How They Voted

[qgo3B5n9n1i]

The White House has expressed a preference for the House bill, which could influence the outcome of the House-Senate conference. But even though President Bush has made energy policy a priority, congressional disputes have thwarted him. Saluting the Senate's bipartisan majority, Bush urged the House and Senate "to resolve their differences quickly and get a good bill to my desk before the August recess." The measure was backed by 49 Republicans, 35 Democrats and one independent. Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R., N.M.), chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, hailed the legislation as "an energy bill worthy of our times." Citing incentives for nuclear power and for energy sources such as wind and solar, Domenici said: "This is a bill that could indeed be called the clean energy act of 2005." However, the bill does not include provisions that environmentalists had sought to require reductions in carbon dioxide emissions as a means of addressing global warming. It also does not include higher gas-mileage standards for U.S.-made cars. Although Bush and some lawmakers have cited today's high gasoline prices as motivation to pass the energy bill, nothing in the legislation is expected to have any short-term effect on the cost of gas at the pump. But the Senate bill sets an ambitious goal of weaning the country from its dependence on oil and contains far more provisions than the House version to encourage the production of alternative fuels. The Senate measure contains $16 billion in tax breaks over 10 years for energy producers and consumers, double what the House bill provides. The Senate bill also would double the mandated use of corn-based ethanol, a clean-burning gasoline additive that is popular in farm states. In addition to bipartisan support for the measure from Midwestern senators, it won backing from potential presidential candidates, who may have their sights on the Iowa presidential caucuses in 2008. The legislation would require that by 2020, 10 percent of the U.S. electricity supply be produced by renewable energy sources such as wind, solar or waste products. The White House and the House have rejected such a mandate. The most contentious issue in House-Senate negotiations next month is expected to be a House provision that protects manufacturers of the gasoline additive MTBE from environmental lawsuits. The additive, which had been used as an alternative to ethanol in coastal states, has been blamed for contaminating water supplies. The lawsuit protections, which a sizable bipartisan coalition in the Senate opposes, largely were responsible for the energy bill's failure in 2003. Domenici said the House needed to work out a compromise on MTBE that could pass Senate muster. Unlike the House bill, the Senate's contains no language about drilling for oil and gas in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Environmentalists oppose the drilling provision, which the Senate has blocked in the past. This year, the drilling measure may have to be decided separately in forthcoming tax legislation. The bill contains loan guarantees for clean-coal technologies and new nuclear reactors. It provides tax breaks to consumers who buy energy-efficient appliances or fuel-saving vehicles or build homes that are energy efficient. It also calls for the federal government to establish an inventory of oil and gas resources on the Outer Continental Shelf, a provision that some senators feared would set the stage for more offshore exploration. That prompted opposition from Florida's senators, Republican Mel Martinez and Democrat Bill Nelson. "This inventory sends a message to states and oil companies that the federal moratorium on offshore drilling is meaningless," Martinez said. "This inventory provision tells the people of states like Florida that it's only a matter of time." Contact reporter James Kuhnhenn at 202-383-6018 or jkuhnhenn@krwashington.com. How They Voted Senators from the Philadelphia area voting for the bill were Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D., Del.), Thomas Carper (D., Del.), Rick Santorum (R., Pa.) and Arlen Specter (R., Pa.). Senators voting against the bill were Jon Corzine (D., N.J.) and Frank Lautenberg (D., N.J.). Highlights of the Bill Cost: $18 billion over 10 years. Tax breaks: $16 billion over 10 years, double those in the House bill and above the Bush administration's goal of $7 billion. Fuel savings: Requires the government to devise a plan to save one million barrels of oil a day by 2015. Oil and gas: Streamlines the process of oil and gas development on existing federal lease sites to bring the fuels to market sooner. Coal: Offers a 20 percent investment-tax credit for clean-coal facilities and a 20 percent investment-tax credit for coal-gasification units. Nuclear: Provides loan guarantees and tax incentives to increase production of electricity from nuclear power plants. Ethanol: Requires fuel manufacturers to use eight billion gallons of ethanol in gasoline by 2012. Renewable fuels: Requires electric utilities to obtain 10 percent of their supplies from renewable resources such as wind and solar by 2020. Provides tax incentives to expand production of energy from wind, refined coal, fuel cells, hydropower, geothermal and biomass sources. Energy efficiency: Grants tax credits to builders and consumers to encourage energy efficiency in buildings and purchases of energy-efficient appliances and cars. Offshore drilling: Requires the government to create an inventory of oil and natural-gas supplies in the Outer Continental Shelf. SOURCE: Inquirer Washington Bureau