|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Elections & Legislation |
|
The Word "Chaos" Cannot Do Justice To The Omnibus Energy Bill |
Current rating: 0 |
by Ralph Nader
(No verified email address) |
15 Nov 2003
|
|
A giant barrel o' pork from Congress to subsidize energy sector campaign contributors, while leaving the public interst in the dark |
The word "chaos" cannot do justice to the omnibus energy legislation properly mired in something called the House- Senate conference. Inside tyranny by the Republicans and the outside full nelson grip on Congress by the oil, gas and coal corporations are driving the Democrats to think about Filibuster. And deservedly, the bill merits defeat. In fact, nobody but a few insiders even know all that is in the bill. Where are the pages containing the changes, rejections, additions and golden handshake insertions, ask the Democrats and the press. The Republicans have excluded the Democrats from many deliberations on this monster legislation, marinated in oil and driven by cash register politics.
Let's back up a bit to see what is at stake for the American people. Our economy wastes more energy than any other country- vehicles, lighting, heating, air conditioning, etc.- which is another way of saying, waste for consumers is greater sales for the energy companies- your electric, gas and oil company. So there is a conflict of interest here and the energy industry holds the trump cards of power, influence and money in Washington, D.C. On the other hand, there are all kinds of efficient technologies that are practical, working in some locales, or waiting on the shelf to be applied to production engineering. Back in the mid-seventies, energy efficiency engineers- hardheaded, practical types- were saying that the nation wastes over half its energy- for starters!
Today, the average fuel efficiency of your new vehicle is the lowest in over 20 years! GM is going backwards into the future, humming the noxious tune of the giant Hummer, with the Bushes giving owners a gigantic, first year deduction if they are in some sorts of business. Furthermore, with the CEO of BP (British Petroleum), Lord John Browne, referring to his big company as "Beyond Petroleum," selling solar energy ($300 million in sales last year) and warning about global warming, isn't it time to dredge up old solar energy technologies and new refinements as a core of future energy policy?
Now look at the omnibus energy bill's offerings. There are major but vague tax breaks for domestic oil exploration and development, as if this long pampered and subsidized industry needs more tax-payer "incentives" to make more megaprofits. The bill contains no significant increase in average fuel economy standards- a bill of rights for producing more gas guzzlers that eat into your budget and pollute the air.
A huge new taxpayer- guaranteed Alaska natural gas pipeline, owned by big companies who want you to assure they get a price immune from market forces, is also in the mix. This one is too much for natural gas companies in our southwest who recoil against a future competitors' unfair corporate welfare.
The Republicans have supported provisions that opens the Arctic refuge to drilling, but has met stiff opposition. More likely is yet another taxpayer subsidy for new atomic energy plants and more immunity for nuclear power in case of a catastrophic meltdown accident. There is more immunity for the makers of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), a gasoline additive that has polluted water supplies around the nation, as it is being phased out. A Senate-passed provision that would have made electric companies increase their use of wind, solar and other renewable fuels (the way the publicly owned SMUD electric district is doing in Sacramento, California) was dropped.
The bill still contains some modest assistance to the poor to pay heating bills (certainly the oil companies like this assured payment), a very small program to assist consumers who conserve energy by weatherizing their residences, and a little research on climate change. Significantly, the latter does not regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from power companies and vehicles which are connected to global warming, early melting of glaciers and turbulent storms. If you ask the people what they want, the answer is more clean, efficient and, where practical, renewable energy. For many years, solar energy in all forms has scored very high on public opinion polls. But for a majority of Congress and its grasping hydrocarbon and nuclear lobbyists, its more fossil fuels, uranium, your tax dollars, and environmental damage from the ground to the stratosphere.
Better to shelve the whole congealed greedy mess and start listening to the people next year. In the meantime, you all conserve wherever you can, and, if you are able, walk some more. For more information visit www.USPIRG.org, www.citizen.org,and www.ucsusa.org - it is not too late to let your Members of Congress know your opinion on the energy legislation. |
Comments
|
Stop The Secret Bush-Cheney Energy Bill |
by MoveOn.org
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
17 Nov 2003
|
This week, Congress will consider final passage of the Bush-Cheney
energy bill. The bill was developed in secret -- first drafted by a
Cheney task force whose very participant list was kept secret, even
from Congress, and now finalized by Republican Senators and House
members who literally locked Democrats out of the final negotiations.
Democrats and the public have been given just 48 hours to review the
1,000-page bill, released Saturday, before voting begins later today.
This is outrageous and simply unacceptable. The last time President
Bush forced something unknown down our throats like this, we got the
USA PATRIOT act.[1] Do we want to let him do to the environment and
our energy supply what he's already done to our constitutional rights?
In the context of recent blackouts and the war in Iraq, all of our
Senators will be under huge pressure to approve an energy bill, even
if it doesn't address the key problems, as this one doesn't - see
below for details. We've got to urge our Senators to stop this bill.
Please call your Senator(s) now, at:
Senator Richard J. Durbin
Washington, DC: 202-224-2152
Local Phone: 312-353-4952
Senator Peter G. Fitzgerald
Washington, DC: 202-224-2854
Local Phone: 312-886-3506
Make sure the staffers know you're a constituent, then urge your
Senators to:
"Please FILIBUSTER to stop the energy bill." [2]
Give some reasons why you're concerned -- such as the secrecy
surrounding the bill, or the harm it would cause, outlined below.
Please take a moment let us know you're calling, at:
http://www.moveon.org/callmade3.html?id=2127-1039338-3KvuHIVFWxSa0PHjNofN6g
Keeping a count will help us stop this bill.
The bill is littered with at least $20 billion in subsidies to the oil,
gas, coal, and nuclear industries. Although the bill is still being
analzyed as of this writing, one credible estimate puts the subsidy
figure at well over $100 billion. [3]
This bill won't solve America's urgent energy problems -- the need to
reduce our dependence on oil by shifting to renewable energy sources,
the need to make America's energy supply more reliable, and the need
to protect all of us who pay utility bills from Enron-style fraud.
Instead, it will make matters worse in most of these areas.
In recent negotiations, it's also become a vehicle for massive attacks
on clean air and clean water laws, which would risk our families'
health and pollute the environment our children will inherit. As Anna
Aurilio of U.S. PIRG put it, "The big winner is big oil. The big loser
is anyone who breathes, pays a utility bill or drinks water." [4]
Here are key excerpts from a recent story in the Washington Post [5]:
No Home Runs in Energy Bill
Little Impact Expected for Imported Oil, Pollution, Power Grid
The energy bill before Congress is a bulky tome of more than 1,000
pages, with thousands of provisions affecting every corner of the
country.
But for all its size, industry officials and environmental activists
of widely divergent viewpoints generally agree that it will have only
a modest impact on the nation's most pressing energy problems,
including its reliance on foreign energy supplies, an overburdened
electricity grid and fuels that pollute the air and may alter the
atmosphere.
For those who want to deal aggressively with the dangers of climate
change and air polluted by auto exhausts, power plants and factories,
the bill is a disappointment.
...
...conservation savings... amount to only about three months of U.S.
energy consumption between now and 2020, according to a preliminary
estimate by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.
The bill's GOP authors dropped a Senate-approved plan to require
large utilities to steadily increase their use of energy from clean,
renewable sources such as wind and solar power...
The bill does not require improvements in the fuel efficiency of cars
and trucks, the main guzzlers of gasoline made from imported oil. The
current 27.5 miles per gallon average for cars could even decrease in
the next decade because of several provisions in the bill, according
to some analysts...
...
The legislation's most far-reaching feature may be the repeal of the
1935 Public Utility Holding Company Act, which limits utility
industry mergers. The act's repeal is a top priority for the electric
power industry and the Bush administration, and if the bill passes, a
wave of mergers and acquisitions could follow...
[End of Washington Post excerpts]
Repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act is a big problem.
Trashing this vital regulation on utilities would worsen the conditions
that enabled the recent Northeast power blackout. [6]
The bill would also roll back the Clean Air Act, allowing the air we
breathe to stay polluted, in virtually any area where air pollution is
a problem. This change would lead to thousands of additional asthma
attacks, hospitalizations, and emergency room visits nationwide. [7]
And it would threaten our drinking water sources, by letting polluters
off the hook for contaminating groundwater with pollutants like MTBE,
and by lifting Safe Drinking Water Act curbs on injecting diesel fuel
and other chemicals underground during oil and gas development. [8]
These are just a few of the energy bill's worst features. For a
comprehensive list of problems, based on the latest analysis, see:
http://www.moveon.org/energy-woes.pdf
We've got to urge our Senators to reject this bill. The only way to
stop it is with a filibuster, the Senate's tactic of last resort to
stop especially dangerous proposals from becoming law.
Please call your Senator(s) now, at:
Senator Richard J. Durbin
Washington, DC: 202-224-2152
Local Phone: 312-353-4952
Senator Peter G. Fitzgerald
Washington, DC: 202-224-2854
Local Phone: 312-886-3506
Urge them to:
"Please FILIBUSTER to stop the energy bill." [2]
Please let us know you're calling, at:
http://www.moveon.org/callmade3.html?id=2127-1039338-3KvuHIVFWxSa0PHjNofN6g
Voting on this bill is expected to begin today. Please call now.
Thanks for all you do.
Sincerely,
- Carrie, Eli, James, Joan, Noah, Peter, Wes, and Zack
The MoveOn team
Monday, November 17th, 2003
P.S.: You can now see the bill at:
http://energy.senate.gov/legislation/energybill2003/energybill2003.cfm
Notes:
[1] "On October 25, 2001, 98 out of 99 voting senators hurriedly passed
the 342-page Patriot Act I - without any public debate and before most
of them had read it." http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0313/lee.php
[2] For more information on filibusters, see:
http://www.moveon.org/moveonbulletin/bulletin11.html
The New York Times has called for a filibuster on this energy bill, at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/29/opinion/29MON1.html
[3] We've posted a cost analysis by Rep. Henry Waxman's (D-CA) office:
http://www.moveon.org/energy_policy_cost_fact_sheet1.pdf
[4] As reported in the New York Times, at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/16/politics/16ENER.html?th
[5] For the full Washington Post story, see:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46456-2003Nov15.html
[6] For more on the Public Utility Holding Company Act, see:
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/renewable_energy/page.cfm?pageID=118
[7] Source: U.S. Public Interest Research Group. See:
http://www.moveon.org/energy-factsheet-pirg.pdf
[8] For details, see:
http://www.foe.org/camps/leg/current/energyfacts.html
_______________
This is a message from MoveOn.org. To unsubscribe from this list,
please visit our subscription management page at:
http://moveon.org/s?i=2127-1039338-3KvuHIVFWxSa0PHjNofN6g |
|
