Originally published on the CGS blog on June 19, 2007.
It looks like round one goes to Nancy Pelosi in the battle over energy legislation that’s ongoing this week in the House.
In the House, the Speaker has been facing off with two of her fellow Democrats, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman, John Dingell (D-Mich) and Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va), chairman of the energy and air quality subcommittee, over energy legislation. Dingell and Boucher sought to include several measures that would have nearly eliminated any global warming benefit from the bill. These nuggets of policy brilliance included watered down fuel-economy regulations for automobiles, support for turning coal to liquids, and a proposal that would have taken away states’ power to set their own tough emissions standards…
Here’s a brief rundown on why I’m breathing a brief sigh of relief:
1. Fuel economy standards (CAFE standards) have been virtually stagnant for the past thirty years. They are a vast untapped resource for reducing our dependence on oil (note that I didn’t say ‘foreign’ oil, but just plain old oil from anywhere, not to mention the fact that the auto industry’s refusal to pursue increased efficiency has contributed to the declining competitiveness of U.S. companies in the global auto manufacturing industry. With Congress finally ready to raise the bar, it would be tragic to start lowering it again before the bill even reaches the floor.
2. Coal to Liquids: This is a very very very bad idea. Let me explain. First of all, it takes a lot of energy to turn coal into liquid fuel, so instead of tapping into a new energy source, you’re actually wasting energy. Second, we’re scrambling to find ways to put the brakes on global warming. The only way to do that is to reduce greenhouse gas pollution… burning coal in our cars would do the opposite, significantly increasing that pollution. Finally, it’s just plain expensive. If the federal budget has a few hundred million dollars extra to waste on coal to liquids, it should take them and invest them in renewable energy technologies that make sense for our own health, the health of our environment, and the health of our pocketbooks.
3. Taking away states’ power to regulate vehicle emissions. First, let’s look at why this was thrown into the bill. On emissions, the federal government has been in policy gridlock for the past several decades. So states have stepped into the vacuum and created their own policies. California in particular has an exemption that has allowed it to make groundbreaking progress in this area. And lately other states have started to follow suit. Momentum is building towards federal action, which is why opponents are taking aim at states’ power. If they can stop the states from regulating emissions, they can bring us back to gridlock.
Which is why i’m proud of Nancy Pelosi today. Despite pressure to meet her own July 4th deadline – she held firm. But this is only round one. In the memo released by Dingell and Boucher this morning, the Congressmen reserved the right to re-introduce the measures later in the year. I’ll be watching, and I hope you will be too.
