On the recordNovember 30, 2001
I appreciate the comments. I can assure the Senator from Connecticut that the Senator from Alaska intends to bring this matter up to a vote, as does my Senate colleague, Senator Stevens. The frustrating thing is we are always put in a position of having to identify with detail and rationale the reasons we believe the 1002 Area could be opened safely. Of course, we come from the State and we know something about the State and the factual information. What we have attempted to do over the years is to encourage Members to come and see for themselves so they can make a fair evaluation, because the action taken by the mass will determine what happens in our State. It seems to put us in a position where what is best for Alaska and what is best for our constituents based on what they tell us they want is somewhat overridden by the dictate of those outside the state. We happen to be the only State still under development. We came in with Hawaii, but obviously we are a State with huge resources. We have 56 million acres of wilderness in our State. I think somebody figured out how much oil there is in ANWR and the comparison of whether it is a viable supply. They did a calculation, and based on 10 billion barrels, it would amount to a supply for Connecticut for 126 1/2 years.
Source
govinfo.gov




