If President George W. Bush wins a second term, it’s “more likely” the standoff in the Senate over the comprehensive energy bill will be resolved “sooner rather than later,” according to a key gas industry lobbyist. But the White House occupant “is not the pivotal issue” when it comes to passing energy legislation, countered Charles Swab analyst Christine Tezak. The “incredibly thinly divided Senate” is the key factor.

“It certainly will be difficult to get [an energy bill] passed whoever is president,” she said. Tezak doubts there will be any action on the energy bill when Congress returns for a lame-duck session later this month. She believes Congress will take up an energy measure next year “only if consumers start sending messages to their congressmen that they are truly unhappy with energy prices,” and it becomes a “front page issue” on newspapers nationwide.

“If Bush gets re-elected, you can expect the same general policy on energy over the next four years,” said Martin Edwards, vice president of legislative affairs for the Interstate National Gas Association of America (INGAA). “From our perspective, that would be good because it would further natural gas supply and infrastructure development,” he noted.

The key issue for the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA) is land access. The Bush administration supports increasing production in several frontier areas: the Rocky Mountains, parts of the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska, said IPAA spokesman Jeff Eshelman. Although Bush objects to development of the gas-rich eastern Gulf, his administration “at least” supports a comprehensive study of the oil and gas resources located in the offshore region, he noted.

Kerry also believes the development of natural gas supplies should be a priority, but “unfortunately” he said drilling should be restricted to only those onshore and offshore areas that are currently open, Eshelman said. Kerry, like Bush, supports the moratoria on oil and gas drilling offshore California and the eastern seaboard, and off the coast of Florida.

The American Public Gas Association (APGA), which represents municipal distributors, doesn’t see much difference between the Bush and Kerry camps. “I haven’t seen any significant distinctions between the two when it comes to natural gas,” said APGA President Bert Kalisch. Both agree more gas supply is needed, and favor construction of an Alaska natural gas pipeline, greater funding for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, and the need for more energy conservation measures.

With the prices of natural gas nearly tripled, whoever is elected as the next president will need to work with the Senate and “get a comprehensive bill through Congress” next year, Kalisch said. The House of Representatives passed an energy bill in November 2003, but the measure has been tied up in the Senate since early this year.

Although the three gas trade associations have strong views on the energy issues affecting their members, officials said they have not publicly endorsed either presidential candidate.

Kerry also is a strong proponent of renewable fuels — namely, a tax credit for wind and biomass. “It’s willful ignorance [to believe] that renewable energy development is going to solve our problems” over the next 25 years, countered INGAA’s Edwards. “It’s a giveaway that doesn’t accomplish much.” Renewable energy is “expensive,” and it “doesn’t make much energy,” he noted.

Whoever’s elected will have to make some “tough choices” on energy, Edwards said. With respect to natural gas, the critical choices will involve environmental policy. Environmentalists support natural gas as a fuel, but they oppose drilling activity in a number of regions in the Lower 48 states and in Alaska due to potential harmful impacts on the land.

On another environmental-related issue, Kerry has shown more interest in reducing carbon dioxide emissions, which would be bullish for natural gas, Charles Swab’s Tezak said.

Bush also has come out more in favor of the development of liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies for the United States, while Kerry remains lukewarm on the subject. Kerry hails from the New England region, where local opposition to LNG projects has been quite intense. Communities have cited the safety and security risks of such projects.

In addition to the virtual dead heat presidential face-off, Edwards said he is watching a number of close Senate races around the nation. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who is being challenged by former Alaska Gov. Tony Knowles (a Democrat), is “behind the eight ball” heading into Tuesday’s election, Edwards noted.

Another key race is in South Dakota, where Sen. Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) is being challenged by John Thune, a former representative for the state. “I wouldn’t be surprised if Daschle lost,” Edwards told NGI. The Rapid City Journal last Friday endorsed Thune for the Senate, noting that “those footsteps Sen. Tom Daschle is hearing are from his own record catching up with him.”

The newspaper said one of the reasons it was supporting Thune over Daschle was because he favors a comprehensive energy policy that includes measures to increase domestic energy supplies.

Other tight Senate races are in Oklahoma, Colorado, Louisiana, North Carolina, South Carolina and Kentucky, Edwards said.

©Copyright 2004 Intelligence Press Inc. All rights reserved. The preceding news report may not be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, in any form, without prior written consent of Intelligence Press, Inc.