[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 85 (Friday, June 18, 2004)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1151]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2004

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                             HON. RON KIND

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 15, 2004

  Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, as ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Energy and Minerals Resources of the Committee on Resources, I rise, 
once again, in disappointed opposition to H.R. 4503/H.R. 6.
  The bill before us today is nearly identical to the Conference Report 
on the Energy Policy Act of 2003--absent of any new ideas that would 
ensure a more secure energy future for America; but with all of the 
same fatal flaws that would force ``mom-and-pop-taxpayer'' to fatten 
the already sizeable bottom line of some of our Nation's largest oil 
companies and pay for the clean-up of MTBE contaminated groundwater. I 
won't spend more of Congress' precious time listing all of my 
objections to this bill, but will simply include the statements I made 
last year on H.R. 6 for the record.
  But let me just say, Mr. Speaker, that there is no question our 
Nation needs a comprehensive and balanced energy plan--one that weens 
us off of our shaky strategic dependence of Middle Eastern oil toward 
more sustainable, cleaner, and renewable sources. Unfortunately, this 
bill--like last year's budget-busting behemoth--does not get us there.
  There are, however, some worthy provisions in these bills that have 
wide, bipartisan support. So, instead of political grandstanding, I 
urge the House leadership to separate and pass these important 
measures.
  One such example is the mandatory reliability standards, which would 
punish utilities who violate rules designed to limit how much 
electricity can be sold over the Nation's aging power grid. This 
measure could be perfected and passed by Congress today if it was 
allowed to be considered separately. The reliability of our Nation's 
interconnected power grid is critical to our economy and our security, 
but has been left at risk. In fact, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham 
was recently reported as saying ``the U.S. power grid is in better 
shape than before last August's massive blackout but remains vulnerable 
this summer.''
  Another widely supported proposal is the renewable fuels standard 
provision. This measure would increase the requirement that gasoline 
sold in the United States contain a specified volume of clean-burning 
ethanol or biodiesel. Under this measure, the annual average volume of 
renewable fuel additives would incrementally increase, starting at 3.1 
billion gallons in 2005 and reaching 5 billion gallons in 2012--two and 
a half times the current requirement.
  The American Farm Bureau has estimated the renewable fuels standard 
will have a significant economic stimulus tool for rural America by 
adding $4.5 billion to net farm income; create the need for $5.3 
billion in rural captial investments; and create 216,000 new jobs. 
Ethanol and biodiesel are just two broad-based, diversified, 
environmentally friendly energy products American agriculture can 
produce. I have long stated that empowering U.S. farmers to assume a 
greater role in producing renewable fuels is a win-win situation 
deserving congressional support. Unfortunately, even though this 
provision has the consensus approval of Republicans and Democrats 
alike, House leadership has steadfastly refused to move it separately.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to oppose this bill and immediately move 
to work bipartisanly to pass these widely supported, and much needed 
provisions.

                          ____________________