Senate Votes to Require Increase in Use of Wind and Solar Power

The
Senate gave environmentalists a
modest victory on wind and solar
power today. But stymied by partisan
disagreements, it put off conclusive votes on
broader energy policy until next month.

By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM NY Times

President Bush says energy legislation is a
top priority. Lawmakers from both parties say
that in light of the terrorism threat, the country
cannot afford to be so dependent on imported
fuel. But after three weeks of debate, the
Senate has made little progress toward
approving a comprehensive energy bill.

The topic for several days has been a
Democratic proposal to require companies that provide electricity to the public
to expand their use of renewable forms of energy like wind, solar and
geothermal power as a partial replacement for oil, gas and coal.

Today, by a vote of 58 to 40, the Senate rejected a Republican alternative to let
the states decide whether to require their utilities to use renewable sources.
Then the Senate approved the Democratic plan, supported by environmentalists,
that would gradually increase the percentage of electricity from those sources
until it reached 10 percent in 2020.

The House of Representatives passed a Republican energy bill last year, and
the legislation that the Senate eventually approves will go to a conference
committee to work out the differences with the House version.

Each side in the Senate accused the other of causing delay.

Republicans, said Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the majority leader,
are conducting "filibusters inside filibusters on this bill at this point."

Senator Larry E. Craig, Republican of Idaho, said Democrats were refusing to
allow votes until they had twisted enough arms to ensure victory.

"Who controls the floor?" Mr. Craig asked. "The Democrats do."

Energy policy is one of those cases that arise periodically in which the Senate
becomes paralyzed because there is no consensus and neither side can
command the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster.

Republicans, with the support of a few Democrats from oil-producing states,
favor expanding exploration for oil and gas in the United States. Democrats,
backed by a few Republicans, mostly from New England, prefer conservation to
development.

The Democrats lost on the lone major vote so far. Last week, the Senate
rejected a Democratic plan to raise substantially the fuel-efficiency standards
that automakers must meet. Instead, the Senate adopted a measure that would
require the Bush administration to study the issue for two years and develop
new mileage standards after taking into consideration issues like safety, job
losses and consumer preferences.

But Republicans do not have the votes to win approval of their main initiative,
which would allow oil and gas exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
"ANWR is history," said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic whip.

On renewable energy sources, Senator Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New
Mexico, said today that the country needed to "diversify our supply of energy" to
generate electricity to be less dependent on oil and gas.

On the other side, Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, said more reliance
on alternative forms would mean higher electricity bills for consumers. No one
would benefit, he said, except "a few wind generators."

The House bill does not have a comparable provision on renewable energy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/22/politics/22ENER.html