US energy bill receives new Senate setback

May 10, 2004
Industry lobbyists said Apr. 30 the likelihood that the US Congress can pass comprehensive energy legislation this year grows ever more remote, thanks to a series of procedural votes the Senate took that effectively rejected comprehensive energy legislation—including politically popular ethanol mandate provisions.

Industry lobbyists said Apr. 30 the likelihood that the US Congress can pass comprehensive energy legislation this year grows ever more remote, thanks to a series of procedural votes the Senate took that effectively rejected comprehensive energy legislation—including politically popular ethanol mandate provisions.

The Apr. 29 roll calls reflect an increasingly partisan atmosphere in the narrowly divided chamber, said lobbyists and congressional staff. And now there seems to be a growing consensus among energy policy stakeholders that the November congressional and presidential elections may help shut down most, if not all, legislation through fall.

Indeed, Congress may not even be able to pass a 2005 federal budget before the start of the new fiscal year Oct. 1, government and industry sources predict. Instead, lawmakers may opt to avoid debate on most domestic spending measures by passing a temporary fiscal measure under what lawmakers call a "continuing resolution."

US President George W. Bush could put political pressure on the Republican-led Congress to finish annual spending provisions by refusing to sign a continuing resolution, but most political observers see that as an unlikely scenario because the presidential election campaign will be in full swing.

As for the energy bill, White House officials have periodically—some lobbyists would even say halfheartedly— called on Congress to pass legislation, but many industry officials say that it's clear the bill is not a top legislative priority for congressional leadership or the administration.

Votes and recriminations

Facing a tough reelection battle back home, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) earlier in the week sought to attach the renewable fuels standard portion of the stalled energy bill onto an unrelated measure dealing with internet taxes pending on the Senate floor. The Apr. 28 proposal required fuel suppliers to double ethanol blending in gasoline to the 5 billion gal level in 2012. It did not include a controversial provision present in earlier versions that would have given liability protection to oxygenate producers, makers of both ethanol and methyl tertiary butyl ether.

Almost immediately after Daschle's surprise announcement, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Pete Domenici (R-NM) called for a separate vote to further amend the internet bill to include the nontax pieces of the latest version of the energy bill considered by the Senate, S. 2095. The tax portion of the energy bill is already being considered under a separate economic stimulus bill. Both provisions failed Apr. 29, and soon after, the finger pointing abounded.

Supporters of HR 6, an earlier comprehensive energy bill conference report that unlike S. 2095 included the oxygenate safe harbor provisions, said the Senate's latest action showed that MTBE was not to blame for the impasse. "It proves the point that the MTBE safe harbor is not the factor that stands in the way of comprehensive energy legislation. Further, today's vote shows that the HR 6 conference report is still the most viable approach for making energy legislation a reality," said Frank Maisano, an industry spokesman for MTBE producers and refiners.

A spokesperson for the American Petroleum Institute, meanwhile, called on the Senate to return to HR 6, energy legislation that House Republicans strongly favor. "We urge the Senate to reconsider and send the HR 6 conference agreement to the president. The conference agreement on HR 6 is the best option for a long overdue and much needed comprehensive national energy strategy," API said.

Both Daschle and Domenici vowed to press forward this year on their respective legislation. Congressional sources said the proposals in their current form are unlikely to get out of Congress this year. Daschle, meanwhile, blamed Republican leaders for failing to pass ethanol legislation.

One solution could be to pass portions of the energy bill in which there is demonstrated agreement, urged Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), the ranking member on the Senate energy committee. Examples include endorsing the construction of an Alaskan natural gas export pipeline and strengthening federal authority over electric power transmission lines.