The last time Georgia Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson tried to find middle ground in an emotional policy battle before Congress, they quickly abandoned a bipartisan immigration package after getting pilloried from the right.
Now the Republicans are in the thick of a debate over oil drilling, and they're again fending off criticism from the likes of Rush Limbaugh over a compromise that would raise taxes on oil companies while paving the way for new drilling off the nation's coasts.
View Larger Map
The issue could come to a head this week as energy takes center stage on Capitol Hill and both parties maneuver to take credit for addressing $4-a-gallon gas prices.
Chambliss and Isakson are so far standing firm behind their proposal, which started with backing from a so-called "Gang of 10" and now has 20 Senate sponsors. But as the package gains bipartisan support, it also is drawing complaints from Republicans that it undercuts GOP momentum on the year's most high-profile political issue weeks before the November elections.
Limbaugh has repeatedly ridiculed the proposal on his conservative radio show, saying House Republicans are pressing for much more ambitious drilling while the Senate proposal "basically cuts (them) off at the knees."
The senators also have taken heat from congressional colleagues, including from fellow Georgia Republicans. Rep. Phil Gingrey of Marietta has said the senators are engaged in "procedural pleasantries" while Rep. Tom Price of Roswell contended their approach "doesn't make any sense to me."
Price said it is "foolhardy" to leave vast coastal areas off limits to drilling and said "tax increases on domestic oil production is counterproductive to bringing new American energy to the market."Chambliss and Isakson dismiss the criticism, arguing that voters want Congress to set aside differences and agree on something that will make a difference - even if it requires trade-offs.
"Usually if the extremes are raising cain, it means you're doing something right," said Chambliss, who spearheaded the compromise along with Sen. Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat. "We think if anything is going to get 60 votes, it's going to be our proposal."The plan would allow drilling 50 miles off the coasts of Virginia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Georgia, and the Gulf coast of Florida. It would eliminate tax breaks for the oil and gas industry to generate some $30 billion in revenue, with the money used to offset a massive new investment in alternative energy.
Republicans such as Gingrey and Price want an "all of the above" bill that would allow far more new drilling all along the East and West coasts and in restricted areas of Alaska, without the tax increases on domestic producers.
In years past, any new offshore production would have spawned a firestorm of criticism from drilling critics who argue that it could cause irreversible environmental harm and only a marginal impact on global oil prices. But with voters outraged about the price of gas, the critics appear resigned to allowing some new exploration.
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has outlined a package that is more in line with the Senate compromise than with Republican proposals.
Last year, Chambliss and Isakson acknowledged that they backed out of the bipartisan coalition on immigration in part because of a strong backlash from conservative constituents.
While there have been calls of protest on their drilling plan, they say they haven't heard anywhere near the level of concern that they had on immigration and that they won't give up on their "gang" unless the package gets altered.
"As long as nobody tries to shift the policies in the proposal, we're not going to do that," Isakson said. "We've got a solid group."(The Associated Press)
Click here for more GPB News stories about energy issues.
