Statement of Congressman John D. Dingell, Ranking Member
Committee on Energy and Commerce

FLOOR DEBATE ON H.R. 6,
THE "ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005"

April 20, 2005

With gasoline, heating oil, and natural gas prices at all time highs, and crude oil supplies more precarious than ever, our country needs a solid energy policy. What our country does not need is for Congress to instead pass a flawed energy bill that will harm the environment, hurt consumers, and cost the taxpayers a bundle.

Democrats have been in favor of working toward balanced, sensible legislation starting with a clean slate and in a bipartisan fashion. The Republican leadership instead chose to push an outdated energy bill which had its origins in the secret Cheney Energy Task Force and was negotiated in secret conference meetings that excluded Democrats. The Administration’s own Energy Information Administration analyzed that old bill saying, “changes to production, consumption, imports, and prices are negligible.” It even found that gasoline prices under the bill would increase more than if the bill were not enacted.

While the bill will do little to improve our energy independence, it is far from benign. Despite Democratic efforts to overturn the anti-environmental provisions in the bill, it weakens laws such as the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Leaking Underground Storage Tank program that protect the environment and the public health. The bill also changes hydroelectric power policies by undercutting safeguards for dam relicensing. By giving power producers more rights than states, tribes, and other public entities, the bill jeopardizes not only fish, but the overall health of our river systems and the recreational activities they sustain. The bill also eliminates requirements for public participation and deference to the states in decisions about the siting of electric transmission lines and natural gas facilities.

As far as consumers are concerned, it is hard to imagine a better case for increasing consumer protections than the debacle that took place in west coast electricity markets in 2000 and 2001. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has determined widespread fraud existed and there are tapes to prove it, yet this bill includes only cosmetic reforms to the law. Even worse, the bill repeals the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 that protects consumers and investors, and does nothing to ensure refunds of unjust and unreasonable overcharges. And while blackouts cost consumers $80 billion, this bill holds a sensible reliability provision hostage to its more controversial provisions, and caps the necessary spending to do the job right.

Taxpayers will also be hit hard by this bill. At this point, we do not know its total cost. Last time around it cost over $30 billion, or four times the amount requested by the Administration. In addition, the bill’s provision protecting manufacturers of MTBE from liability for contaminating water supplies means quite simply that taxpayers will bear billions of dollars in cleanup costs, while at the same time paying MTBE manufacturers $2 billion in subsidies.

I urge my colleagues to reject this bill, so we can move towards a balanced and fair energy policy.

- 30 -

(Contact: Jodi Seth, 202-225-3641)