<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=192888919167017&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">
Monday, March 18, 2024
March 18, 2024

Linkedin Pinterest

House OKs lifting 40-year-old US ban on oil exports

By
Published:

WASHINGTON — Defying a White House veto threat, the Republican-controlled House on Friday approved a bill to lift a 40-year-old U.S. ban on crude oil exports.

The House approved the bill on a 261-159 vote. Supporters said an ongoing boom in oil and gas drilling has made the 1970s-era restrictions obsolete. Lifting the export ban would lower prices at the pump, create jobs and boost the economy, said House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

“In my view, America’s energy boom has the potential to reset the economic foundation of our economy and improve our standing around the world,” Boehner said.

Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said times have changed and that U.S. policy should embrace a new reality of energy abundance.

Friday's vote by the U.S. House of Representatives to end a decades-old ban on exporting domestic crude oil to foreign markets won't change plans for a large oil transfer terminal at the Port of Vancouver, company officials said. Vancouver Energy representatives have previously declined to speculate on the possibility of lifting the crude export ban. Vancouver Energy General Manager Jared Larrabee said Friday that the project's business case remains unchanged: It intends to accept North American crude oil, then send it other West Coast facilities. Larrabee noted that the House's vote is unlikely to become law and actually lift the ban. And the energy industry is "very divided" on the issue, he said. Vancouver Energy, a joint venture by Tesoro Corp. and Savage Cos., wants to build an oil transfer terminal capable of handling an average of 360,000 barrels of crude per day. The terminal would be the largest oil-by-rail facility in the United States. Among those voting Friday to end the oil export ban was U.S. Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Camas.

— Eric Florip

While the Obama administration “claims to support an all-of-the-above energy policy, their actions don’t match the rhetoric,” Upton said.

The White House called the bill unnecessary and argued that a decision on whether to end the ban should be made by the Commerce secretary.

Opponents said the bill would mainly benefit big oil companies.

“This bill is an unconscionable giveaway to Big Oil at the expense of American consumers,” said Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Fla.

Selling U.S. oil to foreign markets will result in higher gas prices at the pump and ultimately benefit China and other economic rivals, Castor said.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., said the bill is not needed as long as U.S. continues to import millions of barrels of oil every day.

“Every barrel exported by this bill will have to be replaced by a barrel of imported oil,” she said.

The measure now goes to the Senate, where its fate is uncertain.

Loading...
Tags