Trump offshore drilling ban a ‘Hail Mary’ to swing Florida votes in his favour

U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent oil ban on offshore drilling in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina is a last-ditch effort to swing votes in his favour ahead of November elections and get some environmentalist voters to switch from his Democrat opponent Joe Biden.

The offshore oil ban, only several days old, is a complete U-turn from Trump’s previous stance on oil, offshore drilling, and any other energy-related topic.

And to make things very clear – Trump was pro-oil, or to put it more precisely – anti-environment, since the first day of his campaign and, consequently, his Presidential mandate.

Donald Trump took the oath of office as the 45th President of the United States on 20 January 2017, but by this time he already announced his Secretary of State, Rex W. Tillerson – chairman and chief executive officer of U.S. energy major ExxonMobil.

Tillerson had no episodic role in ExxonMobil since he was part of the oil giant for more than 41 years. He severed all ties with the company to comply with conflict-of-interest requirements associated with his nomination as Secretary of State in early January 2017. Tillerson was sworn in on 1 February 2017.

This, apart from his campaign-trail, gave a clear message which way Donald Trump’s presidency would be heading.

Another important role filled by, at the time President-elect, Donald Trump was the role of the new energy secretary. He appointed Texas governor Rick Perry to the position. Trump also named Scott Pruitt to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.

Immediately, environmentalists raised questions regarding these appointments as the world was looking to continue transitioning towards clean energy. The main point of contention was the fact that all three of the nominees were known to question the science behind climate change.

Tillerson wouldn’t stay Secretary of State for long as he and the President butted heads often and after just over a year Trump fired Tillerson and appointed CIA director Mike Pompeo as the new Secretary of State.

No sector of the economy received more love from Trump during his initial campaign and the beginning of his term than the producers of what he called “beautiful, clean coal”.

Almost every rally had cheers following his promises to restore coal mining to its former glory as the fossil fuel of choice for the generation of electricity. Trump also claimed during the campaign: “I alone can fix it”.

But as most things during the last four years of his Presidency, help for coal was not significant enough – regardless of Trump lifting a moratorium on federal coal leases in March 2017.

Some coal producers initially bounced back but largest coal producer Peabody’s stock dropped from $47 per share to less than $3.50.

Arch Coal is the next largest producer but it lost 60 per cent of its value during Trump’s time in office. Third and fourth producers, Cloud Peak Energy and Murray Energy are both currently in bankruptcy.

In 2017, Trump signed an executive order focused on opening more areas in the U.S. for offshore oil and gas exploration.

Former President Barack Obama in his final days in the office withdrew millions of acres in the Arctic and the Atlantic Ocean from future oil and gas activity but pro-oil and gas officials hoped the next president would be able to overturn Obama’s actions.

On April 28, 2017, President Trump issued Executive Order 13795, which aimed at revoking the 2015 and 2016 withdrawals by Obama.

Unfortunately for the oil firms Trump’s 2017 executive order overturning his predecessor’s ban of oil and gas activity in certain areas in the U.S. Arctic and canyons in the Atlantic Ocean, was deemed illegal and invalid by a federal judge in Alaska in late March 2019.

Trump even signed into law a bipartisan bill which would use royalties from offshore oil and gas drilling operations to fund maintenance of public lands, national parks, and Native American schools.

First of all, we need to talk about what happened a few days ago. Namely, Trump signed an order to extend an offshore oil drilling ban in the eastern Gulf of Mexico off Florida until 2032.

The executive order would also expand the ban to Florida’s Atlantic coast and the coasts of Georgia and South Carolina.

“It’s an order that does so much for the state of Florida. This protects your beautiful Gulf and your beautiful ocean, and it will for a long time to come“, Trump said in front of Florida’s Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse and Museum after signing the executive order while officials from the three states watched on.

The political reality in Florida is that even Republican governors opposed oil exploration off their shores, fearing it could imperil beaches and harm the tourism-dependent economy of the state.

When Trump’s administration moved to open up almost the entire offshore continental shelf for oil and gas exploration and production with the five-year National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program, it exempted Florida after then-governor Rick Scott – a Republican – pushed for exemption.

Similarly, the proposal to permit offshore drilling in protected areas of the Arctic and the Atlantic, already mentioned above, was also opposed by both Republican and Democratic governors.

At the moment, expanding drilling access to more lands and waters is unpopular across the country. In a nationwide poll last year by The Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation, more than 8 in 10 Americans said drilling in the United States should “decrease” or “stay as-is“.

Another poll of likely voters in Florida by NBC News found both Biden and Trump getting 48 per cent support in the state – even though Trump made it his official state of residence last year. So, Trump is very close to losing on home court.

This means that Trump had to make a move to please voters in Florida since the state was identified as one of the critical states which could decide the 2020 election – the others are Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Since there is almost no difference between Biden and Trump in Florida, such a ‘favour’ could win Trump the state vote.

Right from the off, the problem for Trump is that this most recent ban will probably deepen frustration in other states.

For example, spokeswoman for Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, Alena Yarmosky, said the state has been asking for a comprehensive federal offshore drilling ban for years to no avail.

“This is about protecting our environment and the critical jobs that depend on our coast, including the seafood, aerospace, and defence industries. Protecting our coastline isn’t a partisan issue — and it shouldn’t be treated as such”, Yarmosky told The Washington Post in a statement.

Like Virginia, New Jersey has sued to stop the Trump administration from approving seismic testing for offshore oil.

“The federal government’s insistence on dismantling key environmental protections impacts not just residents and businesses along New Jersey’s coastline, but across this country“, Christine Lee, spokeswoman for Governor Phil Murphy, said.

Apart from getting heat from more states fighting against offshore drilling, this ban gets Trump at odds with the oil and gas industry which was his ally during his candidacy and tenure.

Petroleum producers have eyed the eastern Gulf off Florida for years as one of the country’s best untapped offshore reservoirs. In 2006, Congress put a moratorium on oil leasing there. But that ban expires in 2022.

It also is worth noting that some Republicans earlier this month defied the Trump administration by joining Democrats in a rare bipartisan climate agreement which is focused on slashing the use hydrofluorocarbons used in air conditioning and refrigerators by 85 per cent by 2035.

This is just another indicator that Senate Republicans are beginning to side with environmentalists on questions regarding greenhouse gas, offshore drilling, etc.

Despite the Trump administration’s refusal to join a global agreement to reduce hydrofluorocarbons which has been in place since 1987 named the Montreal Protocol, a push by U.S. firms and environmentalists appears to have swayed lawmakers.

Republican Senators John Barrasso, John Neely Kennedy and Democrat Senator Thomas Carper were the three people to propose the decrease of hydrofluorocarbon use. Some of the U.S. corporations which backed this were the multinational conglomerate Honeywell and DuPont spin-off Chemours.

From day one of his campaign, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden made it clear that he was a believer in climate change and that one of his main goals was tackling environmental problems of the U.S.

He put out a strong statement earlier this year after he released his plan to spend $2 trillion over four years to significantly increase the use of clean energy in the transportation, electricity, and building sectors.

The first man to oppose this plan was Trump, who called it “the most extreme platform of any major party nominee, by far, in American history. I think it’s worse than actually Bernie’s [Sanders] platform”.

The plan outlines specific and aggressive targets, including achieving an emissions-free power sector by 2035.

When compared to Biden’s original plan, it is even more aggressive since the first plan called for spending $1.7 trillion over 10 years to achieve net-zero emissions before 2050. The new blueprint significantly increases the amount of money and accelerates the timetable.

One major element of the announcement will include charting a path to zero carbon pollution from the U.S. electricity sector by 2035. Coal and natural gas still account for more than 60 per cent of the sector.

The plan encourages the installation of “millions of new solar panels and tens of thousands of wind turbines”, but also keeping in place existing nuclear energy plants. It will also call for investing in carbon capture and storage technology for natural gas. Research funding and tax incentives for carbon-capture technology were also promised in the plan.

Earlier this month, Biden started filling out his transition team, adding staff and advisers to prepare the transition of power, should he defeat Trump in November.

The team includes a pair of key advisers who have played major roles in developing Biden’s climate change and clean energy policies.

Namely, executive director at the Center for Earth, Energy, and Democracy Cecilia Martinez and president of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Lonnie Stephenson were announced as a part of the transition team.

Martinez and Stephenson both contributed to Biden’s $2 trillion climate plan and both serve on the nominee’s Climate Engagement Advisory Council, a group focused on mobilising voters around environmental issues. Stephenson’s union was one of the first energy unions to endorse Biden during the Democratic primaries.

New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, who touted clean-energy jobs in her state during the Democratic National Convention, was also appointed as a co-chair of the team.

Other members include Representative Cedric Richmond of Louisiana, adviser Pete Buttigieg – the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and former presidential candidate and adviser Susan Rice – a former national security adviser to President Obama. The team is led by Ted Kaufman, a longtime political adviser to Biden.

The statement above could also say “You’re with the Democrats or with the Republicans” depending what your view on the environmental questions is.

In his campaign and during his Presidential tenure, Trump was pro-oil and his heel turn on the industry was immediately called out by Biden.

After Trump announced the ban in a speech, Biden immediately hit back by going to Twitter and stating: “Just months ago, Donald Trump was planning to allow oil and gas drilling off the coast of Florida.

“Now, with 56 days until the election, he conveniently says that he changed his mind. Unbelievable. You don’t have to guess where I stand: I oppose new offshore drilling”.

This content is available after accepting the cookies.

Change cookie-settings View on Twitter.

If we made a more layman’s transcription of Biden’s tweet it would probably go something like this: “Florida has to be won so Trump might as well try this”.

At every step Biden was pro-environment, Trump was not. Offshore drilling – Biden against, Trump for; coal – Biden against, Trump for.

Even with the Montreal Protocol, and the subsequent Kigali Amendment, the different outlook on the environment holds up. The Trump administration never submitted the Kigali Amendment for a Senate vote, though 17 Republican senators have asked it to do so.

Biden, as you could have predicted, said on his campaign trail that he would press for ratification of the treaty.

Trump was even against funding the restoration and protection of the Everglades in Florida, including a dike at Lake Okeechobee. Until he didn’t and gave that to Florida as well along with the offshore drilling ban – on the same day.

Just for factual accuracy, the Trump administration actually sought to eliminate that specific funding earlier in the President’s tenure.

This could get him some votes probably but it is worth pointing out that just days after Trump signed the ban, Biden got a donation from former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg worth $100 million – just to help Biden win Florida. So, the counterpunch is there – not just tweets.

Even though the largest oil companies in the world already have strategies in place for either net-zero goals or for transitioning to cleaner energy, they are probably looking at this election with special attention.

Depending on which candidate wins and, in turn, which strategy for further U.S. progress wins – that is the way oil companies will have to shift to.

Will it be a more environmentally-friendly one with less offshore drilling, less coal, and more renewables or will it be same old-same old with more fossil fuels depends on who will sit in the oval office next term.

We will all find out soon enough as, at the time of writing, it is only a bit under 48 days and 14 hours (Washington DC time) from Election Day on 3 November.