn’t eat up your lungs.
DM – Some reading on the subject pitched to your level of knowledge:
https://crankyuncle.com/book/
Actually, you may not be getting it! Internal combustion engines have come a long way since the 60’s. My Honda Accord 4-cylinder has the exhaust profile of a hybrid. A Partial Zero Emission vehicle. Wonder how that happened??? Let ingenuity and hard work solve these issues. Keep the ham-fisted over-the-top solutions to a minimum. Be aware.
Hybrids are not the answer, although the oil companies and engine makers would love for you to think so. You’ve taken the bait.
Mac – as I stated, we aren’t helping matters. But it’s patently false to say we are the sole cause of global climate change. That is obviously false. There is (again OBVIOUSLY) Change happening naturally. So yes, as I said, we are making matters worse. But to say and/or insinuate we are the sole cause is idiotic. And I think you are smarter than that (even if I often see you driving by yourself with your mask on)…
DM – You’re quite wrong about a lot of things that have to do with epidemiology and climate science. You roll out the old myths that the climate change we see is “natural” – it isn’t. (myth #56):
https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-natural-cycle.htm
What’s truly idiotic is thinking that there might not be very good reasons to be driving alone with a mask on.
But, you don’t learn, so we can expect a flood of posts from you reiterating the same falsehoods, and when you’re conclusively debunked, you’ll change the topic.
You’ve heard about climate change, right? Caused by billions of people burning fossil fuels? This is why extracting more of it is a fool’s errand.
You can say that people are playing a role in our changing climate… but to cite them as the “cause” is spectacularly narcissistic!
Is it narcissistic to agree with almost 100% of scientists that say that human activities and the rapid increase in CO2 is causing climate change? And knowing that the scientists that argue against this are working for the fossil fuel industry or getting paid by their lobbyists? Think about 8,000,000,000 people and the energy they need to burn to live and recreate. That’s a lot of hot gas.
No pitmix… 100% of scientists don’t say “we are the cause” of climate change. We certainly aren’t helping matters and are perhaps even accelerating things… but we are only a part of the equation… not THE CAUSE as you seem to be alluding to. You… me… WE… simply aren’t that important!