FYI, Daschle is heating up the debate on Alaskan pipe, but note Pat's quick analysis.
- Nancy

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Shortridge, Pat  
Sent:	Monday, October 22, 2001 11:32 AM
To:	Bagot, Nancy; Hartsoe, Joe
Subject:	RE: Daschle may allow ANWR vote in Senate, according to Press

If  they have 60 votes, Daschle's "consent" isn't needed.  You break the fillibuster and invoked cloture.  There's no need for any deal on the Alaska pipeline.  If anything, the Dem leadership seems to be using the Alaska pipeline as a political football to distract attention away from their refusal to allow a vote on ANWR.  If they can establish that the Alaska gas pipeline is the key to solving America's energy security needs, then it's not such a big deal to block ANWR.

It's an interesting strategy, but I don't know if it works.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Bagot, Nancy  
Sent:	Monday, October 22, 2001 10:56 AM
 
Natural Gas Intelligence
the weekly gas market newsletter 
published : October 22, 2001
Daschle Sets Conditions for ANWR Vote in Senate 
Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) has indicated that he will allow a vote on oil and natural gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) if the pro-ANWR forces in the Senate can pick up 60 votes to bring the proposal to the floor. 
Since any move to introduce an ANWR initiative assuredly will be followed by a filibuster, he said at least 60 senators would have to vote in favor of cloture to end the filibuster so that the proposal could proceed to the Senate floor for action. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) has vowed to filibuster any ANWR bill. 
Daschle's conditions for an ANWR vote came under immediate attack from Sen. Frank Murkowski (R-AK), a key ANWR proponent. He questioned "why is the Democrat leadership so afraid to give ANWR a straight up or down vote? Why do we need 60 votes to pass this?" ANWR, Murkowski added, "is certainly something that should not be filibustered." 
Daschle further tied his consent for an ANWR vote to the Senate getting behind a compromise measure to build a long-line pipeline from Alaska to the Lower 48 states. Murkowski, as well as other key Republican senators, denounced this "quid pro quo" offer, calling it "inappropriate." 
Murkowski said it hasn't been established yet if specific legislation will be needed for the Alaskan pipeline, other than to streamline the permitting process and possibly offer economic incentives to the sponsors of the project. In addition, he believes the Senate should withhold any action until the three major Alaskan producers --- ExxonMobil, Phillips and BP -- complete their study on the feasibility of constructing the pipeline, and an application is filed at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 
Nevertheless, Daschle's remarks were noteworthy because it was the first time he publicly expressed an interest in the Alaska pipeline, noted a press aide to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. "When he expresses an interest in the pipeline, you can be sure it is shooting to the top of the list" of items on the Senate agenda. 
Senate Democrats, for the most part, see "ANWR as just a big distraction," while the "Alaska pipeline is the big deal," the committee spokesman noted. Republicans, however, have expressed "some anxiety" about the pipeline issue overtaking the ANWR debate. "An Alaskan natural gas pipeline isn't going to do anything to help reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil," argued Murkowski. 
In a related development, Democratic and Republican members of the Senate Energy Committee had been expected to meet throughout last week to discuss issues to be included in comprehensive energy legislation that will be sent to Daschle for Senate action before adjournment. It wasn't known how much of a monkey wrench the anthrax scare on Capitol Hill threw into these plans, however. 
Murkowski said that he expected to have a scaled-down energy bill ready last week for introduction by the Republican leadership, but that never materialized. 
Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham came to Capitol Hill last Tuesday to help propel the Senate into action. Energy legislation "needs to occupy center stage" in the Senate now, he said, adding that it was a "high, high national priority." 
The House of Representatives "has done its job; it's time for the Senate to act," he told reporters. "This is legislation that does not need a lot of time on the floor to be finished." It is "not a highly complicated process," Abraham noted. 
Moreover, "I think it would be great if the Senate had a fair vote on ANWR," said Abraham, who was flanked by several Republican senators, including Murkowski. "I don't think there has to be much haggling" on the issue.