Bush Energy Stance Begins to Worry Some in GOP

As power shortages and price spikes spread beyond California, congressional Republicans are beginning to worry that the Bush administration’s reluctance to offer much immediate relief could hurt the party in the 2002 elections.

A national energy plan to be unveiled by the White House next week will focus on long-term strategies. But with California and other states bracing for a summer of electricity turmoil and gasoline prices surging across the country, some GOP lawmakers are pressing for short-term solutions.

“The White House has been taking a look at the big picture,” said a GOP leadership aide in the House. “But they’re going to be around in four years. We might not have members around in two years if we don’t show we care.”

That sentiment is being voiced by a rising number of GOP lawmakers. “We’re in a crisis situation, which is only going to get worse if we don’t act very aggressively,” Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Simi Valley) said Wednesday. Gallegly is one of four congressional Republicans from California to break with the administration by supporting temporary price controls on wholesale electricity.

The rising anxiety, which has begun spreading beyond the California delegation, underscores how much has changed since the state declared its first Stage 3 power emergency in December. At that time, Congress’ response was largely: That’s Gov. Gray Davis’ problem.

Not anymore.

Thirty-nine Stage 3 alerts later, a House committee today will take up a GOP-drafted emergency bill that would, among other things, allow Davis to temporarily waive certain emission standards for power plants during an emergency and provide federal aid to relieve a notorious bottleneck in the California power grid.

But some GOP lawmakers say the legislation doesn’t go far enough, and plan to offer amendments containing their own ideas. Rep. Mary Bono (R-Palm Springs) plans to push for $100 million in energy assistance to low-income households and for a directive to federal facilities in the West to cut energy use by 20%.

“House leaders recognize that they could lose the House in California if there’s not an action plan that members can campaign on,” said Scott Reed, a GOP strategist.

As lawmakers search for ways to provide immediate relief, the White House continues to cite California’s troubles as evidence of the need to upgrade an aging, overburdened electricity transmission system.

Responding to reports that the administration would propose legislation to give the federal government eminent domain authority in siting power lines, White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said Bush wants to ensure that the distribution infrastructure can move electricity from regions with surpluses to regions that need more power.

“That’s one of the reasons that California is going through the difficulties it’s going through,” Fleischer said. “There is energy available in other parts of the country, but it can’t be shipped to California as easily as you would hope, because of infrastructure problems.”

Fleischer took exception to a front-page story in The Times reporting that Bush, in a speech delivered Tuesday, “offered no hint of what his administration might do” to help California avert a possible economic downturn caused by power blackouts.

Though the president did not specifically mention possible actions in the speech, Fleischer said Bush last week “announced a series of steps, including conservation,” to help California get through an energy crisis this summer.

He said that the Pentagon is reducing its energy needs within California by 10% and that all other federal agencies, at Bush’s direction, are reviewing their energy consumption patterns.

Environmentalists already have begun blasting the administration’s energy plan--even before its details are made public--for what they characterize as a failure to emphasize energy efficiency and investments in renewable fuels.

Activists Say Crisis Isn’t Real

At a Wednesday news briefing, a coalition of environmental advocates disagreed with the administration’s assertion that the country is experiencing an energy “crisis,” and accused it of crafting a plan designed to boost the profits of key campaign contributors.

“We cannot drill our way out of this situation,” said Dan Becker of the Sierra Club. He and others argued that conserving fuel--with cars that use less gasoline and appliances that use less electricity, for example--is the best way to avoid energy shortages in the short term.

So far, it is not clear whether the energy crisis will work to either party’s advantage. Many on Capitol Hill are bracing for an election year that could be brutal for incumbents of both parties if voters who endure high energy bills this summer vent their frustration in the voting booth next year.

Some House Republicans acknowledged that they have been pushing the White House to appear more engaged in finding near-term solutions.

When House Republicans met with Cheney last week, “they urged him and all the administration to at least make it clear that a lot of effort is going into finding a way to solve the problem,” said Jim Specht, a spokesman for Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands), leader of the California GOP delegation.

Though some Republicans have offered ideas to address the immediate problem, it is not clear whether any will receive congressional approval.

Indeed, the emergency assistance bill being taken up today by the House energy subcommittee faces trouble, although it was drafted by the panel’s chairman, Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas).

Barton stripped out a number of provisions opposed by environmentalists. But Democrats plan to seek a vote on capping wholesale electricity prices, a proposal most Republicans oppose. Democrats also plan to introduce an amendment to target natural gas prices.

House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) said the bill “fails miserably” to address California’s problems. “During the campaign, President Bush promised a sensible energy policy,” Gephardt said. “In recent weeks, however, the president has responded to the gathering crisis by throwing up his hands and saying there’s nothing we can do, there’s no way to give people immediate relief from blackouts and sky-high increases of price of gasoline at the pump.”

Lawmakers of both parties acknowledge that they are hearing a rising chorus of constituent complaints about the energy price spikes and supply shortages.

Rep. Chris Cox (R-Newport Beach) was caught in a blackout during a tour of a computer chip factory in his district. “They said it cost them $1 million if the power goes off even for five minutes,” said Cox, who nonetheless opposes price controls.

Cox said he is worried about how the California electricity crisis might affect the national economy. He said that when he asks business owners about expanding in California, “they just look at you like you’re nuts. They don’t consider California an option because of this uncertainty.”

“People come up to you and want you to help solve the problem,” said Rep. George Radanovich (R-Mariposa).

He has explained that there is little the federal government can do in the short term.

“Californians want somebody to do something,” said John J. Pitney Jr., associate professor of government at Claremont McKenna College. “When people are in a mood like that, politicians get nervous thinking that they’re the ones who might get blamed.”

Said Reed, the GOP strategist: “Every incumbent in California is vulnerable in the next election, in both parties. This is an issue that is not ideological. It’s about action and solving a short-term problem. “Politics have taken over this issue, like it or not,” he said. “They may have been raging in California for the last three or four months. It’s now a national political issue.”

*

Times staff writers James Gerstenzang, Edwin Chen, Elizabeth Shogren and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar contributed to this story.