Providing for Consideration of HR 4503, Energy Policy Act of 2004, and HR 4517, United States Refinery Revitalization Act of 2004

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4503, ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2004, AND H.R. 4517, UNITED STATES REFINERY REVITALIZATION ACT OF 2004 -- (House of Representatives - June 15, 2004)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, rather than have a thoughtful discussion about ways to reduce American dependency on foreign oil, this body is again recycling bad legislation, in this case a series of corporate subsidies and environmental rollbacks that indemnify companies that would poison our water, encourage the polluting of our air, and waste taxpayer dollars.

Two provisions would have the gravest of impacts upon my State. The first permits a controversial Long Island Sound energy cable, the Cross Sound Cable, to be reactivated despite having been turned off by the Secretary of Energy earlier this year. The cable is in violation of State and Federal environmental permits. The bill disregards pending litigation by the Connecticut Attorney General and stifles the regulatory authority of Connecticut and the Army Corps of Engineers, who share jurisdiction over the installation of such transmission cables.

This bill would also sound a death knell for States' abilities to regulate the siting of natural gas pipelines by eliminating the ability of State environmental departments to prevent the damaging environmental effects of pipeline siting. It would grant FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the sole authority to make these decisions. Remember, FERC is charged with protecting consumers; but as the people in California and the Pacific Northwest know very well, they abdicated that responsibility in support of the industry. They gave the industry every break and not one for the consumer.

If we grant FERC this authority, it paves the way for the construction of Islander East, the gas pipeline, across the Long Island Sound, stretching from Branford, Connecticut, to Shoreham, New York. The results will be that Islander East, that pipeline, would be installed over and above the objections of the Army Corps of Engineers and the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection.

This is a slippery slope, Mr. Speaker, I will tell the Members, because this will run roughshod over State authority. These provisions disregard the needs of Connecticut's economy, its environment, and the voices of millions of Connecticut citizens who will be directly affected by these provisions. By not even allowing for the amendments to address these concerns, the leadership insisted once again that it is they and not the Connecticut citizens, who are elected officials, who know what is best for our State.

The Republican leadership does not know what is best for the State of Connecticut. If we want to reduce dependence on foreign oil, if we are serious about saving taxpayers' money, we should have a real debate in this body, if we are serious about what constitutes good energy policy instead of more corporate giveaways like this in this bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT