Jeff Bingaman

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, let me speak for just a few minutes on this issue. I don't believe I will need a full 22 minutes. Let me put it in context. The reason we believe it is important to include in this legislation a renewable portfolio standard is that we believe it is important that the Nation have a diverse group of sources--a diverse supply for its energy needs. We are headed in the future to a situation where that diversity is not present to the extent it should be. I have shown this chart many times. We spent nearly a week on the Kyl amendment. This is essentially the same issue coming back in another form. Let me show the chart again. You can see that in the year 2000 we are providing about 69 percent of our total energy needs from two sources; that is, from coal and natural gas. A lot of new generation is under construction around the country. We have a lot of new generation that is expected and planned for, and 95 percent of that new electric generation that is currently planned is planned to be gas fired. It is going to be using more natural gas. We have a problem with that in that today we are not producing as much natural gas as we are consuming. The disparity between what we are producing and what we are consuming is going to grow. It is continuing to grow. We are saying let us hedge our bets as a nation. Let us try to encourage utilities to develop some renewable energy sources. We give them a wide variety that they can pursue. But do something in this regard. We are saying in the amendment I have at the desk, try to do 1 percent in the year 2005. That is what we have in the bill. Try to do 1.6 percent in the year 2006. We have very small increments after that. The whole idea is that by the year 2020 we would try to do 10 percent of their total generation from one or more of these various sources. We specifically provide in the legislation that it is up to the States to decide the right mix. It is up to the individual utility. The individual utility can decide what the right mix is. We are not trying in any way to dictate that. There are some States that have stepped up and are doing something useful. Texas is the most successful. They have a very credible program. Then-Governor Bush--President Bush now--signed that into law. It has moved that State very significantly towards the use of renewable resources. I think they are being held up as a model by many experts for what we ought to see around the country. We are not saying everyone has to do as much as Texas. We are saying let us do as much as we have in this amendment. We have all sorts of flexibility about how they get from here to there. There are some States that produce more than the 10 percent from renewable resources. There are States that have adopted programs that will get them to a higher level than the 10 percent. More power to them. We do not do anything to discourage that. We want to discourage the opportunity for States to essentially give this lip service and not really do anything. We want to encourage the opportunity for States to do as Illinois has done. Illinois has a great goal. They say: We want to be at 5 percent. We want to be at 15 percent. That is wonderful. But they do not have any teeth in their bill. New Mexico has a good goal. I cannot recall exactly what the goal is. But we just suspended the goal until the year 2006 because of other considerations that had nothing to do with the renewable portfolio standard issue. The majority of the Senate favors having a renewable portfolio standard. Let us do it. Let us keep this provision in the law. The Senator's amendment would, in my strong opinion, gut the renewable portfolio standard. It says if you have adopted any other program that you can call a renewable energy portfolio program, it doesn't matter how much teeth there is in it, or standard. If you adopted anything, you are exempt. If you haven't adopted anything, then you need to adopt something in order to be exempt. We are not telling you what it has to be. We are just saying it has so be something. If you adopt anything, you are exempt. That is a gutting of the provision, in my opinion. Clearly, that is not what I believe the majority of the Senate wants to do. I strongly oppose the amendment by the Senator from Alaska.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, how much time remains on the two sides?

Mr. BINGAMAN. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, let me be very brief. I will speak for a couple minutes and then yield back the remainder of our time. I am informed Senator Jeffords will not be arriving in time to speak prior to this vote. Mr. President, I strongly urge Senators to oppose this Murkowski amendment. It does, in my strong opinion, gut the underlying provision which we have been debating now for the last several days. The renewable portfolio standard that we have in the amendment I have sent to the desk requires certain things from utility companies over the next 18 years, between now and the year 2020. We all understand that. What the Murkowski amendment says is that any utility located in any State that has something else in the way of a renewable portfolio program, no matter how weak it is, is exempt from the Federal requirement. It also says that if you are in a State that does not have anything, the State can adopt anything, no matter how weak. And then utilities in that State are also exempt. So it is very clear that his amendment does eliminate any meaningful mandate on utilities anywhere in the country. I strongly urge Senators to oppose the Murkowski amendment. It would gut our renewable portfolio provision. For that reason, I think it should be defeated. Mr. President, I know of nobody else on our side who wishes to speak in opposition. So I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BINGAMAN. I assume time runs against me during the quorum call.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am informed that Senator Jeffords wants to speak in opposition. I also want to speak for another couple minutes, but I would like to do that after him. I would have to suggest the absence of a quorum at this time in order to preserve his right to speak.

Mr. BINGAMAN. All of that is in opposition?

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, how much time remains?

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, let me ask this of my friend: The way I read his amendment, it says any State--this provision does not apply to any retail electric supplier in any State that adopts or has adopted a renewable portfolio, energy portfolio program. Am I correct that a State that is one of the white States on this map, that they do not have a program right now--if they decide to adopt a program which says instead of going to 10 percent, we will go to one- tenth of 1 percent by the year 2020--that certainly is a renewable portfolio program in every sense of the word--they would be out from any other requirements because they will have adopted a program, a renewable portfolio program under his amendment and, therefore, our effort to move them in any meaningful way to use renewable power would be thwarted? Would he agree with that?

Mr. BINGAMAN. Will my colleague yield?

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, that completes the items we intended to complete today.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I have two other amendments that are at the desk at this moment. Amendment No. 3023, which is an amendment by Senator Lincoln related to the biodiesel credit, is cleared, and I urge that we go ahead and proceed with it.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I also move to reconsider the vote on the adoption of amendment No. 3016.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, these 11 amendments have been cleared on both sides. I urge their adoption en bloc.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 3041 be voted on.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, under the unanimous consent, I believe the Senator from Maine now is in order to offer her amendment which is an agreed-to amendment.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BINGAMAN. The point I was making is this amendment would essentially give Governors the option of taking their State out of this program by signing a certification to the effect that in their opinion this adversely affects folks in their State. The reality is the majority of the Senate has expressed their view. The majority of the Senate has indicated they believe putting a reasonable renewable portfolio standard in the law makes sense and this proposal does that in a gradual, moderate way. I think it would be a terrible mistake for us at this point to totally gut that provision, as the Kyl amendment would do. Anyone who voted against the Kyl amendment earlier today should oppose this amendment as well. Anyone who voted against the Murkowski amendment just now should vote against this amendment as well. I am advised there may be others wishing to speak, so I reserve the remainder of my time.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Let me speak briefly, and I will yield the remainder of my time, and I hope the Senator from Arizona will as well. This will be the third time we have had essentially the same vote: The Kyl amendment earlier this morning, and then the vote we just had on the Murkowski amendment, and now this one. This amendment says that although we have a renewable portfolio standard, the majority of the Senate has agreed that makes sense, any Governor who doesn't agree with it can take his State out. He can sign a certification saying in his opinion----

Mr. BINGAMAN. I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Vermont.

Mr. BINGAMAN. How much time remains?