You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Democrats Attack Bill to Boost Refineries
2005-10-09
A new Republican-crafted energy bill, prompted by the hurricane devastation and high fuel prices, came under sharp attack Friday from Democrats who called it a sop to rich oil companies that would do little to curb gasoline or natural gas costs, while hurting the environment. Supporters argue the measure is needed to spur construction of new refineries. The House was expected to vote on it later in the day. In an attempt to ease approval of the bill, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, removed a particularly contentious provision Friday that would have implemented clean air regulation changes long sought by the Bush administration. It would have allowed not only refineries, but also coal-burning power plants and other industries to expand and make changes without adding pollution controls even if emissions increase.

Still, Democrats and a few Republicans lambasted the legislation as debate opened on the House floor. It does nothing to curb oil use by requiring more fuel efficient cars or promoting alternative energy sources, said Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass. He called it "a leave-no-oilman-behind bill."

Attempts to add requirements that automakers increase vehicle fuel economy and a measure aimed at producing more natural gas were thwarted by GOP leaders who strictly limited the ability by lawmakers to amend the bill. "Natural gas is an issue this (Congress) needs to deal with," said Rep. John Peterson, R-Pa., who was prevented under House rules for the bill from offering a proposal that would have opened offshore natural gas resources to drilling.

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita shut down more than a dozen refineries and disrupted natural gas supplies. Gasoline prices soared and huge increases in heating bills are expected this winter for users of both gas and fuel oil. Barton says vulnerabilities in the fuel supply system exposed by the hurricanes show that the country needs to build more refineries, especially away from the Gulf Coast region. No refineries have been built in the United States since 1976 as the industry has consolidated to fewer, but larger facilities.

The GOP legislation also would limit to six the different blends of gasoline and diesel fuel that refiners would be required to produce, reversing a trend of using so-called "boutique" fuels to satisfy clean air demands. And it would give the federal government greater say in siting a refinery and pipeline. It also calls on the president to designate military bases or other federal property where a refinery might be built. "The bill weakens state and federal environmental standards ... and gives a break to wealthy oil companies while doing little or nothing to affect oil prices," Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., said in a letter Thursday to colleagues. With prices soaring, "oil companies now have all the profits and incentives they need to build new refineries" without government help, he maintained.
Posted by:Fred

#7  "Let MTBE manufacturers off the hook"

For producing a chemical additive DEMANDED by several legislatures, you mean?
Posted by: mojo   2005-10-09 23:03  

#6  Don't forget the Halibuton Earthquake and Tsuami Generation Division (HE&TGD) and Haliburton Hurricane generation Division comspired in a secret meeting on that secret moonbase (you know.... the one where experiments are conducted on baby ducks and puppies... not to mention the desecration and dishonor to Allan (the moon god)) to cause the current energy crisis...

And now the HE&TGD is at it again in pakistsan trying to dusrupt the oil supply....

/we-can-have-fun-with-this....
Posted by: CrazyFool   2005-10-09 12:28  

#5  Hey, we could start a rumor on DU that "other Federal property" means the National Parks.

hee hee,

Republican-crafted energy bill Friday [bill passed 212-210] has a secret provision for federal land to be used, encouraging construction of new refineries even in
Nationl Park land.


This clause was added at the behest of Vice President
Dick Cheney

to fullfil a promise made in secret meetings five years ago with the energy industry at the White House.

Environmentalist have sought The draft from those meetings for years now, but have been blocked by
Presidential Privilege

. This bill fullfils items from the energy industry ‘wish list’ at those secret meetings in 2001.

For example, their bill would let MTBE manufacturers off the hook, open the door to exploitation of coastal resources, weaken clean air protections, and give billions of taxpayer dollars to energy companies. In fact, the Republican leadership in Congress tripled - to more than $23 billion - the tax breaks that President Bush originally asked for to the coal, nuclear, oil and gas industries.
Their bill continues the outrageous $100,000 tax deduction for so-called small businesses that buy SUVs - even Hummers!


/Ima tempted.
Posted by: Red Dog   2005-10-09 12:09  

#4  'They really need to build some in California, since that's a major user.'

actually already a major producer...majority used in state is produced locally....try going to carson ca and taking a whiff... some of those very liberal eastern regions need to beef up
Posted by: Whaiger Threating3380   2005-10-09 11:47  

#3  Think I'll start a new slogan.

NNN

Nukes
Needed
Now

Non-patent pending, use as desired.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2005-10-09 11:05  

#2  then they will pay at the ballot box for obstructing refineries, anwr, and drilling
Posted by: Frank G   2005-10-09 10:44  

#1  Mostly good. I'm glad that they tried to prevent spurious amdendments. Reducing the number of brands will greatly reduce the volatility, since it will be legal to ship excess gas in city A to city B which has a shortage. That has been a felony.

I'm not sure about building them on "Federal Property." That probably means the West. Hey, we could start a rumor on DU that "other Federal property" means the National Parks.

They really need to build some in California, since that's a major user.

Of course, it will die in the Senate, or be amended into something worse than doing nothing.
Posted by: Jackal   2005-10-09 00:41  

00:00