March 19, 2004
By Charli E. Coon
It would be nice if we could simply order up a
round of applause for the Senate for drafting a new energy
bill that trimmed $17 billion out of the $31.1 billion
legislation the two houses of Congress agreed to last year.
But one look at the new bill makes it clear:
The Senate will have to wait for its standing ovation.
The new bill may cost a lot less, but it still
includes a subsidy for ethanol, almost all of which will go to
huge agribusinesses. A $2 billion subsidy for the coal
industry remains. And the bill still includes an array of studies,
programs and grants that could and should be jettisoned, such as
$6.2 million to study ways to convert auto trips to bike trips and
$50 million for a five-year transit bus demonstration program.
In other words, as supporters of the new
legislation say, it "achieves the same goals the old bill did."
Which is precisely the point. Like its predecessor, the new bill
fails to address the key challenge, which is to provide Americans
with a secure source of affordable, reliable energy.
In fact, replacing one misguided
multibillion-dollar bill with a cheaper version only makes things
worse. Energy use will grow faster than consumption in the United
States at least through 2025. As a result, by then, we'll have to
turn to the rest of the world for 36 percent of our total energy
needs in 2025 - up from 26 percent in 2002. Are we to assume the
world will be safer then, that it will be easier to meet our energy
needs from abroad?
What's worse, look where the money goes. The
$5.4 billion increase in direct spending over the 2004-2013 period
would fund such projects as research on ultra-deep wells,
coastal restoration along the Gulf Coast and development of rural
electric projects in distressed communities in Alaska.
Then there are the generous handouts to
special interests-tax credits, tax deductions and other tweaks to
the tax code designed to keep these constituencies on board. There
is the "production tax credit" for "favored fuels," including wind
and poultry facilities. The new bill would expand this to include
all biomass, geothermal energy, solar energy, small
irrigation power, municipal solid waste, biosolids and sludge.
The new bill also would create an artificial
market for four vehicles so far rejected by the marketplace - among
them electric/gas hybrid cars, alternative-fuel vehicles
and lean-burn diesel cars. The bill would subsidize not only
these vehicles but the exotic fuels - also not accepted by the
marketplace - needed to run them. Cost: $4 billion over 10
It allocates $2 billion to encourage
energy-efficient homes and appliances; $7 billion more to subsidize
oil and gas production from marginal wells (those that produce
fewer than 15 barrels of oil per day or its equivalent); and $4.3
billion so oil and gas producers can depreciate some of their
equipment more quickly.
Some of these may be worthwhile projects.
Mismanagement of the Mississippi River by the Army Corps of
Engineers largely created the need for coastal restoration,
and no one opposes more efficient homes or appliances, but
they don't belong in this bill.
What does belong in this bill are measures
that increase the supply of affordable, secure energy. Such as:
- Access to domestic energy supplies now
off-limits, such as in the Rocky Mountains and off the coasts of
California and Florida.
- Enhanced electric reliability standards to
ensure transmission grid viability.
- Limited "backstop authority" so
the Federal Energy Regulatory Agency can issue permits
for interstate electricity lines in bottleneck areas.
- Repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company
- Reform of the convoluted federal lands
It's not simply that the emphasis of the bill
should change from rewarding lobbyists to building energy
independence. It's that the tax code should be made simpler and not
used to modify economic behavior. Let the people choose which
energy-saving devices are worthwhile through their purchases. And
let government assure that we have the energy to have the
prosperity to make those purchases.
Charli Coon is an energy and environment
analyst at The Heritage Foundation , a
Washington-based public policy research institute.
First appeared on FoxNews.com
It would be nice if we could simply order up a round of applause for the Senate for drafting a new energy bill that trimmed $17 billion out of the $31.1 billion legislation the two houses of Congress agreed to last year.
Charli E. Coon
Read More >>
Heritage's daily Morning Bell e-mail keeps you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.
The subscription is free and delivers you the latest conservative policy perspectives on the news each weekday--straight from Heritage experts.
The Morning Bell is your daily wake-up call offering a fresh, conservative analysis of the news.
More than 200,000 Americans rely on Heritage's Morning Bell to stay up to date on the policy battles that affect them.
Rush Limbaugh says "The Heritage Foundation's Morning Bell is just terrific!"
Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) says it's "a great way to start the day for any conservative who wants to get America back on track."
Sign up to start your free subscription today!
The Heritage Foundation is the nation’s most broadly supported public policy research institute, with hundreds of thousands of individual, foundation and corporate donors. Heritage, founded in February 1973, has a staff of 275 and an annual expense budget of $82.4 million.
Our mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. Read More
© 2013, The Heritage Foundation Conservative policy research since 1973