Democrats Offer Energy Bill Minus Contested Items

In an apparent setback for the White House, Senate Democrats late Wednesday introduced a stripped-down version of last fall’s energy bill with hopes for a full Senate vote as early as next Tuesday.

The compromise legislation, designed to avoid a filibuster similar to the one that killed last fall’s energy bill, deletes four contested provisions of the earlier measure--most prominently, the Bush Administration-backed proposal to drill for oil and natural gas in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

“It is my expectation that a comprehensive energy package as just (introduced) will be considered--and expeditiously so, early next week,” Senate Energy Committee Chairman J. Bennett Johnston (D-La.) said on the Senate floor.

Also excluded from the new legislation are provisions to increase corporate average fuel economy standards, as well as lesser provisions affecting recycled motor oil and the refurbishment of electric power plants.

Johnston had promised to introduce such a compromise since the earlier bill was defeated on Nov. 1, primarily over opposition to drilling in the Alaska refuge. But the timing surprised many in Washington.

“It came up rather suddenly,” said Tony Garrett, Johnston’s press secretary.

The bill was reportedly discussed at a meeting of Senate leaders on Wednesday that was conducted by Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.). Johnston, on the Senate floor, indicated that the compromise bill was acceptable to Sen. Malcolm Wallop of Wyoming, the Senate’s senior Republican and co-sponsor with Johnston of the earlier legislation.

The Democrats apparently have agreed to oppose any provision affecting the Alaska refuge. Whether some version of the fuel economy standards might be added in an amendment was still unresolved.

“Some auto industry senators might hold out for an ironclad ban on a (fuel economy standards) provision,” said one Senate aide, “while others might not want to consider a bill that doesn’t have (those) provisions.”

White House officials have said that the President would veto any energy bill that did not allow exploration of the Alaska refuge.

“This is a big defeat for the President,” said Dan Becker, Sierra Club lobbyist in Washington.

“We still think that the bill as introduced is a bad environmental bill and a bad energy policy for America’s consumers,” Becker said late Wednesday. “But what has been introduced is not the bill that is going to be voted on . . . it’s a very fluid situation.”