Executive Summary | News Release | U.S. PIRG

Download the report.
This report is a PDF file. The free Adobe Acrobat Reader is needed to view the file. It is 279 KB.

Executive Summary

On July 17th, 18th, and 19th, 2001, key committees in the House of Representative moved to send three bills to the full floor of the House of Representatives for a vote, scheduled for the first week of August. These bills-packaging the cornerstone components of the Bush energy plan-are dirty, dangerous and do not deliver for consumers. Rather, these bills represent a huge payback to polluting industries that contributed millions of dollars to committee members in the 1999-2000 election cycle.

Each of the bills emerging from committee falls short of securing a new energy future for American consumers; instead, these bills are a recipe for more drilling, more spilling, more asthma attacks, more radioactive waste, and more global warming. Specifically:

· The House Energy and Commerce Committee crafted and marked up the Energy Advancement and Conservation Act, establishing an inadequate fuel economy standard and quelling efforts to raise the standard to 40 miles per gallon; subsidizing the "clean coal" program, which is dirty and inefficient; and subsidizing the nuclear power industry's research into a dangerous uranium mining process.

· The House Resources Committee developed and marked up the Energy Security Act, which opens the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling; threatens public lands with increased mineral speculation as well as drilling; and provides $7.4 million in "royalty relief" to oil and gas companies seeking new leases in the Gulf of Mexico. (Note: The House of Representatives has indicated that it may redefine which leases qualify for this subsidy in the final bill language; as such, the final subsidy may be substantially lower than that passed out of committee.)

· The House Ways and Means Committee crafted and marked up the Energy Tax Policy Act, which provides $27.6 billion in subsidies to polluters in the oil, gas and coal industries as well as nuclear power, offering less than $6 billion to renewable energy and energy efficiency programs-or 17% of the total package.

The Bush energy plan, as packaged in these three bills, is the culmination of polluters' undue influence on the House Democrats and Republicans. Polluting industries contributed a staggering $18.4 million to House members in the 1999-2000 election cycle.

Key findings of the report include:

· In the House Energy and Commerce Committee, members who opposed the Markey (D-MA) amendment to toughen fuel economy standards received, on average, contributions four times higher ($16,416) than those who supported ($4,155) the amendment.

· In the House Resources Committee, members opposing the Energy Security Act and its provisions to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and on other public lands received no contributions from ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP Amoco and Phillips Petroleum-the "Dirty Four" companies lobbying to drill in the Refuge-as opposed to the bill's supporters, who received $92,038 in total contributions from these four companies.

· In the House Ways and Means Committee, members voting with industry to provide $27.7 billion in subsidies to fossil fuels, nuclear power and the auto industry received, on average, more than 2 ½ times ($80,666) the contributions received by members voting against ($31,963) these subsidies to profitable polluters.

· The oil/gas industry, electric utilities, mining industry, auto industry and railroads gave $2,479,358 in contributions between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2000 to members of the House Ways and Means Committee. In return, the committee included in its bill $27.7 billion in subsidies at taxpayers' expense for the oil, gas, nuclear, coal, auto and railroad industries over the next 10 years. Assuming an average annual subsidy of $2,766,800,000, in the first two years the polluting industries will enjoy a return on their investment of 2,232 to 1.

· In a giveaway to the Houston-based Anadarko corporation, which reported cash flow from operations during the first quarter of 2001 of $1.1 billion, up from $135 million in the first quarter of 2000, the House Resources Committee bill allows the Interior Secretary to indefinitely suspend the term of existing subsalt leases so that Anadarko would not have to pay to drill a well in order to keep its subsalt lease. Taxpayers are in effect subsidizing a corporation that enjoyed first quarter earnings nearing its total earnings for all of 2000. Anadarko Corporation gave $15,767 in PAC contributions to the House Resources Committee members in the 1999-2000 election cycle, including a total of $11,500 to the Energy Security Act's co-sponsors.

· In a nod to the dozens of oil and gas companies already drilling or looking to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, the House Resources Committee bill provides "royalty relief" to the tune of an estimated $7.4 billion to those seeking new leases on the Outer Continental Shelf. (Note: The House of Representatives has indicated that it may redefine which leases qualify for this subsidy in the final bill language; as such, the final subsidy may be substantially lower than that passed out of committee.) The oil industry, including Texaco, Chevron and others with interests in the Gulf, gave $1,055,394 in PAC contributions, soft money, and individual campaign contributions overall to Resources Committee members during the 1999-2000 election cycle. El Paso Corporation, the largest leaseholder in the shallow-water area of the Gulf of Mexico with 365 blocks comprising 1.3 million net acres, gave $33,250 in PAC contributions to the House Resources Committee members and $1,116,495 in PAC contributions, soft money and individual contributions overall in the 1999-2000 election cycle.