Broad Energy Bill Passed by House

Automakers and their allies want to make sure that, in the name of reducing greenhouse gases, the EPA does not issue even more demanding fuel-efficiency regulations.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

The regulatory issue was singled out by the Bush administration yesterday. A statement of policy from the Office of Management and Budget complained that the energy bill "leaves ambiguous the role" of the EPA. The administration wants the Transportation Department, which traditionally has been more sympathetic to automakers than has the EPA, to have the final say over fuel efficiency.

Critics of the bill took aim at almost every component besides the fuel-efficiency standards. Rep. Joe L. Barton (R-Tex.) said the biofuels target would set a mandate "that can't be met." Others said the renewable-source standard would put an unfair burden on Southeastern states, which are not considered good places for the generation of wind power. Supporters of the bill said, however, that those states are good sites for solar power plants.

Some of the bill's supporters were not enthusiastic about various parts of it.

"It will come as no surprise to anyone in this body that I have some reservations -- to put it mildly -- about how this legislation was assembled. Many have been complicit in the curious process that has yielded an imperfect product," said House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Dingell (D-Mich.). "But it is probably the best product achievable."

But environmentalists and those who think that oil imports compromise U.S. national security were enthusiastic.

"Congress hasn't changed fuel-efficiency standards since the age of the eight-track tape player," said Jeremy Symons, director of the National Wildlife Federation's program on global warming. "From the point of view of solving the climate crisis and advancing the clean-energy economy, this is a big down payment on action."

For House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), passage of the bill was a hard-fought triumph that took nearly a year to secure. In addition to the broad popularity of the measure's fuel-efficiency standards, the promotion of ethanol won the legislation the allegiance of farm-state lawmakers from both parties.

"We will send our energy dollars to the Middle West and not the Middle East," Pelosi said on the House floor.

But she had to beat back challenges from the House's senior member, Dingell, who has long opposed fuel-efficiency mandates on his home-state auto industry. Democrats on Dingell's committee complained bitterly that Pelosi's handpicked negotiators largely circumvented them as the deal was put together.

Finally, Pelosi had to tamp down a threatened revolt by conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats, who were angered by tax increases in the bill that could endanger their political careers.

In that sense, the triumph could be short-lived. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) has called for a vote today to break off debate on the energy bill and move it to final passage. Senate Democratic leaders expressed strong support for the measure and will push hard for the 60 votes needed to break a threatened filibuster.

"We've got a chance, and America is watching," said Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.). "They know what the price of gasoline is, what the price of a barrel of oil has gone up to, and they know that global warming is a reality. They expect the Congress to move forward on energy."

The Senate vote is expected to be close. Reid has summoned the chamber's four Democratic presidential candidates from the campaign trail for a motion to defeat a threatened filibuster, but if the Senate cannot muster the 60 votes needed, portions of the bill could be removed. These sections include many of the tax measures and, perhaps, the renewable-energy requirement on utilities.