US Senate starts energy bill floor debate

May 12, 2003
The US Senate may pass comprehensive energy legislation as early as late May, Republican lawmakers said May 7 on the eve of floor debate in the chamber.

Maureen Lorenzetti
Washington Editor

The US Senate may pass comprehensive energy legislation as early as late May, Republican lawmakers said May 7 on the eve of floor debate in the chamber.

That timetable could slip to early June, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Pete Domenici (R-NM) conceded. But he still is optimistic consensus can be reached well before summer.

In a floor statement formally introducing the bill, Domenici called on Democrats to forge a compromise in the narrowly divided Senate.

"I sincerely hope that this important legislation does not become wrapped up in partisan delay tactics," Domenici said. "I know there has been speculation in the media that the Democrats want to deny President Bush his energy bill. This is not President Bush's energy bill. This is not Pete Domenici's energy bill. At the moment, what you have before you is the recommendation of your Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and I am proud to bring it before you."

The House passed its own energy bill earlier this spring that loosely follows general guidelines set by the White House in a May 2001 energy strategy document.

The pending Senate bill is more similar to the House's version than what the Senate passed last year. This year, for example, the proposed Senate bill has more domestic production incentives favored by industry, such as royalty relief and streamlined permitting measures.

Democrats respond

Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), now the ranking member of the energy committee and the former chairman when the Democrats held power last year, commended Domenici on bringing energy legislation to the Senate floor. He stressed that he too supports measures designed to boost domestic energy supplies. But he warned that neither he, nor most of his Democratic colleagues, could accept the legislation in its present form because it does not do enough to promote energy efficiency.

"Energy does not need to be a partisan issue. As was demonstrated by the strong bipartisan vote we had on the Senate energy bill in the last Congress, there is much that Democrats and Republicans can agree on," Bingaman said.

"We will have an opportunity to do better now that the bill is on the floor. I look forward to the amendment process to see if some of the flaws in this bill can be remedied."

Floor schedule

Amendments were up for possible consideration at presstime last week. Congressional staff at presstime foresaw initial debate centering largely on updating reformulated gasoline (RFG) standards. The bill does not currently include a title addressing RFG, but it is widely expected that the Senate, after a day or two of debate, will adopt the RFG measure already passed by the Environment and Public Works Committee. That committee's RFG plan is similar to a previous proposal endorsed by the Senate last year. It sets a fuel ethanol mandate program with credit trading, phases down the use of methyl tertiary butyl ether, and eliminates an oxygenate standard for RFG.

From there, it is unclear what the Senate will consider next. Lawmakers do anticipate protracted debate on controversial items such as climate change, fuel efficiency standards, electricity restructuring, and Indian energy.

Near the end of floor debate, senators are expected to add to the bill an $18 billion tax measure, already approved by the Finance Committee. About $5 billion of that total is targeted to the oil and gas industry over a 10-year period.

The bill is also expected to include additional fiscal incentives and a loan guarantee program for an Alaskan natural gas pipeline to the Lower 48. What the legislation is not expected to include is a provision opening a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for leasing. The Senate this session already voted on that issue, and Domenici has said that any effort to reconsider that controversial plan would be counterproductive.

"I have not included ANWR in this bill, even though I understand there were the votes on the Energy Committee to do so, because I know the 60 votes are not here on the floor to break a filibuster," Domenici said. "I think that is a shame, but I also am not about to sacrifice a broader energy policy over that single, though important, issue. "

The ANWR issue will undoubtedly resurface if and when Congress holds a conference between the House and Senate to reconcile differences between the two measures.

Both the House and the White House want an ANWR provision; however, a slim majority of senators do not want the area open to development.

Another issue that may cause debate between Congress and the White House is the amount of the tax package. Congressional staff said the tax title could be reduced when the House and Senate reconcile the differences between their two bills to placate the White House's concerns the measures are not cost-effective. Currently the House and Senate tax measures are very similar in scope, with the exception of the Alaskan gas pipeline. The House bill does not include any tax incentives or loan guarantees; the White House also does not want to subsidize the line. But lobbyists say it would be foolish to discount the influence of the Senate Alaska delegation, especially if ANWR winds up not being in a final bill.