Resolved: Allowing deep water offshore oil drilling is in the best interest of the United States.

Because I support the latter choice to redefine the law when it comes to Offshore drilling, therefore, I stand resolved: Allowing deep water offshore oil drilling is in the best interest of the United States. For further clarification I have provided some terms with definitions Allowing: to give permission to or for Best: better than all others: of the highest quality or standard or the most excellent type OIL DRILLING: Oil drilling is the process of perforating the earth's surface and rock layers to extract fossil fuels, or oil, for energy production. Oil can be found all over the world, and it is drilled in many countries. Oil is formed from the organic decay of plants and animals that existed millions of years ago. In the absence of oxygen between the earth's layers, the decaying process of this organic waste eventually lead to oil production 1. The environmental damage done by the Deepwater Horizon spill has been grossly exaggerated. According to Josiah Schmidt of the Associated Press, most of the heavy components have dispersed into the ocean sediment where it will be digested by bacteria. http://www.lewrockwell.com......... The harmful benzene has mostly evaporated into the upper atmosphere where it will have no noticeable effect. Time reports that the spill has killed less than 1% of the number of birds that died as a result of the Exxon-Valdez. http://www.time.com......... Despite the horror stories, wildlife organizations have found only three oiled marine mammal carcasses. Only about 350 acres of Louisiana marches have been damaged – paltry compared to the 150,000 that erode naturally each year. b. The economic damages have been overstated as well. Fishing areas have been reopened following NOAA's findings that fish populations are safe and uncontaminated. http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov......... The projected damage to beaches has also proven to be largely a false alarm. http://www.aipnews.com......... Projections claiming that the oil slick would creep up the east coast failed to take crucial into account crucial factors, such as the Gulf's ability to break down oil. Testing done in the "threatened" areas show an oil concentration of less than .2 parts per million -- barely above the threshold of detection. c. Government directed cleanup efforts were badly mishandled, leading to far more damage than was necessary. The Mineral Management Service (MMS), a federal regulatory body charged with overseeing safety standards and contingency plans for offshore drilling operations has an extensive 582 page report on procedures following a spill. Of course, the plan doesn't so much as *mention* protocols for a *deep-water* spill. http://www.lewrockwell.com......... The number of deep-water rigs has increased nine fold in the last twenty years, yet the number of MMS inspectors has remained the same over that time period. The Jones Act of 1920 prevented foreign oil skimming ships from working in the Gulf region. The law requires that all work ships in US waters be built in the United States and manned by American crews. http://tinyurl.com......... The law can be overridden by a Presidential waiver, however, the Obama administration has opted not to do so. With help from Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, and other countries, the cleanup could be completed in three months. Currently, it is projected to take nine. http://www.examiner.com......... d. It's tragic that eleven workers died in the Deepwater Horizon incident, however, this hardly makes the case for a ban on offshore drilling. There are far more dangerous occupations, including construction work, taxi driving, power line maintenance, farming, logging and fishing. http://www.businessinsider.com......... Needless to say, all of these jobs, like oil drilling, are extremely important and significant harm would result from their ban. Risky occupations usually offer higher pay to compensate for the danger involved. When workers take these jobs, they decide freely that the rewards outweigh the risks. If they believe the risk is unacceptable, they are not forced into these positions. All eliminating these jobs would do is destroy employment opportunities for those willing to take on risks for the opportunity of greater personal gain. 2. Drilling would actually decrease the amount of oil that seeps into the ocean. Oil naturally bubbles up from the ocean floor. Drilling helps to alleviate pressure. http://www.dailytech.com......... On average, the amount that leaks from the ocean floor exceeds the amount spilled. The amount of seepage eliminated by drilling is far greater than the amount released by the occasional spill. 3. The United States stands to benefit economically from offshore drilling. Extremely conservative estimates by the EIA show at least 18 billion barrels of technically recoverable crude in the Gulf and off the coast of California. http://www.eia.doe.gov......... At $100 per barrel, the damage done by a potential spill would have to exceed $1.8 trillion in order to make an economic case against drilling. http://www.cato.org......... The proposed six month moratorium on offshore drilling would cost in excess of $3 billion and put 12,000 workers out of a job. If the moratorium were made permanent, it would destroy upwards of 400,000 jobs. http://www.cato.org......... Remember this only would impact current drilling sites. Experts estimate that by opening up additional offshore sites, 270,000 jobs would be created. http://www.heritage.org......... In addition to this, the increased purchasing power, greater energy availability, and lowered price of oil would benefit other industries in ways too numerous to expound here. 4. If American companies don't drill off the coast, others will. Currently, there is an executive ban on drilling within 200 miles of American coastline, however, the ban only applies to American businesses. Foreign companies are free to do as they please. The Wall Street Journal reports Respool YPF SA, a Spanish company, will begin drilling exploratory wells just 60 miles south of Florida within the coming year. http://online.wsj.com.......... China and other nations are likely to follow. b. Not only would this make the US more dependent on oil from potentially hostile foreign governments, it would make the chances of another Deepwater Horizon type incident both more likely and more damaging. Chinese companies don't adhere to the same safety standards as American companies. http://www.ft.com......... Moreover, because of the United States government's weakened diplomatic position, it would be even more impotent at collecting damages in the event of a spill. On balance, the economic gains from offshore drilling far exceed the dangers. The environmental issues also strongly support my case; drilling actually reduces the amount of oil that seeps into the ocean. Modern technology makes a repeat of the Deepwater incident extremely unlikely. Moreover, even if the United States chooses not to take advantage of its natural resources, other countries will, thus depriving the US of the benefits while subjecting its citizens to even greater risks.