SW Arkansas Times

House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Bruce Westerman criticized President Joe Biden's recent decision to withdraw 625 million acres of federal coastal waters from future oil and gas leasing. In a letter addressed to both President Biden and U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, Westerman described the move as jeopardizing American energy, economic, and conservation interests.

The letter states: "Your withdrawal of these areas betrays decades of progress and abandons the workers and communities relying on offshore energy development for their livelihoods. By ceding ground to OPEC, Russia, China, and other foreign adversaries, you have put American energy security and economic stability at risk for the sake of fleeting-political optics. This decision is not just a misstep--it is a willful act of sabotage against the American people and our future."

Westerman further commented on the delay in releasing the 5-Year National OCS Program: "For two years, the American people waited for the release of the 5-Year National OCS Program, only for it to become the most pathetic in history-delayed, underwhelming, and maliciously drafted." He criticized that with this withdrawal "your administration has effectively slammed the door on future development in critical regions," including areas like the Gulf of Mexico.

President Biden announced his decision on January 6th to withdraw significant federal waters along various coasts from future oil and gas leasing. The acreage withdrawn is equivalent to over 25% of U.S. land area or approximately 1.8 billion football fields.

This action affects the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas program's long-term viability—a program seen as vital for American energy independence and economic security since before technological advances such as fracking unlocked vast reserves post-2004.

Offshore energy development has historically contributed significantly to federal revenues; prior to 2004 alone, it generated $159 billion through bonuses, rentals, royalties, and in-kind oil deliveries. Over two decades following that period added another $140 billion into federal coffers.

Critics argue that this withdrawal reinforces an environmental approach detrimental to national energy needs while impacting funding sources for conservation programs like the Land and Water Conservation Fund.