|
 Oil companies such as Exxon Mobil Corp and ConocoPhillips could
earn huge profits if the United States loosened economic sanctions
on Iran, allowing access to its oil and natural gas fields, some of
the world's largest and least costly to produce.
But through September, at least, U.S. energy companies have largely
opted to stand back even as Congress considers whether to further
limit new oil exports from the Islamic republic.
It is an unusual tack for an industry known for its strong Capitol
Hill presence on every issue from taxes to pollution rules to
international trade.
But this particular issue may be too hot to touch.
"You are unlikely to flip any lawmaker, but you could offend them,"
said one lobbyist familiar with sanctions issues, who spoke on
condition of anonymity to avoid being seen as speaking for clients.
He said his company had received no client requests this year to
lobby on Iran sanctions.
The oil and gas industry spent $105 million on lobbying in the first
nine months of this year, behind only the insurance and
pharmaceutical industries, according to the Center for Responsive
Politics, a Washington watchdog group. Companies in the sector, and
their employees, also donated a total of $20.5 million to candidates
in last year's elections, ranking ninth overall.
It is uncertain whether the six-month deal with Iran struck last
month in Geneva will lead to comprehensive restrictions on its
nuclear capabilities, which could bring a full rollback of
sanctions. Under the interim deal, Iran will limit uranium
enrichment in return for limited access to funds frozen by U.S. law.
The June election of moderate President Hassan Rouhani offered a
clear sign that 2013 could be the best year for relations between
Washington and Tehran since Iran's 1979 revolution.
Yet the U.S. Congress has been firm in its backing of further action
against Iran. The House of Representatives voted 400-20 in July to
choke funding to Iran's disputed nuclear program by slashing its oil
exports further than sanctions enacted in 2010.
The Senate also widely supports being tough on Iran, though
President Barack Obama has pushed it to delay introduction of its
version of the bill to give the Geneva agreement a chance.
DEAF EARS
For its part, Iran's oil ministry is hopeful a full deal could one
day spur new investment by U.S. energy companies. Oil Minister Bijan
Zanganeh this month named seven Western energy companies it wants
back to develop reservoirs if sanctions are lifted, including Exxon
and Conoco.
Exxon spokesman Alan Jeffers said that his company always looks for
development opportunities, but that current U.S. laws prevent work
in Iran.
A Conoco spokesman said his company is not engaged in business
discussions with Iran.
Both companies have not lobbied Congress this year on Iran
sanctions, records show. Neither has U.S.-based companies Chevron
Corp. or Halliburton Co.
[to top of second column] |
All four companies lobbied Congress in 2010 on the initial sanctions
bill that targeted the OPEC member's oil exports.
Conoco lobbied that year, the spokesman said, as part of a coalition
called USA Engage. The coalition was concerned about the impact of
sanctions on joint venture projects in foreign countries.
"The 2013 legislation did not appear to have this impact, and no
lobbying activity was required," the Conoco spokesman said.
The other three U.S. companies declined to comment.
Congressional aides agreed oil companies would be wasting their time
if they attempted to persuade lawmakers to turn back existing
sanctions or prevent enactment of new ones.
The effort "would likely fall on deaf ears at a minimum and at worst
create serious political repercussions" if oil companies were seen
as undermining the resolve by the countries that reached the interim
agreement with Iran, the United States, Britain, Russia, China,
France and Germany, one Democratic House aide said on condition of
anonymity.
The companies that have lobbied Congress this year have largely been
U.S. divisions of larger international oil companies, such as BP
America, part of London-based BP Plc and Shell Oil Co, the U.S. unit
of Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
BP lobbied Congress between April and September of this year on the
House Iran bill, while Shell weighed in on "general issues related
to Iran" between January and March, records show.
"It is not unusual for BP to discuss proposed new legislation with
lawmakers in order to understand its purpose and scope so that,
among other things, we can remain compliant in the event it is
enacted," said BP spokesman Scott Dean.
Shell did not respond to questions.
The American Petroleum Institute, the main oil industry trade
association, lobbied on a provision in the bill that threatened U.S.
shipping lanes, but not on the sanctions themselves, an oil industry
expert said. The trade group declined to comment.
(Additional reporting by Patricia Zengerle;
editing by Marilyn
Thompson, Martin Howell and Lisa Shumaker)
[© 2013 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2013 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
