Industry tax breaks fill GOP energy bill

[radfringe]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001791918_energy15.html">Industry tax breaks fill GOP energy bill
By Seth Borenstein and Sumana Chatterjee
Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Congressional leaders yesterday forged a national energy bill that contains tens of billions of dollars worth of tax breaks and subsidies to oil, gas, coal and nuclear industries while emphasizing production over conservation.
A cornerstone of President Bush's energy policy — the controversial drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge — was eliminated because of a lack of support in the Senate. Also missing is the oil industry's desire to test fo oil and natural gas along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.

Details of the legislation remain under wraps to all but a handful of Republican lawmakers and their aides, who promised to make it public today. Those who wrote the bill, however, acknowledged the details may not look good.

-snip-


EDITED BY ADMIN FOR COPYRIGHT REASONS

[ronatchig]

1. One word Democratic response:

filibuster!

[cthrumatrix]

2. This is why they release the bill on a saturday....an embarrassment

[dusty64]

3. I have a sad feeling this

plan which is nothing more than an assault upon the health of the People and the Planet and a MASSIVE corporate welfare giveaway will pass.

[Ramsey]

4. Link please

Interesting article. Do you have a link??

[radfringe]

5. link.... sorry, screwed up on the html code...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001791918_energy15.html

[Instant Karma]

6. It only proves they were using the Arctic issue as a scare tactic

in order to make the rest of the details of this ripoff scam seem like a favor compared to what could have happened.

[Don_G]

7. It Proves Several Things

No matter what the Rethuglins say, they will not work with the Dems or the people to benefit the country as a whole. Their legislation is crafted to benefit the special interests with deep PAC pockets and/or to make themselves look good to the local voters. The Rethugs want secrecy in government to protect their collective a**es.

I tink these points should be brought up and hammered by the Democratic canidadate in 2004.

[BuckeFushe]

8. TOTAL BushCO payoff to the petroleum industries and contributors

What you read at these links will infuriate you.

With only 169 stations in the U.S. selling E-85, most E-85 capable vehicles are still operating on gasoline instead of E-85.

A 1998 law reduced the ethanol subsidy to 52 cents per gallon starting January 1, 2003. Why is ethanol subsidized to begin with?

As of October 2003, a total of 18 States had passed legislation that will ban MTBE - but none of the states that are major users of MTBE, such as CA, CT, KY, MO and NY have their ban in effect yet. And virtually NONE have ethenol available at the pump.
California began switching from MTBE to ethanol to make reformulated gasoline, resulting in a significant increase in ethanol demand by mid-year, even though the California MTBE ban does not go into effect until January 1, 2004.

New York and Connecticut are planning for increased ethanol use in late 2003 becuase MTBE bans in their states will also take effect on January 1, 2004.

Surprisingly Negative ethanol op/ed by the Heritage Foundation

http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/bg1603.cfm

<snip>Ethanol use neither helps the environment nor improves the nation's energy security. Ethanol is not environmentally friendly and is not an authentic renewable resource; its production may require more energy than the fuel it produces.

Finally, ethanol is not economically advantageous. Mandated increased use would entail additional production costs, transportation costs, infrastructure costs, and environmental costs, the burden of which would fall squarely on consumers.

The ethanol provision in the Senate-passed version of H.R. 4 would simply subsidize a small group of large ethanol producers at the taxpayer's expense. Mandating the use of more fuel ethanol is both costly and unnecessary. The evidence clearly shows that there is no justification for including any such provision in America's national energy policy, either now or in the future.<snip>


And, an article about Archer-Daniels (largest ethenol producer) bid-rigging

http://www.agobservatory.org/News/news.cfm?News_ID=1794

Agriculture links (extensive)

http://www.agobservatory.org/HotUrl/UrlList.cfm

Money, Agribusiness, and Politics

http://homepage.mac.com/oscura/ctd/polmoney.html

Craig Announces Advanced Nuclear Reactor in Idaho

http://craig.senate.gov/releases/pr032603a.htm

<snip>This provision would authorize funding for the approximately $1 billion project, including siting and construction of an advanced technology nuclear reactor at INEEL. The reactor project is included in what is referred to as "the Chairman's mark" and is therefore more likely to be included in the final energy bill. The committee is scheduled to take action on the bill during the first two weeks of April, with consideration by the full Senate soon thereafter.

"With his position as Chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, Senator Domenici and I have jointly developed this project to move beyond paper studies, and to begin the work of designing and building an advanced nuclear reactor at INEEL. (SIMPLE TERMS-THIS IS FUCKING PORK). We began a long process back in 1997 when the nuclear energy research and development budget had reached the low point of essentially being zeroed by the previous Administration. We have worked hard since then to build the country's nuclear capabilities back up, and this provision is further commitment to that," said Craig. "I thank Energy Secretary Abraham for his support in designating Idaho as DOE's nuclear energy technology command center. That was also an important element in gaining the support of my Senate colleagues for this project. We still have a lot of work to do to make this project a reality, but this is a significant step along the way and I am excited about what the future holds."

According to the legislative provision, funding will begin in the next fiscal year and the reactor is to be constructed and operational at the INEEL by the year 2010. Two competing designs will be funded and one of them will be constructed. The reactor design that is selected for construction must be capable of generating both electricity and hydrogen, for use in moving the nation towards a hydrogen-based transportation economy as outlined by President Bush in his State of the Union address. Industry, university and international partners will also be part of the project. INEEL will be the lead DOE laboratory for all stages of the project.<snip>


The gas pipeline project is a handout to the petroleum industry because they have said repeatedly that it is not cost effective to bring Alaska natural gas to the lower 48, hence, another BushCo giveaway to line the pockets of the oil barons.