February 11, 2015
(http://www.texaslawyer.com/id=1202717639322/Bartons-Bill-Presses-for-Allowing-Crude-Oil-Exports)
By ANgela Neville, Texas Lawyer
Plunging petroleum prices are prompting some Texans in Congress to advocate removing restrictions on crude oil exports that have been in place since the 1970s oil crisis.
Recently, U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, and a group of other lawmakers introduced H.R. 702, which takes away all restrictions on U.S. crude oil exports.
“The United States should remove all restrictions on the export of crude oil, which will provide domestic economic benefits, enhanced energy security and flexibility in foreign diplomacy,” according to the bill.
Seeking to remove export restrictions, the bill would repeal §103 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S. Code 6212).
Original co-sponsors of the legislation include Reps. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.; Jim Bridenstine, R-Okla.; John Carter, R-Texas; Steve Chabot, R-Ohio; Michael Conaway, R-Texas; Kevin Cramer, R-N.D.; Trent Franks, R-Ariz.; Bill Flores, R-Texas; Randy Neugebauer, R-Texas; Robert Pittenger, R-N.C.; Matt Salmon, R-Ariz.; and Joe Wilson, R-S.C., according to a statement on Barton’s website.
Sean Brown, communications director for Barton, said that the congressman is optimistic that the bill will become law this Congress and that it will be included in the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s comprehensive energy legislation package, known as the Architecture of Abundance.
“He and his fellow co-sponsors also continue to talk to other members and educate them on the benefits of lifting the ban on crude oil exports—like creating nearly a million jobs and lowering prices at the pump,” Brown said.
Brown said that Barton is also working with senators on a companion bill, which they plan on introducing in the Senate.
Brown talked about Barton’s response to critics, pointing to studies that he said show the benefits of lifting the export ban.
“A recent report from the Council on Foreign Relations recommends lifting the ban on all energy exports, predicting an uptick in U.S. energy investment and production as a result,” Brown said. “The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas and the Congressional Budget Office are just some of the groups that have studied the concept and believe it could also lower prices at the pump.”
Brown said that allowing domestic oil exports would also have international repercussions. He said that professors at the Bush School of Government and Public Service recently wrote that lifting the crude oil ban “would create a more shock-resistant world economy” and “reassure our allies worldwide.” Brown said this could ultimately limit the influence of so called bad actors, such as Russia and Iran.
Carlton Carroll, communications director at the American Petroleum Institute, said trade restrictions on crude oil are a relic of the 1970s and only limit U.S. growth as an energy superpower.
“Study after study shows that free trade in crude oil will mean more jobs and downward pressure on fuel costs, and could reduce the power that foreign suppliers have over our allies overseas. It’s time for policymakers to harness the economic advantages of free trade by lifting outdated and counterproductive limits on U.S. crude exports,” Carroll said.
Gina Warren, associate professor at Texas A&M University School of Law specializing in oil and gas law, said the 40-year-old ban is probably worth revisiting, at the very least, to encourage a discussion about the nation’s future energy goals.
“Environmentalists and refineries have made strange bedfellows arguing against lifting the ban. Environmentalists are concerned that lifting the ban will encourage even more fossil fuel production in a time when the U.S. should be focusing on mitigating the impacts of climate change and increasing renewable energy development,” Warren said.
According to Warren, refineries are concerned that producers will choose to export the crude oil instead of utilizing existing U.S. refineries, thereby increasing the price, decreasing domestic supply and increasing the cost of gasoline to the end consumer.
“It is unclear, however, whether the latter argument holds much weight,” she said. “The lack of refineries capable of processing sweet oil (from Texas and North Dakota) has already caused a refining bottleneck.”
Originally appeared in print as Bill Presses for Lifting Ban on Crude Oil Exports
