|
I commend Senators Domenici and Bingaman for their efforts in securing an energy bill that retains many features important to the Senate. Had I been present for the final vote on the Senate bill one month ago, a vote I missed because of the passing of my mother, I would have voted “yes” because I believed that the Senate bill took positive early steps towards development of a comprehensive energy policy, including an important initiative for renewable energy development.
I consulted urgently with Senator Bingaman during the House-Senate Conference on an issue that was put before the Conferees by the House that would have undermined the Clean Air Act and worsened air pollution in Connecticut and a number of other states. Senator Bingaman was able to keep that proposal out of the Conference Report and I thank him for that. I learned, through that bit of first-hand experience, just how hard both Senator Domenici and Senator Bingaman worked to keep faith with the Senate in producing a Conference Report that reflected some of the Senate’s chief concerns. For that I believe we owe them both a debt of gratitude.
Senators Bingaman and Domenici are to be commended for recognizing the deep concerns that public officials across New England have about the LICAP proposal and for including a Sense of the Congress Resolution in the bill directing FERC to reevaluate this proposal in light of their concerns. I note that the Sense of the Congress Resolution specifically draws to FERC’s attention the objections of all six of New England’s governors – both Democrats and Republicans. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that two letters, from those governors to the Chairman of FERC expressing their objections to LICAP, be inserted in the record following my remarks. Mr. President, I cannot emphasize enough the need for FERC to reconsider this deeply flawed proposal – a proposal that would cost New England ratepayers more than $12 billion over the next five years. The governors rightly argue that there much more cost effective alternatives to achieving the goal of ensuring our region of the country has adequate electricity that FERC should consider. And, I am pleased that conference report directs FERC to address the governors' objections and recommendations.
While I am disappointed with many of the changes made in the final version of the bill emerging from Conference, and feel that we are still far from developing the bold national energy policy we so urgently need, I am voting “yes” today because this bill at least starts the process of changing the status quo.
Still, it is my strong hope that having addressed issues of conventional energy supply through this legislation, we will turn, in the very near future, our urgent attention to the most pressing issues - the clear and inextricable linkage between energy supply and national security, the resulting urgent need for aggressive development of a portfolio of alternative and renewable fuels and conservation strategies, and the need to take comprehensive steps to set mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions. Solving these problems – and soon – is a responsibility that we have to today’s public as well as our children and grandchildren, an obligation that we will not have fulfilled when this legislation passes. When this bill becomes law, new energy efficiency standards for appliances will be put into place and businesses, homeowners and consumers will see a range of new incentives to invest in and adopt in their homes, factories and automobiles, clean technologies, such as fuel cells, solar energy, alternative fuel vehicles and hybrids. All this will be done without forcing the Senate and the States to accept a number of provisions that would have done damage to the environment and to the treasuries of state and local governments contending with groundwater contamination from MTBE. Finally, the bill offers some hope that we will get at least a little but further in developing some of the technologies that can help combat climate change. Again, it includes a Sense of the Congress resolution regarding LICAP, an issue now important to the State of Connecticut but potentially important to us all. There is also good news to be found in what this bill does not do. It does not include provisions for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It avoids rollbacks to the Clean Air Act, rollbacks harmful to not just the Northeast, but to all who live and work in areas downwind of pollution sources.
Despite these positives, I am disappointed by the missed opportunities for setting a bold forward-looking 21st century energy policy. Opportunities to establish a renewable portfolio standard. Opportunities to protect the Outer Continental Shelf fully from potential exploration and drilling. Opportunities to develop clear steps to reduce our dependence on oil. Opportunities to protect our drinking water from possible contamination by toxic hydraulic fracturing fluids. Opportunities to take our first real steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
I urge my colleagues to consider this just a beginning, and to continue in earnest our work to reduce the dependence on oil that is so undermining of our national and economic security, to develop alternative and renewable energy sources as well as conservation techniques, and to address the problem of climate change with mandatory steps that are so clearly required, as clearly expressed in the Sense of the Senate resolution passed by this body last month.
-30-
|
