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

CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 6
THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005

July 28, 2005

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report.

Largely a result of tough negotiations involving Chairman Barton, Senator Domenici, Senator Bingaman, and myself, together with the efforts of Democratic conferees in open session, this report is a major improvement over the House-passed measure. I voted against that measure in April, because it hurt consumers, taxpayers, and the environment. Now consumer protections in electricity and natural gas markets will be strengthened, taxpayers are no longer on the hook for MTBE cleanups, and the environmental risk has been reduced.

I want to commend my colleague and friend, Chairman Joe Barton. He was knowledgeable, hard-working, and fair. He kept the conference as open as could be expected as he tried to meet a very ambitious deadline. I also express my appreciation and high regard for Senator Pete Domenici and Senator Jeff Bingaman whose knowledge and experience in energy matters were critical to the quality of the product of the conference. Our collective efforts moved the bill towards the more balanced Senate position.

What does this bill do? It begins to set forth a comprehensive and balanced approach to the development and use of energy sources, rather than encumber important industries with costly mandates carrying unfortunate economic effects. This bill represents major progress on the reliability of the electrical grid, incremental progress on efficiency standards and on developing renewable energy sources, potentially very significant progress for clean coal technologies, and significant progress for energy research and development programs.

Some of my colleagues call this a “missed opportunity.” Well, my autoworker constituents will be glad that we missed an opportunity to impose harsh fuel efficiency requirements on our home-grown auto manufacturers. They already make many models that are very fuel efficient that the American people can buy right now.

 Others of my colleagues will cite the subsidies for traditional energy industries, and sometimes they are right. I tried, but failed, to reduce or eliminate many of those. But we need to encourage the development of multiple domestic sources of energy, and many of the subsidies in this bill will help us develop those sources. Are we overpaying in some of the particulars? Probably. Should this make us reject the entire incentives package that, taken as a whole, will spur significant and broad-based energy development? No.

This is not a perfect bill, but it is a solid beginning to developing an energy strategy for the 21st century. It is a balanced product that will serve the country well.

- 30 -

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