Rather than dealing with “one gargantuan bill,” the Senate should pick out the energy provisions that have the broadest support and are likely to do the most good and pass them individually or in small packages, suggested the ranking Democrat on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in a Capitol Hill newspaper article last Tuesday.

The pared-down omnibus energy bill (S. 2095) that was introduced in February by Committee Chairman Pete Domenici (R-NM) “seems to be an inefficient starting point for actually getting something done this year,” wrote Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) in The Hill.

“Many important energy priorities of the ‘moderate middle’ of the Senate were excluded” in the development of that bill. “That probably means another long slog on the Senate floor to address all the deficiencies in this 1,200-page bill, if we go to it,” he said.

“It might be more realistic to look to the smaller set of key, broadly supported and effective energy provisions and to enact them, either individually or in smaller packages. In this way, the Senate can focus on changes that would actually make a difference to our energy future. We would also likely save time by not hitting every hot button in energy and environmental policy at once.”

Bingaman noted “plausible candidates” for this treatment would be provisions that bolster the reliability of the electricity grid, ban manipulation of power prices, increase funding to expedite permitting to drill for oil and natural gas on federal lands, support the construction of a 3,600-mile gas pipeline from Alaska’s North Slope to the Lower 48 states, enhance energy efficiency and establish a renewable portfolio standard that would “measurably reduce upward pressure on natural gas prices.” He believes a separate bill calling for more research and demonstration on hydrogen fuel cells “could easily pass” Congress as well.

In addition, “a balanced package of energy tax incentives that actually contribute to our energy security could be added to any of the several tax bills that Congress will consider this year,” Bingaman said.

By adopting this approach, Bingaman believes “we stand a better chance of having something concrete to show for our three years of effort on energy legislation.”

But Domenici is adamant about passing a comprehensive energy measure this year. He believes any attempts to break up the bill into stand-alone proposals or piggyback them to other legislation would dilute congressional response to the nation’s energy problems.

“Passing comprehensive energy legislation is tough any year. Some people tell me it will be nearly impossible during a presidential year when election politics flavor every political debate. I disagree,” he wrote in a separate article in The Hill.

“I would argue that elected representatives are more keenly attuned to the needs of their constituents during an election.” Domenici said, adding that the last comprehensive energy bill passed by Congress came in October 1992, a month before a presidential election.

©Copyright 2004 Intelligence Press Inc. Allrights reserved. The preceding news report may not be republishedor redistributed, in whole or in part, in any form, without priorwritten consent of Intelligence Press, Inc.