Yes, oil is part of a global market. However, clearly there are local and national influences on price. If it weren’t so, the price of oil would be the same everywhere, which they clearly aren’t.

And then there are severe price swings, like after Hurricane Ike, where gas prices went up because of only the fear of a lack of supply, and only in places reliant on gulf coast oil. A more diverse supply clearly would make these kinds of oil price spikes less severe, and (as has been mentioned) bring more money into the US as opposed to sending it to other countries.

So even if you dismiss the effect of drilling in Alaska on overall global oil prices, there are still benefits and no downsides. As for environmental concerns, clearly the oil companies have to jump through a lot of hoops to make sure the drilling is as safe as possible for the environment. And again, by the environmentalist logic, we should not be drilling anywhere then (which would include not importing it from other countries).

Secondly, from what I understand, in a market as inelastic as oil, even small increases in supply can have a disproportionately large impact on price. Even so, I admit that it would probably be pretty small.

With that said, I still cringe when I hear the “drill, baby, drill” slogan. I believe drilling should part of the solution, along with many other energy initiatives. The ironic thing is that, based on what they are saying beyond the slogans, the republican plan is actually more comprehensive than the democratic plan, since they support everything the democrats do, plus more oil and nuclear. However, this point is muted since they insist on advertising themselves with “drill, baby, drill”.

As for the 68 million acres issue, do you really believe that every acre of land has the same amount of oil? The oil companies buy land to explore on. Some has oil on it, some doesn’t. Why should the oil companies have to drill on non-productive land before we give them access to productive land? Even if the 68 million acres does have some oil, it needs to exist in a high concentration to be profitable.

The oil companies control 68 million acres of land under federal leases right this moment for drilling; this does not include the land they are actively drilling.

Those 68 million acres have not resulted in one job and they have not reduced oil prices by one cent. All they do is help the oil companies bottom line as an asset.

I don’t even object to more drilling provided there are adequate controls and penalties for failures. I don’t mind the oil companies making a reasonable profit, and for the most part, I think complaints of gouging are overdone.

But I don’t like being lied to about something that is clearly an election year smokescreen.

This is a bogus issue trumpeted by the McCain campaign because they’ve got nothing else.

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2008/looking_for_oil.html