The Energy Bill: Pro-Industry, Anti-Environment Posted: 08/08/05
Update 8/9/05: Yesterday, President Bush signed the regressive Energy Bill into law. The final bill repeals the vital consumer-protection law known as Public Utility Holding Company Act (PUHCA) and provides massive tax subsidies to the the mature and lucrative nuclear and fossil fuel energy industries. Meanwhile, there are no substantive measures to move our country towards energy independence and sustainability.
Among the conference committee negotiations, lawmakers agreed not to protect manufacturers of the gasoline additive methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) from defective product lawsuits. The bill also does not include language opening up drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska.
The House passed the final version of the bill on July 28 by a vote of 275-156. The Senate passed the bill by 74-26 on July 29.
Update 6/22/05: On June 22, the Senate rejected by a vote of 38-60 the McCain/Lieberman global warming amendment, which environmental groups criticized for including a provision that encourages building new nuclear reactors. However, the Senate then passed, by voice vote after a motion to table the amendment failed 44-53, a nonbinding "sense of the Senate" that states that climate change is a problem and calls for Congress to approve mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions -- but limits that won't significantly hurt the economy. While the resolution is nonbinding, environmentalists say it is a step in the right direction that the Senate has finally admitted climate change is a problem.
Public Citizen* describes the overall Senate version of the bill: "The Senate Energy Policy Act of 2005 promotes outdated, polluting technologies, lavishing profitable private companies with subsidies in a time of unprecedented federal budget deficits instead of enacting policies to move our country towards energy independence and sustainability. While the Senate version of the energy bill does not currently contain some of the House version's most controversial measures -- such as the liability waiver for producers of a pollutant called MTBE and allowing oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge -- both bills are largely based on last year's anti-consumer, anti-environment legislation that failed to gain approval from Congress."
The House voted 249-183 on April 21, 2005 to pass their version of the bill (H.R. 6). The House bill includes $8.1 billion in tax incentives for the energy industry, protection against liability for producers of the water-polluting additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), and approval to start drilling for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
- Public Citizen to Senate: Don't Follow the House's Lead on Energy Bill, 7/28/05, Public Citizen*
- Public Citizen's in-depth analysis of this year's Senate version of the Energy Policy Act.
- Public Citizen’s in-depth analysis of this year’s House version of the Energy Policy Act.
- MTBE "Compromise" Would Let Oil Companies Off the Hook, Leave Taxpayers With Much of Cleanup Tab, 7/22/05, Public Citizen*
- Seven Governors Urge President to Lead on Energy, 7/15/05, Campaign for America's Future*
- Senate Rejects Greenhouse Gas Limits, 6/23/05, The Washington Post (free subscription required)
- Nuclear Industry to Receive More Than $10 Billion in Tax Breaks and Subsidies in Senate Energy Bill, 6/22/05, Public Citizen*
- A 19th-Century Energy Policy, Frank O'Donnell, 5/25/05, TomPaine.com
- Jagged Little Drill, Cornerstone Environmental Law (NEPA) Under Fire in Energy Bill, 5/5/05, Grist Magazine
Summary of Legislation Last Congress
After three years of negotiations, a House-Senate conference committee has reached a final agreement on comprehensive energy legislation in the form of the Energy Policy Act of 2003 (H.R. 6). The bill, although it does include incentives for renewable energy sources and creates reliability standards for the national electricity grid, does little to protect the environment or make America less dependent on foreign oil. Instead, the plan, projected to cost more than $30 billion over the next ten years, continues to follow the Administration's strategy of doling out bonuses to big business by providing $23 billion in tax breaks to oil, coal, and nuclear companies and by weakening environmental and consumer protection regulations aimed at increasing the health and safety of the American people.
The House passed the energy conference report on Nov. 18, 2003 by a vote of 246-180. On Nov. 21, 2003 Senate Republicans were unable to stop a filibuster on the bill led by Senate Democrats, and the energy bill was blocked. Instead of addressing the myriad concerns facing Americans today, the House leadership scheduled a "re-vote" on June 15, 2004. By a vote of 244 to 178, the House of Representatives passed the same pro-industry, anti-environment energy bill for the second time.
The bill repeals the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 (PUHCA), a law that protects consumers by regulating the utility industry. This could lead to a rash of mergers and a concentration of ownership in the energy market, resulting in increases in utility prices and other Enron-like scenarios. After the weakening of PUHCA in 1992, the ten largest public utility companies owned one-third of the national generating capacity. In 2002, these companies owned half of it.
It weakens the Clean Air Act's pollution standards for major urban areas such as Washington, D.C., Dallas, and Atlanta, which are some of the most polluted cities in the nation. The bill also allows them to delay implementation of clean air measures already in place in other cities.
Our national security is reduced by the bill. Programs encouraging the active use of new hybrid automobile technologies are cut in favor of support for diesel engines. Additionally, more stringent automobile efficiency standards are circumvented in certain provisions of the legislation. The energy bill also funds nuclear energy without considering implications of market competitiveness and storage of waste.
The law blocks legal efforts to make oil companies pay for the cleanup of water supplies polluted by the gasoline additive MTBE. MTBE, methyl tertiary butyl-ether, is a compound that was used to decrease levels of smog-producing compounds in highly polluted areas. The provisions effectively pre-empt lawsuits in at least five states across the country.
The bill is full of provisions aimed to please special interest energy groups, such as a $1.1 billion coastal restoration project primarily aimed at helping Louisiana and a $5 million "demonstration project" designed to explore the effectiveness of a "high-energy electron scrubbing technology" in reducing polluting byproducts found in Midwestern coal.
Learn More: Moving Ideas’ Energy Section
*Denotes a Moving Ideas' member or partner |
