EEE会議（Re:米国のエネルギー法案審議状況）....................................................................03.11.27


昨日のメールで、米国のエネルギー法案は、New York Timesによれば、上院で否決さ
れ「廃案」になったようだとお伝えしましたが、どうやらこれは小生の早とちりだっ
た可能性があり、「廃案」になったのではなく、来年の会期まで持ち越し（審議延
期）となっただけなのかもしれません。永崎隆雄氏（日本原子力産業会議）によれ
ば、現状では今件法案の取り扱いは次のようになっている模様だとのことです。いず
れ事実関係がはっきりするはずですが、とりあえずの情報として、以下ご参考まで。
　なお、在米の会員で、詳報を入手された方はご教示くだされば幸いです。
--KK
**********************************************

　エネルギー法案「廃案」は誤報ではありませんか。
　ややこしい、議会技術で審議延期になったようで１月再投票だそうです。　即ち
討論終結動議が否決されたのであって、法案が廃案になってはいないようです。

　上院で審議中の2003年包括エネルギー法案は、反対する民主党議員の審議引き
延ばしに対して、21日共和党は、議事妨害を終わらせるため討論終結動議
（Closure）を提出。

　しかし、投票の結果、動議への賛成57、反対40で、全上院議員の5分の3（定員
100名の内の60名）を確保できず、動議は否決されていた。

  反対40票の内1票は、「法案を再投票に付すために上院院内総は反対票を投じ
た」とされ、実際の賛成票は58票。

　　　　永崎

　
　　　



Kumao KANEKO wrote:
>
> 皆様
>
> ここ数日来山場を迎えていた米国の包括的エネルギー法案は、ブッシュ
> 大統領、チェイニー副大統領以下ホワイトハウスの総力を上げての議会工
> 作も功を奏せず、結局上院で僅か２票の差で否決され、廃案となったようで
> す（共和党の６議員が民主党と一緒に法案阻止に回ったため）。主たる敗因
> はやはり、「積み過ぎによる沈没」、つまり、あまりにも共和党（Domenici上院
> 議員ら）ペースでごり押しをしたこと、あまりにも産業界利益を優先したこと、
> 地元への補助金等のばら撒き(pork-barrel politics)により巨額の財政負担を
> 伴ったこと、環境への配慮が欠けていたこと等のようです。
>
> これで１０年振りといわれた米国のエネルギー政策の大転換も法的根拠を
> 得るに至らなかったわけで、今後大統領選挙戦との絡みもあり、ブッシュ政
> 権がどういう形で巻き返しを図るか、また、今回の敗北で同政権が意図する
> エネルギー政策（エタノール計画、水素エネルギー計画を含む）の遂行に
> どの程度の影響が出るか、とくに多額の政府財政援助が期待された原子力
> 発電所新設計画等への影響が懸念されるところです。
>
> 詳細は次のNew York Times(11/26)の報道でどうぞ。ただし、いつもながら、
> 同紙は元々民主党色がつよく、共和党主導のエネルギー法案に当初から
> 批判的であったことを念頭に入れてお読みください。
> --KK
>
> ********************************************
>
> Even With Bush's Support, Wide-Ranging Legislation May Have Been Sunk by
> Excess
>
> By CARL HULSE
>
> Published: November 26, 2003
>
> WASHINGTON, Nov. 25  In the end, the energy bill that fizzled in the last
> days of Congress was undone by an overload.
>
> Lawmakers, lobbyists and others who took part in the effort to enact the
> first significant changes in national energy policy in a decade said on
> Tuesday that the measure, which fell two votes short of passage, had too
> much for industry, cost too much, was written with too little Democratic
> help and was too much in the shadow of the Medicare fight.
>
> "I think the best approach would be to start from a clean slate next
year,"
> said Senator John E. Sununu of New Hampshire, one of six Republicans who
> along with Democratic critics blocked the measure from being sent to
> President Bush, who has been pursuing an energy bill since early in his
> term.
> Even last-minute intervention by Mr. Bush could not break the impasse. On
> Monday evening, he telephoned Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, the House
> majority leader, to see if there was room for compromise on the provision
> raising the strongest objections, immunity from pollution lawsuits for
> makers of the gasoline additive MTBE, some of which are based in Houston,
> near Mr. DeLay's hometown.
>
> According to a spokesman for Mr. DeLay, the majority leader told the
> president that the immunity was a bipartisan bargain that had passed
easily
> in the House and won 58 votes in the Senate, and that he wanted to stick
> with it. Senate Republicans then threw in the towel for the year on the
$31
> billion bill, which would use more than $23 billion in tax breaks to
> increase domestic energy production and efficiency while improving the
power
> grid.
>
> On Tuesday, the authors of the bill said they intended to bring the
measure
> back early next year. In the meantime, Senator Pete V. Domenici,
Republican
> of New Mexico, the main Senate author of the measure, told his colleagues
> that they should not hope for a repeat of last summer's blackout.
>
> "If there is," Mr. Domenici said, "the American people are going to ask
why.
> And we're going to tell them, because we did nothing."
>
> Industry officials joined him in warning that the failure to send the
energy
> measure to Mr. Bush would slow the development of mandatory rules to
enhance
> the reliability of the power grid. The measure would give the Federal
Energy
> Regulatory Commission six months to develop those standards and the
> commission had already set a Dec. 1 hearing to begin the process.
>
> "There are a lot of consequences to not moving forward with the energy
> bill," said Tom Kuhn, president of the Edison Electric Institute, an
> industry association.
>
> Lobbyists for the wind energy business, which would have received help
> through an extension of a production tax credit, said the tax break would
> expire next month. "It is impossible for the U.S. wind industry to
maintain
> a steady growth rate in the present climate of uncertainty," said Randall
> Swisher, head of the industry trade association.
>
> Critics of the measure said it was unlikely it would have prevented last
> summer's blackout. They said there were few immediate benefits for
consumers
> worried about heating costs or gasoline prices and that the proposal ?
drawn
> up by Mr. Domenici and another industry ally, Representative Billy Tauzin,
> Republican of Louisiana ? had become weighted down with pet projects for
an
> array of special interests.
>
> "They wrote a completely pro-industry bill and they basically pushed
people
> over the edge," said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York and
an
> organizer of a filibuster last week, who said the bill did not represent
an
> overarching energy policy.
>
> The role of the president illustrated the importance the White House
placed
> on the proposal. Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, both former oil
> industry executives, took office promising new approaches to energy
policy.
> A task force led by Mr. Cheney laid the groundwork for some of the
> legislation in 2001.
>
> Mr. Cheney was also contacting lawmakers in the past few days to break the
> impasse and had earlier helped settle a House-Senate disagreement over a
> separate element of the bill. Administration officials expressed
frustration
> at the failure to get the bill passed.
>
> "It is past time to get serious and tackle the job at hand," Energy
> Secretary Spencer Abraham said on Tuesday.
>
> But it might not be easy to enact a bill in 2004. Lawmakers say the
> conference committee that wrote the final measure was dissolved after the
> House easily passed the energy legislation. So the Senate either has to
pass
> that bill, perhaps making changes through separate legislation, or start
> fresh and potentially renew a full-scale energy debate in Congress.
>
> "They don't have easy choices," said Senator Maria Cantwell, Democrat of
> Washington and another filibuster organizer.
>
> Ms. Cantwell said the authors should consider trying to advance energy
> provisions that can pass, like the grid reliability standards, and
jettison
> the others. "You can't have good energy policy held hostage for bad energy
> policy," she said.
>
> Mr. Domenici indicated he was not interested in trying to pass the measure
> piecemeal, though he has said he is willing to eliminate the protection
for
> producers of MTBE. But that could fracture the legislative bargains that
> make up the energy plan.
>
> Mr. DeLay and Mr. Tauzin, among others, pushed for immunity from product
> liability lawsuits for refineries that produce the additive as well as $2
> billion for those companies to convert to production of other fuels. In
> exchange, they accepted an expansion in the use of corn-based ethanol as
an
> additive. If the MTBE producers lose out, House Republicans are less
> inclined to help the ethanol industry, which is crucial to Midwestern
> support for the measure.
>
> "We have a carefully crafted compromise, and once you start pulling the
> strings out of the compromise, it becomes difficult to keep as a sweater,"
> said Frank Maisano, a spokesman for a group of MTBE producers.
>
> The bill's future is also complicated by 2004 being an election year,
> because contentious legislation can be difficult to enact when the parties
> are jockeying for advantage and unwilling to hand the opposition any
> successes.
>
> The energy bill, however, also contains scores of projects, like the
ethanol
> program, that lawmakers could tout in their re-election bids. The last
> significant energy measure was enacted in 1992 and was signed by President
> George Bush at the height of his re-election campaign.
>
> Mr. Domenici and other lawmakers said the stalemate was an example of the
> difficulties in drafting energy policy, an area where regional clashes
> dominate and efforts to help one sector often end up drawing opposition
from
> another.
>
> "It isn't going to be easy," Mr. Domenici said, "but neither has it ever
> been easy to pass an energy policy in this country."
> -----------------------------------------------