AAEA

HOME

2003

Senate Vote To End Filibuster On Energy Bill Fails

Nov 21 2003 -- The U.S. Senate refused to "Invoke Cloture," which ends a filibuster and cuts off debate, so that members could vote on the energy bill. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said there would be another cloture vote. Until then, the energy bill is dead. The vote was 58 to 40. It takes 60 votes to stop a filibuster. Deals are being offered in an effort to get at least two senators to changer their votes. Deals did not work and the conference report will be revisited in 2004.

H.R. 6 Energy Bill Conference: The Exemption That Killed The Bill

A main sticking point that caused the energy bill to fail was the MTBE liability exemption. The exemption provides protection from lawsuits for makers of the fuel additive methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE), which has been found to contaminate groundwater.

One of the main proponents of the MTBE exemption is House Majority Leader Tom Delay (R-TX). The largest domestic producer of MTBE, Lyondell Chemical Company (formerly Arco Chemical) is headquartered in Houston, Texas, part of which is represented by Delay. Valero Energy Company of San Antonio, Texas also makes MTBE. Critics charge the MTBE exemption will affect approximately 130 lawsuits filed by communities seeking damages for contamination.

A key defense of MTBE's manufacturers is that the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments passed by Congress mandated the use of oxygenates such as MTBE as additives in gasoline to reduce smog. Finally, opponents of ethanol as a replacement for MTBE agreed to support ethanol in exchange for the exemption. So eliminating the exemption to try to pass the energy bill neutralizes the ethanol deal. This equation will not change in 2004.

House Passes Energy Bill Conference Report

11-18-2003, 4:47 p.m.The House vote was 246 Yeas to 180 Nays.

Ethanol Tax Measure Stalls Energy Bill

(Nov 2003) The Energy Bill has been in limbo for weeks because of a disagreement between Senate Finance Chairman Grassley and House Ways and Means Chairman Thomas over tax breaks for ethanol. Thomas has consistently rejected Grassley's plan to reform the ethanol tax incentive program, known as the "Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC) Act of 2003, S.1548, ," which proposes to eliminate the ethanol tax credit exemption and fully fund the Highway Trust Fund.

The sticking point: If states show significant economic harm from the ethanol requirement, they can "opt out" of the bill's ethanol mandate. Because gasoline that is blended with ethanol is taxed at a lower rate, and under current law puts less into the Highway Trust Fund than normal gasoline, ethanol-using states such as California contribute less funding , and therefore receive a smaller proportion of funding back for highway projects through the Highway Trust Fund. As a result, states in theory could argue that the ethanol mandate is creating a significant economic harm, and seek an exemption, unless Grassley's VEETC is put in place to ensure the ethanol credits are not paid out of the Highway Trust Fund, but are paid out of general revenue. If enough states used the "opt out" clause, the program would also be ineffective.

Republican Senate Passes Last Year's Democrats' Energy Bill

July 31, 2003 Exasperated over delays, Senate leadership agreed to replace their 2003 energy bill (S 14) with the 2002 energy bill (HR 6). The Senate bill now has to be reconciled with the House energy bill that passed in April. Controversies will still threaten to kill the bill this year as it did in conference committee last year. For instance, the House legislation approved drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; the 2002 Senate bill did not.

Senator Wyden Anti-Nuclear Amendment Fails

June 10, 2003: The U.S. Senate today voted 50-48 to reject an amendment (S.Amdt.875) offered by Sen. Ron Wyden, Oregon Democrat to strike the nuclear loan guarantees from S. 14, the Energy Policy Act of 2003.

Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee approved S.14

comprehensive energy legislation (The Energy Policy Act of 2003) by a vote of 13-10 on April 30, 2003. Consideration now moves to the Senate Floor. Upon passage, a House/Senate conference committe will reconcile the legislation. See House passage below.

House Approves Energy Bill

The U.S. House of Representatives voted 247-175 to pass H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2003, on Friday, April 11, 2003. The energy plan increases domestic energy supplies; renews and enhances the energy delivery infrastructure; increases energy efficiency and conservation efforts; and provides energy assistance to America's most poor families (a provision making available to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) the expected $2.1 billion in revenue from ANWR). An amendment that would have required higher fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks was defeated.

Senate Energy Committee Passes Energy Bill

The Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee approved S.14, comprehensive energy legislation (The Energy Policy Act of 2003) by a vote of 13-10 on April 30, 2003. Consideration now moves to the Senate Floor. Upon passage, a House/Senate conference committe will reconcile the legislation.

AAEA Supports Energy Policy Act of 2003

AAEA supports S. 14, but opposes drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve and believes that the bill should include a significant increase in automobile fuel economy standards. Although we understand the logic of opposing much greater subsidies for production of energy compared to conservation of energy, we believe that the importance of emission free nuclear power in a global warming world, justifies the subsidies in the bill. Wind and solar power are excellent supplemental sources of electrical power and we strongly support increased subsidies for these technologies, but their total reliance on clear, windy days and back-up power limits their practicality for reliably providing electricity 24 hours per day, seven days a week. In fact, the estimated historical imbalance in subsidies of $150 billion for nuclear compared to $15 billion for solar and wind appears to be a reasonable ratio in a global warming and smog threatened world. Moreover, the nuclear subsidies are justifiable from a health standpoint alone.

AAEA supports aggressive participation of African Americans in the nuclear industry. This includes mining, milling, fuel production, plant ownership, waste shipping, operation of Yucca Mountain and reprocessing. Opportunities for an ownership stake in the revival of this industry could provide significant environmental and economic benefits for the black community. AAEA is challenging the nuclear industry and government agency to promote such participation.

Unfortunatedly, the biggest impediment to new nuclear power plant construction is the reluctance of investors to take a risk because of the great potential for delays in construction. A new report published by Standard & Poor's states that construction risks tied to delays could add untold sums to any future project. That would also increase the threats to any lender. To attract new capital, future developers will have to demonstrate that the perils no longer exist or that energy legislation could successfully mitigate them.

Currently, 103 nuclear reactors operate and have a combined generating capacity of 98,000 megawatts. That provides about 20 percent of this country's electricity. But no new nuclear power projects have been constructed in the United States since 1979, when Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania suffered a partial meltdown of the reactor's core.

The bill also authorizes $1.1 billion for the government to build a demonstration nuclear co-generation plant that would produce both electricity and hydrogen. The energy bill passed by the House authorizes neither the loan guarantees nor the co-generation project. However, like the Senate bill, it provides $1.7 billion in funding for nuclear energy research and commercial development activities. The final numbers will be settled in conference committee

America should be building new nuclear power plants now to meet the electricity and atmospheric needs of the nation. Loan guarantees and reauthorization of the Price Anderson Act, new nuclear power plant designs such as the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor combined with Yucca mountain waste disposal will hopefully help in revitalizing this valuable industry. The bill also supports Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel research and provides funding to examine the feasibility of using nuclear power plants to produce hydrogen fuel for automobiles and other purposes. The MOX program uses the nuclear material from nuclear warheads as a fuel for nuclear power plants. The value of removing this material from the terrorist marketplace in incalculable. The bill requests about a billion dollors for each of these programs.

S. 14 also repeals the Public Utility Holding Company Act (PUHCA), enacted in the early part of the 20th Century to control utility investments. It is antiquated in a deregulated utility universe. AAEA supports utility deregulation and supports repeal of PUHCA.

Back to Top