That pesky energy bill..

[G_j]

http://tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9922

Energy Unplugged  

Amanda Griscom is a columnist for Grist Magazine. Her articles on energy, technology and the environment have appeared in publications ranging from Rolling Stone to The New York Times Magazine.


Oh, the irony. The same week Fortune magazine released a special "Climate Collapse" issue warning its double-starched readers of "growing evidence" that "abrupt climate change may well occur in the not-too-distant future," Republican leaders in the U.S. Senate have been attempting yet again to push through a controversial energy bill that would only intensify the threat.

In late January, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) announced that he would be "working closely with House leadership to see what steps we can take to get the last few votes we need for final passage." Soaring gasoline and home-heating costs as well as threats of blackouts due to a deep freeze in the Northeast have fueled Domenici's argument that it's time to pass the bill and step up energy production.

But worries about the federal deficit have changed the budgetary climate, so to speak, and could foul up his plan. The energy bill originally proposed by the White House would have cost $18 billion, but after Domenici larded it up with additional tax incentives and subsidies in an effort to buy as many votes as possible, the cost expanded to $31 billion. "There have been growing nationwide concerns about America's ballooning deficit, intensified by the primaries," said Bill Wicker, Democratic spokesperson for the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, "and you can bet Karl Rove is putting pressure on senators not to make that add fuel to the fire."

Discontent on this front is so pronounced that one senator who formerly backed the energy bill, John Ensign (R-Nev.), recently rescinded his support on the grounds that the legislation was loaded with too much fat. That puts the bill three votes shy of passage—three votes that won't be easy to come by.
...moee...

[salin]

1. Just posted an lbn news item on the energy bill

in short - they have "cut out" about half (remember - the bill before the hijacked "conference committee" {where democrats were locked out and delivered a 1,000+ page completely rewritten bill'; and where lobbyists were seen day and night purportedly writing sections of the bill while dems were locked out - making paid industry lobbyists rather than elected congressfolks the ones writing the nations law} the bill cost 19billion. During the fill it up with additional pork ( a) to get votes from waivering senators; and b) to give extra $ gifts to the companies for whom the lobbyists writing parts of the bill worked) - and it suddenly had a 31billion price tag.

Reportedly they are cutting it back to about 15 billion.

They were trying to push it into the Highway bill - but it appears that those trying to get the highway bill don't want it (is it now seen as a 'poison pill'? Or are they protecting bush's fundraising ability since he has threatened to veto the highway bill in a symbolic "look at me I am cutting spending" move - and if the energy bill is in it he vetoes the very gifts he must deliver to demonstrate WHY these interests should give him so much money?)

Reports around the slimmed down version are varied... they took out the provision to block suits and damage against MTBEs (gaining some senate votes) - which is garnerning ire from the right in the House who see this as a negative for all of their 'tort reform' efforts. So the cheerleaders are proclaiming it saved and ready to go, while the detractors are calling it dead in the water.

Quite a spectacle.

edit - to add lbn thread link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=357821

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. Kicking this pesky post back up