No ‘Gang of Energy’ Bill; House Energy Bill Looks Even Worse Now

By September 19, 2008Energy

This should help clarify the debate. From The Hill, “‘Gang of 20’ won’t offer energy bill“*:

A bipartisan group of senators who sought a compromise in the rancorous energy debate won’t introduce their bill before lawmakers adjourn for the elections, several Senate aides said Thursday.

Instead, the so-called Gang of 20 will offer a statement of principals outlining their agreement on a host of divisive issues, including expanded offshore drilling. They plan to offer legislation once the political season has ended, according to an aide to a Democrat involved in the discussions. The aide said that the election-year environment has poisoned the atmosphere and hampered the chances of passing a bill on such a controversial campaign topic.

May we suggest one principle, rather than a set? It’s this: The United States should encourage the domestic production of all market-viable forms of energy, with an immediate emphasis on oil and natural gas production from areas where development is now blocked.

Meanwhile, as people get a chance to read the House-passed “energy” bill (H.R. 6899), the reviews worsen. The criticism pins blame on Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi for orchestrating a bill intended to provide political cover instead of energy, but the editorials do not merely declare anathema, they explain just how the House bill fails.

More at The Chilling Effect, which also points us to Heritage’s critique.

* Please, please, please, let this be the end of the “Gang of X, Y and Z” formulation for naming ad hoc congressional coalitions. The Gang of Four was a murderous group of totalitarian Chinese communists; we shouldn’t be naming anything after them. (One exception: The great British rock group, Gang of Four. Rock ‘n rollers always have stupid names, but that’s no reason to emulate them.)

Leave a Reply