Energy Bill Snagged On Pipeline, Aid to Oil ...Tax Incentives

[cthrumatrix]

Energy Bill Snagged On Pipeline, Aid to Oil
Tax Incentives Are at Issue in Hill Negotiations
By Peter Behr and Dan Morgan
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, November 1, 2003; Page A05


House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) is opposing a Senate-backed financial support for a $20 billion trans-Alaska natural gas pipeline while pressing for new tax breaks to benefit oil producers in his home district, congressional and industry sources said yesterday.


The House-Senate differences over the subsidies have emerged in broader negotiations over $20 billion in new tax incentives to be included in a far-reaching energy bill.

Tax-related disputes between Thomas and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) have stalled progress on the energy bill. Although Vice President Cheney and President Bush this week began pressuring Republicans to end the impasse, powerful regional interests have made compromise difficult.

Thomas and Grassley made no attempt to end their disagreement over a Senate-backed plan to double U.S. production of ethanol fuel from corn, a priority in Grassley's home state and across the Farm Belt. Because the plan would require changes in federal gasoline tax collections, which finance highway construction, Thomas has argued that it should be postponed until Congress takes up highway legislation next year.

The proposed pipeline, which would bring natural gas from Alaska's North Slope to U.S. consumers after 2010, has split congressional Republicans and has driven a wedge between major oil companies.

snip

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48989-2003Oct31.html

Tax incentives so they can make more money .... home and abroad we fill the corporate coffers.

[salin]

1. I hope it stalls until AFTER the SC ruling on Cheney and his

energy papers. A district court upheld the ruling of a lower court that Cheney must turn over papers. The never to follow the rule of law administration pushed the DOJ to file a request (good use of our tax dollars - eh? Keep the corporate cronyism fed by out tax dollars secret) to have the case reviewed by the SC. Rather than impartially turning down the request (which I think the SC could have done - but I might be wrong on this) - the politicized SC heard arguments this week and is expected to hand down a ruling by the end of the year. While the SC is politicized, some members have grown increasingly uncomfortable with this condition - fearing the long-term integrity of the SC (re: Kennedy and O'Conner). This might lead to a more impartial ruling, as completely reversing themselves on this type of issue - compared to their rulings in the Clinton/Jones case, would be nakedly political.

In any event - if this bill can be stalled - preferably to next year - there will be a better chance that it will be forced to go back to the drawing board if the nature of its provisions and the corruption therein (as is expected to be seen in these papers - hence their secrecy) are aired in public.

[bvar22]

2. Another route much cheaper.

Bill Moyers did a segment on this pipeline project several weeks ago. There is an alternative route through Canada to deliver the gas to American customers. The cost of the Canadian pipeline much cheaper and less environmentally hazardous. To support their fellow Pigs at the Trough, the Republicans have been able to prevent the consideration or discussion of this alternative route from entering the process.

you can find details here:
http://www.pbs.org/now/archive.html
and search for Alaska Pipeline.

[sandnsea]

3. But but, where's private enterprise?

I thought the private sector didn't need the government. That's what's so wonderful about American capitalism, it's all private capital and free market!

[salin]

4. bush's private enterprise = private perks from govt sourses for biggest

corporate cronies. There is little, if anything, in this bill that is geared to protect or promote the interests of taxpayers.