- Special Sections
- Public Notices
To the editor: I am in receipt of your [Sen. Richard Burr’s] letter dated Aug. 12, 2008, whereby you related to me what you are doing to help alleviate the major problem of fuel costs facing all Americans today. You indicated you cosponsored the Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008 (S.3202), which is “a more serious and comprehensive solution to our energy crisis.”
The major conditions of your proposed legislation are:
• Exploration would have to be at least 50 miles off the coast.
• Meet stringent environmental protections.
• Revenue sharing that would give 37.5 percent of royalties to the state .
• Dedicate 12.5 percent of royalties for land and water conservation efforts .
• Repeal the moratorium of oil shale production on public lands .
• Beef up enforcement and staff at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the government agency in charge of regulating and monitoring commodity trading .
• Require the CFTC to gather information on index traders and swap dealers.
My personal reaction to your proposed legislation tells me you are out of touch with reality. Think about the cost and time to build a 50-miles out facility to drill for oil, let alone the cost of piping oil 50 miles to a storage area. The coastline limit is 12 miles. Why would the state receive 50 percent of the royalties? Your proposal also increases a government agency for bigger government. Great job.
Do you really think your proposed senate bill would lower the cost of energy? This proposal sounds like some legislation that would be proposed by Sen. Reed or Kennedy and the Democrats.
Do you think this is really a comprehensive solution to our energy crisis? This is not the effort we expect from a republican senator sent to Washington to represent the interest and problem solving efforts for your constituents.