[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 116 (Thursday, July 31, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Page S10529]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page S10529]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

                        House of Representatives

The House was not in session today. Its next meeting will be held on 
Wednesday, September 3, 2003, at 2 p.m.




-----------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 Senate

Thursday, July 31, 2003


(Legislative day of Monday, July 21, 2003)

                  UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT--H.R. 6

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, we have three short unanimous consent 
requests. Senator Baucus will be taking the floor shortly.
  I ask unanimous consent that following Senator Baucus's statement and 
Senator Dodd's statement on free trade, the Senate then proceed to the 
consideration of Calendar No. 85, H.R. 6, the House-passed Energy bill, 
provided that all after the enacting clause be stricken and the text of 
the Senate amendment to H.R. 4 from the 107th Congress as passed by the 
Senate be inserted in lieu thereof; the bill then be read a third time 
and the Senate proceed to a vote on passage of the bill with no 
intervening action or debate; further, that following that vote, the 
Senate insist on its amendment, request a conference with the House, 
and the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees with the ratio of 7 to 
6.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Ms. CANTWELL. Reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Reserving the right to object, I know the leadership on 
both sides of the aisle would like to proceed on last year's Senate 
Energy bill. This Senator believes we have just begun to have debate on 
two important issues that have emerged since that legislation was 
passed by this body.
  The first issue is we now know for a fact, proven by the Federal 
Regulatory Commission, by the Department of Justice, and by Enron's own 
memos, that market manipulation has occurred. The 2002 Energy bill does 
not address that issue.
  This body will need to come back and address that issue. I am happy 
to address it in another forum, but I am hearing a commitment from 
leadership on both sides that we will come back and address this issue.
  The second issue: The Federal Regulatory Commission, since the 
passage of the 2002 act, issued a rule calling for the implementation 
of mandatory regional transmission organizations and standard market 
design. For my colleagues who do not understand what that means, it 
means a national grid where your region's cheap, affordable electricity 
at cost-based rates might be displaced by the highest bidder of an 
energy company that wants to sell its more expensive energy in your 
State.
  The 2002 bill does not address that. We need to address the fact that 
we do not want FERC to proceed on an order mandating regional 
transmission organizations with standard market design. That is what 
some of my amendments dealt with; that is what some of the underlying 
bill dealt with. That is not in the 2002 version.
  I will not object at this time based on agreement that I have heard 
from my leadership and the majority leadership that we will have an 
opportunity to address both of those issues in the future.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________