President Bush's action Monday in lifting the ban on offshore drilling for oil and gas had the sound of his fulfilling one more promise to the American oil industry that is his base before he leaves office.

It is a piece of irony that the ban he eliminated had been put in place by his father as president in 1990. Fortunately for Americans who oppose drilling off America's coastlines, a congressional ban on it instituted in 1982 remains in effect and is unlikely to be removed by this Congress before its end.

Some 24 states' coasts are affected by the maintenance or removal of the ban. The argument for removing it is that America should be producing every drop of oil that it can to meet growing world demand for it. Evidence supporting that argument is continuing rising gas prices, which are slaughtering the U.S. economy and forcing ordinary Americans to make very hard choices between, for example, filling the tank and paying for food and medications.

The arguments against permitting oil and gas drilling off America's coasts are both global and immediate. First, oil and gas eventually produced off America's shores will not necessarily go to Americans. The American oil companies producing it will sell it on the world market, maintaining their current stunningly high profit margins. The world oil market is composed of one big pool of oil. New American production would be pumped into that pool, which would be bought from by China, India and everyone else as well as by the United States.

The real issue is one that successive Republican and Democratic administrations have refused to address, either because they chose to put it in the "too hard" category or because they were paid off by oil company campaign contributions. That is how to reduce American demand, either through fuel economies or through replacement of fossil fuel energy by other sources, such as wind, solar or nuclear.

The other obvious argument against offshore U.S. drilling is the environmental and aesthetic issue. Oil rigs, platforms and pipelines are not lovely to gaze upon unless one is an owner or stockholder. Spills occur -- bad for birds, turtles, fish, polar bears, beachgoers and the like. On the other hand, countries otherwise not noted for environmental insensitivity such as Norway and the United Kingdom drill off their shores, so there are ways to meld the economic and the aesthetic.

However, in balance, until Mr. Bush's last months, successive American administrations and Congresses have not expanded drilling. Congress will likely maintain this ban. What will have to be watched now is the temptation on the part of Mr. Bush to start another Middle East war to push up the gas price to the point that Congress will cave in on the subject.