A joke making the rounds in Washington, D.C., late last week is that the GOP, which Republicans like to think of as Grand Old Party, actually stands for Gas, Oil and Petroleum.

That's a conclusion many Americans may have drawn after the GOP-dominated House of Representatives approved a wide-ranging energy bill that only an oil company CEO and its stockholders could love.

Among other things, the House version of the bill would give oil and gas producers an $8-billion tax break, with other financial incentives piled on top of that, clear the way for drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, require more ethanol use in gasoline - all of which will generally have little impact on soaring gasoline prices, according to experts.

There's so much not to like about this bill that we barely know where to start, but the obvious first criticism would have to be giving oil companies tax breaks and financial incentives at a time when they are raking in record profits. In fact, during the debate on the House floor late last week, Democrat critics of the bill hauled out a large chart, which in very large letters highlighted a recent quote from President Bush: "With oil at more than $50 a barrel ... energy companies do not need taxpayer-funded incentives to explore for oil and gas."

So much for House Republicans following the advice of their leader.

Another troubling feature of the bill is that it protects manufacturers of methyl tertiary-butyl ether, more commonly referred to as MTBE, from liability in water contamination cases. This would be a major blow to thousands of communities across America whose water supplies have been fouled by MTBE discharge. If the bill passes in its present form, taxpayers will be on the hook for billions of dollars worth of cleanup in the years ahead.

By the way, the MTBE protection part of the energy bill is the brainchild of Texas Republican Tom DeLay, who has grabbed so many headlines lately for his behavior. Preventing a last-minute effort by Democrats to keep MTBE makers on the hook for the damage they do is yet another dubious feather in DeLay's political hat.

Advertisement

Then there is the cost of the energy bill. Economists and congressional analysts say the price tag over the next decade would be close to $92 billion, due mostly to the tax cuts for energy companies and the economic incentives. Among the costs would be nearly $2 billion to help the MTBE manufacturers retool their plants as that additive is phased out.

The bill's proponents scoff at such numbers, arguing that bills are passed all the time for which Congress then refuses to appropriate funding. Really? When was the last pork-filled piece of legislation left unfunded?

President Bush has told Congress he wants an energy bill on his desk as soon as possible, but that may take some doing. This bill is very similar to one approved by the House last year, but which stalled in the Senate, whose older and wiser Republicans seem to have a better sense of the potential political fallout of passing a seriously flawed piece of legislation. But the Senate may pass such a bill, and you can bet it will be just as fat with pork as the House version.

There is one bright spot in the House's bill, and we mean that literally. The bill proposes to extend Daylight Saving Time by two months each year. Instead of going from early April until late October, DST would be extended by eight weeks, from early March to late November.

The longer period of the year during which the clock allows the sun to shine would save an estimated 100,000 barrels of oil a day, which is about 1 percent of the nation's total consumption. At today's prices, that's $300 million a day that would not be spent on fuel. It would also save lives. According to traffic experts, longer days for a longer time each year would save 25 lives and prevent 1,000 injuries a month. And, of course, it's just pleasant to have another two months of summer.

But that's about it, folks. The House vision of a new national energy policy relies far too much on fossil fuels, a finite resource, questionable drilling schemes and totally unnecessary tax breaks for companies already reaping record profits.

What the bill does not do is aim this nation in the direction of using less fossil fuel by dictating higher gas-mileage requirements for cars and trucks. Congress, it seems, is asleep at the wheel on that one.

April 24, 2005