So now I am confused by your comments...

You admit there is a refinery issue but instead want to drill in more places even though there is no capacity to refine more oil anyway??

Then why are you getting upset with Congress for not opening up more places to drill? You should be clamoring for more refineries first and then we can discuss drilling off the coast of florida and in ANWR...

When discussing use it or lose it, I think it is important to point out when opening more places to drill for oil the same oil companies who are not using the 75% of the land leases they have now are the companies who will be getting these contracts.

It is hard to justify giving these companies more contracts when there is a 75% chance that they are just going to sit on the land they way they have with everything else. I would be much more supportive of drilling if the oil companies were using every bit of land they could at the moment and need more places to get oil. However, they are only using 25% of those leases. To me the idea of pushing to open more places to drill is just a way for big oil companies to grab up more leases and then do nothing with them...

I ask you, if we did open up drilling to ANWR and off the coast of florida and the places you want and then the oil companies were not drilling there and just stilling on the leases would you make them use them? I am assuming there would be an outcry from the American public if we went through all this fighting over where to drill for nothing.
This is why I supported the idea of use it or lose and will continue to support ideas like and not any expansion of drilling.

I respect your dialog and opinion however will disagree regarding alternative energy unless you were a member of the energy providers profession during the faux energy crisis of the time period to which I referred; I was.

Alternative energy remains elusive and wind energy a pipe dream. It is better than before in some applications, however it cannot be used for the base load demand of even a minor utility company like T.E.P.

Re: use it or loose it. Is it the role of government to dictate to private property owners what they elect to do with their lands? Sounds a bit Soviet when you tell it. That didn't work and this won't either.

Drilling has been a political issue for over 40 years now - NIMBYs always shoot it down. (Not in My Back Yard) Cuba and their pals Russia are certainly drilling in the Carib, while the retired East Coast liberals whine about drilling offshore in Florida.

That's the problem. Like Ted Kennedy who supports wind power generation but not in his back yard.

The bill passed was legislative slight of hand and should have never seen the light of day. Alas now members of the House can go home and tell the peeps they "solved the energy problem"

yeah right.

Mitchel and Giffords are lauding their legislative illusion.

First off, alternative energy was the big idea 30 years ago, and look where it is today. In Arizona via the Residential Energy Standards you are already subsidizing alternative energy. Do you know anything about the RES? I'll bet no.

As for the "more drilling" issue, look again closely at the legislation wording before you so eagerly praise Mitchel and Giffords. They deserve nothing for this legislative illusion.

From 1977 until 1983 Congress passed all manner of alternative energy legislation, called for increased drilling, ballyhooed the evil big oil companies.

Nothing has changed. Both the Democrats and the Republicans have had 30 years to actually DO something, but listening to Giffords sing of solar its like taking a step into the Way-Back Machine.

Giffords, solar isn't the answer. You can't even get solar water heaters on the roofs of the new houses in Tucson! So get off it. We want real solutions, not the same old crap.