Posted on 11/20/2003 3:03:38 AM PST by kattracks
WASHINGTON (AP) — Attempts to derail the energy bill over a dispute involving a gasoline additive suffered a setback when the Senate's top Democrat said he would support limiting debate on the legislation.Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota said Monday he was ready to support the broad energy legislation and will oppose attempts block it over the issue of MTBE, a gasoline additive found to contaminate drinking water supplies.
The bill would double ethanol use, an important issue in Daschle's state where he faces re-election next year.
A Daschle spokesman, Dan Pfeiffer, said the senator will vote for ending debate on the bill, overcoming any impending filibuster by senators opposed to the MTBE provision, as long as senators are given adequate time to debate the legislation.
"There is a lot of legitimate concern about the bill on both sides of the aisle ... (but) he will support it because of ethanol and other provisions in the bill on energy efficiency," said Pfeiffer.
Pfeiffer said Daschle had not determined how much time would be sufficient.
On Wednesday night, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and other Republicans set a parliamentary vote for Friday for ending the debate. That would force a final up-or-down decision on the 1,100-page bill, which breezed through the House on Tuesday.
Pfeiffer said Daschle hasn't decide yet whether he would support concluding debate Friday or let it go on a bit longer. Democrats have complained they had little say in putting together the bill during 2 1/2 months of mostly closed-door negotiations between House and Senate Republicans.
Daschle told a South Dakota radio station that while he has some concerns about the bill — including the MTBE provisions — it was good news for renewable fuels such as ethanol.
South Dakota is a major producer of corn-based ethanol. The bill calls for doubling ethanol production to 5 billion gallons a year by 2012.
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said that he's confident the legislation, which provides $23 billion in tax breaks and contains hundreds of provisions beneficial to a broad range of energy industries, will get a substantial majority.
It would be the first time Congress has agreed on a blueprint for the nation's energy agenda since 1992.
But some Democrats as well as Republicans have made clear their distaste for the bill, especially a provision that would give makers of MTBE liability protection from lawsuits. MTBE, put in gasoline to reduce air pollution, has been found to contaminate drinking water supplies in at least 28 states.
Supporters of the liability shield argue that the contamination stems from spills of gasoline containing MTBE or leaks from underground tanks at gasoline stations and that the product itself should not be viewed as the villain.
The issue brought some heated exchanges on the Senate floor Wednesday.
When Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., a supporter of the bill, suggested that MTBE was not a health hazard even though it fouls water so that it's not drinkable, Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H. shot back, "If a person cannot live in their home (because they can't drink the water), is that not a health hazard?"
New Hampshire recently filed a lawsuit against 22 oil and refining companies, demanding that they help pay for water cleanup from MTBE pollution. But the provision in the energy bill would bar the state from going after these companies on the basis of product liability.
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who opposes the energy bill because of the MTBE waiver and other issues said, "I've been for ethanol for 21 years, and I just can't do this. That's a bargain with the devil."
How right you are. And let us not forget the President, once re-elected, may have some more tricks up his sleeve. Social Security reform, making the tax cuts permanent (we haven't done that yet, have we?), RE-REFORMING this Medicare bill to move up the privatization stuff, **FIXING** the Campaign finance insanity, etc.
Bush will be able to say to the electorate in 2005, "We've come a long way, and I am not going to be re-elected, so I will push an even stronger agenda that focuses on American's freedoms..." or something like that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.