[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
REPUBLICAN BUDGET RESOLUTION
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY BUDGET COALITION
315 Circle Avenue, #2, Takoma Park, MD 20912-4836
Phone 301-270-2258 / Fax: 301-891-2866
IN ANOTHER ASSAULT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, HOUSE REPUBLICANS' BUDGET
RESOLUTION SLASHES FUNDING FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY PROGRAMS WHILE
CONTINUING TO FUND NUCLEAR PORK
For Immediate Release, May 16, 1996
Contact: Ken Bossong 301-270-2258
Henry Griggs 202-321-8282
Washington, D.C. -- A coalition of national business, environmental, and
consumer organizations charged that the Fiscal Year 1997 (FY'97) Budget
Resolution scheduled for consideration today by the U.S. House of
Representatives continues the Republican Party's assault on the environment
by slashing funding for federal renewable energy and energy efficiency
programs.
In particular, the House Budget Resolution proposes to:
** reduce funding for renewable energy technologies to $191 million
in FY'97, down from $393.8 million in FY'95, and $178 million below the
Administration's FY'97 request of $368.9 million;
** eliminate all funding for wind energy systems, solar buildings,
and renewable energy production incentives;
** move towards a goal of phasing out all energy conservation
research by reducing funding for energy efficiency research and development
(R&D) to $230 million in FY'97, down from $486.4 million in FY'95, and $336
million below the Administration's FY'97 request of $566.2 million;
** eliminate all funding for federal in-house energy management
programs (which save taxpayers $4 for every dollar invested), global
warming R&D programs, and new energy efficiency standards;
** cut funding for the Energy Information Administration by 50%
below FY'95, privatize the national laboratories operated by the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) as well as eliminate DOE itself.
"At the very moment that the American wind industry needs to
continue its close partnership with government to compete in booming global
markets, the House Budget Committee has stepped in to impose a divorce
edict," said Karl Gawell, director of governmental affairs for the American
Wind Energy Association. "Zeroing out DOE's wind programs will put the
future of U.S. technology in jeopardy in one of the most dynamic new
energy markets on the horizon."
Similarly, Solar Energy Industries Association Executive Director
Scott Sklar called the House Budget Resolution "the final nail in the
coffin of U.S. energy policy." He added that the proposed rollbacks of
cost-shared clean energy technology development are the most irresponsible
and foolhardy act the House Budget Committee has ever taken. "I don't know
how the Budget committee leadership can honestly look the U.S. taxpayer
in the eye, since they are saddling our children with higher trade
debts, greater energy dependence, and a lower quality of life."
At the same time, the House Budget Resolution proposes to fund
nuclear fusion at $200 million -- more than provided for all the renewable
energy technologies combined -- even though the technology is at least 50
years away from producing a single unit of commercially usable electricity.
Moreover, the Budget Resolution fully funds the Advanced Light Water
Reactor program at $40 million in FY'97 even though this is the sixth
year of a five-year program; 190 members of the House voted last year to
terminate this program and a new fight is expected this year.
"The energy provisions in the House Budget Resolution are the
ultimate hypocrisy: the Budget Committee slashes clean energy programs
with one hand, while protecting polluting, wasteful nuclear programs with
the other," said Anna Aurilio, a staff scientist with the U.S.
Public Interest Research Group.
OPPOSITION BY ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS CAUSES SPLITS AMONG REPUBLICANS
The House Budget Resolution flies in the face of recommendations by
the Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund, Wilderness Society and seven
of the nation's other leading environmental organizations, who wrote to the
members of Congress on April 22 "to emphasize the pivotal role that
improved energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies must play in
achieving both domestic and international environmental goals. ... [W]e
urge you to support full funding of the Administration's FY'97 budget
request for energy efficiency and renewable energy."
"Excessive dependence on coal and oil are at the heart of our most
pressing environmental problems -- from fine particle pollution to global
warming," said Daniel Lashof, senior scientist with the Natural Resources
Defense Council. "The House Budget Committee's obsession with trying to
eliminate the energy efficiency and renewable energy programs that are
critical to providing cost-effective solution to these environmental
problems is totally at odds with the Speaker's commitment to craft a new
approach to environmental issues."
Members of the Sustainable Energy Budget Coalition charged that the
energy provisions of the Budget Resolution essentially reflect the personal
agenda of Rep. Robert S. Walker (R-PA) who, as chairman of the House
Science Committee, was unable to get the very same provisions through his
own committee due to Republican opposition. In fact, on May 1, seven
Republican members of the House Science Committee wrote to the House
Budget Committee describing themselves as "strong supporters of
alternative energy research and development programs" who believe that
"renewable energy and efficiency programs ... should not suffer
dramatically disproportionate cuts in comparison with science programs
in particular and with unwise domestic spending in general."
"A number of Republicans on the Science Committee recognized that
trashing R&D on environmentally benign, politically popular, energy
alternatives is not wise, either substantively or electorally," said Scott
Denman, Executive Director of the Safe Energy Communication Council. "Now
this failed proposal has resurfaced in the Budget Resolution; didn't the
Republicans learn their lesson on the environment last year?"
In addition, letters addressed to Reps. Walker and Livingston now
circulating among members of the House and already signed by over four
dozen members, including over 20 Republicans, urge that "priority [be
given] funding for DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy programs,
which themselves sustained a disproportionate 31 percent cut from the
previous year. ... We urge your support for [these] programs on their
merits, with an eye on the long-term energy security of our country."
"Serious gasoline price impacts over the past two decades will
revisit the United States with increasing severity and frequency as our
dependence on foreign oil and petroleum products deepen," concluded former
CIA Director R. James Woolsey. "May I suggest that strengthening the
nation's renewable energy and energy efficiency programs, now under attack
in the Congress, is the most progressive, certain, and American solution
-- a solution that will enhance our energy and national security."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Sustainable Energy Budget Coalition is a coalition of nearly 40
national business, environmental, and other energy policy organizations
(list available upon request) working to promote sustainable energy
programs.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To receive regular energy policy alerts, summaries and updates from
Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy Project, send the following
message to listproc@essential.org: SUBSCRIBE CMEP-LIST [your name -
organizational affiliation - home state]
The Critical Mass home page is located at http://www.essential.org/CMEP