Responses to the special editorial ''Drilling down on oil ,'' @issue, June 22

Anti-drilling folks spout gibberish

The AJC editorial sets up a two-page "straw man" on oil, then shoots him down. The probability that greater domestic production of oil will not lower the price in the near term is not the point.

We have enough oil reserves —- offshore, ANWR and oil shale —- to make us independent of foreign oil. Instead of going hat in hand to Venezuela, Russia, OPEC or any other hostile source, we can be self-sufficient.

The anti-drilling people —- mainly Democrats —- gibber about oil spills in the ocean, "despoiling" Alaska and searching for alternatives other than petroleum. These objections are absurd. ANWR drilling would not affect wildlife. Even after hurricanes, oil rig spills were essentially nonexistent. When they come up with a sail that will use wind power to move my SUV, maybe they'll start to make sense.

WALTER INGE

Atlanta

No easy way out of this; we need leadership

Finally, an oil discussion that is clear, concise and eminently readable. Many kudos to the editorial staff for an outstanding summary. Now if we could only get our general population to understand where we really are in this situation, how the system works and what we can do about it.

I'm afraid too many simply don't care. With the government, oil and automobile companies all acting as enablers, we have been prime contributors to the creation of a global mess from which there is no easy way out.

It will likely take something on the scope of the Manhattan Project to develop solutions to our energy problems. I wonder if we have anyone with the statesmanship to get after it. So far, I've certainly heard little of value from our present or future leaders.

CRAIG JAMES

Newnan

Why can't U.S. oil be sold to U.S. refineries?

We are told in your special editorial that all oil used in the U.S. is bought on world markets. Thus even if we drill and find oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, there would be no price advantage for the United States; one wonders if this would also be true for oil found in the Gulf of Mexico and other U.S. waters. Why must this be so? Why can't oil found within our own borders be sold directly to U.S. refineries, hopefully at a lower price than what is available on world markets?

There must be a reason, but the editorial did not mention one. Can anyone enlighten us frustrated energy users who are having to cope with sky-high pump prices for gasoline, diesel and fuel oil?

JOHN S. WHITNEY JR.

Atlanta

Environmentalists have put us 20 years behind

Despite the array of statistics, those convenient things that bolster needed conclusions, it doesn't take an economist to easily understand the relationship the increasing price of oil has upon inflation and national security. Its effect, evident to casual observers in the cost of gasoline, is useful, painful as it may be, in that it brings public attention to years of foolish policy decisions made by our government concerning development of our vast oil resources.

We live in an oil-based economic nation in which we must have oil in huge quantities. The less we have, the more we regress into the 19th century. And of course, as its supply decreases, its cost increases. There are only two possible foreseeable results from an oil-starved condition: inflation and rationing (aka socialism).

Is it too late to undo the poor decisions concerning oil exploration in ANWR and in offshore waters? We do know that bowing to pressure from the environmentalists' lobby has robbed us of at least 20 years of energy independence and sent us into the beginning of an inflationary spiral. Further delay in at least attempting to maintain America's oil equity with the major powers could alter our premier place in a dangerous world.

JERED FLEMING

Sandy Springs

Regulation has stymied building of new refineries

The editorial was a sham. Oil refineries operate at 98 percent of capacity and have no room for error or catastrophe, as witnessed by the Katrina fallout. Also, the two primary reasons refineries haven't been built in 31 years are because environmental regulations make construction cost-prohibitive and because those same regulations prevent oil companies from drilling for more oil, which would increase production to an amount that would allow (costwise) the expensive refineries to be built.

The editorial's suggestion that the lack of new refineries is "market-based" is disingenuous at best and an outright lie at worst (considering that it is government that has made the "market" untenable).

The most astounding statement in the editorial, though, is that producing more oil in America would have little effect on U.S. gas prices. Leaving aside that a big leap in U.S. oil production means thousands more jobs for Americans instead of foreigners and that the profits would remain largely on American shores and would mean less reliance on terrorist nations, any significant jump in domestic oil production will help gas prices by helping meet growing demand. Whether that means 5 cents —- or $5 —- help at the gas pump is only a parceling of numbers that a liberal columnist at a major U.S. newspaper could make light of.

DAVID ELMORE

Roswell

Remember, Reagan quashed Synfuel

Jim Wooten (and many on the right) believe that we wouldn't be in the oil mess we're in now if Bill Clinton hadn't prevented drilling in ANWR ("No-drilling energy policy no way to get out of oil crisis," @issue, June 22). May I remind him that we also wouldn't be in this mess if Ronald Reagan hadn't eliminated, within months of his taking office, the Synfuel effort that President Carter had started as a response to the oil shock of the late '70s.

RANDY HORENSTEIN

Lawrenceville

We should try to keep more energy jobs here

It's true that opening up our coastal waters will not decrease oil prices. But it's also true that every barrel of oil produced domestically will be done with American workers, who will spend their paychecks in America, giving other Americans a paycheck. We're outraged about the outsourcing of our jobs, so why are we so eager to outsource our energy jobs?

EDWIN GLOVER

Suwanee

It's the fault of Clinton and other Democrats

If Bill Clinton had not vetoed the bill in 1995 that would have allowed us to drill in ANWR, we would now be producing a million barrels a day that we would not have to import. Add that to the amount of oil that could be produced from offshore oil wells and we might well be energy independent today. Given that scenario, it would seem that we have Bill Clinton and the Democrats in Congress to thank for the energy crisis.

JOHN CARR

McDonough

U.S. should have started drilling in '73

I must say I am getting tired of people spouting off about how drilling for oil offshore or in ANWR is pointless or useless because it will take years for the benefits to arrive. Of course, they are partly correct, because it will take a minimum of three years for newly drilled Gulf Coast oil to ease pain at the pumps by itself.

If we had begun drilling immediately when OPEC turned off the spigot in 1973, we wouldn't be stuck where we are today. But oh no, it would have taken years for that to help. Well, we're years ahead now. Too bad this country and some of its citizens can't learn from history. I guess we'll just have to repeat it.

CHRIS NEHLS

Athens

Professor's need for secrecy worrisome

Thanks to the AJC for running "Higher ed, lower bar" by "Professor X" (@issue, June 15), and for printing so many of the comments received in response (@issue, June 22).

No one mentioned that Professor X thought it advisable to seek anonymity before telling his tale. His concern that his job might be jeopardized troubles me almost as much as what he has to say about his students.

RICHARD DIGUETTE

Tucker

Health museum will end up wasting away

The AJC has been covering the proposed National Health Museum. Why do organizers think that spending $250 million for this kind of venue will attract the numbers of visitors necessary to keep it financially viable? Have any studies been commissioned to show people's level of interest in this museum? Don't think so.

This is just another boondoggle pushed by special interests that will be crying for public funding when attendance doesn't meet costs

MEREDITH K. LEWIS

Acworth

Bureaucrats are the scary ones

Well, I sure feel better. There have been times I actually questioned whether some government officials were in touch with reality. But the quote in the AJC ("New Medicare cards urged," News, June 22) eased my mind. "We don't want to scare them," said Charlene M. Frizzera, CEO of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

We seniors are living a Catch-22. We are regularly warned not to carry Social Security cards on our persons [because there is] too much danger of identify theft. Yet we must carry our Medicare cards, which contain those numbers.

Now, finally, even Social Security officials are urging that these numbers be removed and replaced. But according to the story, Medicare officials are balking because "if the government suddenly issued new Medicare cards or identification numbers, it could startle or alarm beneficiaries."

Thank God for discerning government leaders such as Frizzera, who realize this would be too frightening for us senile old codgers!

B.J. HOLT

Ellijay

Catholics growing in numbers, faith

Thank you for the article on the Eucharistic Congress ("Catholics turn out in droves for Eucharist," Metro, June 22). It was nice to see coverage of this event that brings together Catholics from all over Georgia. We are a minority religion in the South but growing in numbers. We live in difficult times, and this was a way for Catholics to strengthen our values.

There were so many families attending, and this confirms my belief that we are growing in faith. My own parish has grown from 250 families to over 900 families in just nine years. I have attended the congress in seven of the last nine years, and every year I have had my faith become stronger.

CHRISTINE KEELEY

Dallas, Ga.

Chaplain's task heartbreaking

Thank you for the well-written series on "Chaplain Turner's war" [the eight-part series that began June 22 on Page One]. It breaks my heart, but I need to read it to appreciate what the brave men and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are experiencing to defend our country and the rest of the world from terrorism. Their sacrifices are humbling.

BELINDA MASSAFRA

Marietta