[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 21]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 29862]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2003

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. BARBARA LEE

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, November 18, 2003

  Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, the Energy Policy Act of 2003 that 
unfortunately passed this afternoon is a failure in process and policy.
  The Republican majority squandered a historic opportunity to forge a 
truly bipartisan consensus that would meet the nation's immediate needs 
while expanding conservation and encouraging renewable energy to wean 
us from foreign oil.
  The Republican majority has steamrolled concerns, facts, and 
opposition, all to benefit powerful energy industries at the expense of 
American people.
  This bill not only fails to promote a healthy energy policy, it will 
also cost the American people over $140 billion over the next decade.
  These costs include industry subsidies, tax-breaks, authorizations 
for new government spending, and mandates that increase consumer prices 
for gasoline and electricity.
  This legislation continues the Bush administration's rollbacks of 
environmental protections while steamrolling the public interest.
  It was written for big energy companies by big energy companies to 
benefit big energy companies, with a $16 billion package of tax breaks 
and production subsidies for the oil, coal, and nuclear industries.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill threatens more than the pocketbooks of the 
American people, it also poses an imminent threat to our Nation's air 
quality, drinking water, and public lands.
  We see this threat to our public health most clearly in my home State 
of California.
  MTBE, a known cause of cancer, is leaking out of storage tanks, but 
this bill shields MTBE producers and oil companies from product 
liability lawsuits and pays them $2 billion.
  This gasoline additive, intended to reduce air pollution, has 
contaminated groundwater supplies in numerous California communities.
  In addition to weakening clean water protections, this bill will 
crack open the door for offshore drilling by shifting control of 
projects off California's coastline toward the Federal Government.
  It also requires a faster permitting process and the easing of some 
environmental rules to promote energy development on public lands.
  This bill will cause catastrophic harm to the public health and the 
public interest.
  This bill is a total failure based on tax-breaks and subsidies alone.
  What makes this bill even more difficult to stomach is the 
possibility of what could have been.
  This bill does not, for example, provide a clear direction for the 
development of the electricity grid.
  This bill also does not encourage the U.S. car industry to 
manufacture vehicles that consume less fuel and produce fewer 
pollutants.
  Additionally, this bill does not significantly encourage energy 
conservation and it does nothing to wean this country from oil and gas 
imports.
  Tragically, America needs a new energy policy. Just not this one.
  We need an energy bill that would remove subsidies and market 
distortions.
  We need a progressive energy policy that would invest in energy 
efficiency and renewable energy sources instead of fossil fuels. Such a 
policy would create four times as many jobs without adding to the 
deficit, burdening taxpayers, or poisoning our air and water.
  I strongly opposed this bill because of its complete failure to 
protect America's environment, protect America's health, and protect 
American taxpayers.

                          ____________________