Energy Policy Act of 2005
ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005 -- (House of Representatives - April 21, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act.
I believe every Member in this chamber agrees that our country faces a potential energy crisis if we do not act quickly to establish a new national energy policy. We need to make major investments in energy self-reliance, infrastructure, and new technologies. However, where we differ is on how best to achieve those goals. When I look at the provisions of this bill, I do not see a clear vision for America's future. Instead, I see a policy that promises more of the same and that does not end our nations' dependence on foreign oil. It astonishes me that the nation that mobilized to put an American on the moon is not leading the world in developing new, clean and renewable energy sources. Such an effort would revitalize our economy, improve our environment, and strengthen our national security. However, this mission can be successful only with the leadership of Congress and the President, and I regret that we have not pursued that goal here today.
Instead, this bill clings to the incorrect assumption that our nation can drill and dig its way to energy independence. Although transportation is the largest source of oil consumption in the nation, H.R. 6 authorizes drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge rather than making modest improvements to automobile fuel efficiency standards. Instead of investing in renewable energy sources, 93 percent of its $8.1 billion in energy production tax incentives are targeted toward gas, oil, and other non-renewable sources.
The measure also includes some very disturbing provisions that can damage the health and safety of our citizens. H.R. 6 includes a liability exemption for manufacturers of MTBE, the fuel additive that has contaminated the groundwater of communities throughout the nation, including in Pascoag, Rhode Island. It also strips states of their ability to provide for the safety of their citizens by granting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission almost unlimited authority in siting new liquefied natural gas facilities. A recent study by the Department of Energy noted a deliberate attack on a LNG tanker could result in a deadly fire reaching as far as a mile away. Nevertheless, FERC is considering an application for a LNG facility in Providence, in proximity to Interstate 95, schools, neighborhoods, and Rhode Island Hospital, the only Level trauma center in the state. A broad, bipartisan group of state public officials, including the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, Mayor of Providence, and the Congressional delegation, have expressed their united opposition to the proposal, but the provisions in this bill would place the decision solely in the hands of FERC without the consent of those elected to protect the people of Rhode Island.
Last week, right before the April 15th tax filing deadline, this Congress passed an estate tax bill that benefited only the wealthiest one-third of one percent of Americans while adding massive debt to burden future generations. Today, the day before Earth Day, we are considering an energy bill that provides massive tax breaks to the oil and gas industry instead of investing in cleaner renewable sources and energy efficiency. Again, Congress has identified a problem and responded in a fashion contrary to the long-term interests of our nation. I am deeply disappointed in this measure and urge my colleagues to vote against it so that we can refocus our efforts on an energy policy for America's future.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov