Recognize the importance of domestic energy production
Producing energy in Wyoming is good for the local economy and our national security. Every bit of energy we produce at home decreases the need for us to look overseas to supply our critical energy needs. I believe in smart, balanced energy policy that
recognizes the importance of domestic energy production and reducing our reliance on foreign oil, as well as protecting our natural environment. Wyoming will continue to be a world leader in coal production, natural gas, and other renewable energy source
Source: Campaign website, www.barrasso2008.com
Aug 12, 2008
Favor investment in coal and natural gas production
Every bit of energy we produce here at home decreases the need for us to look overseas to supply our critical energy needs. I believe in smart, balanced energy policy that recognizes the importance of domestic energy production and reducing our
reliance on foreign oil, as well as protecting our natural environment. With smart policy choices and wise investment, Wyoming will continue to be a world leader in coal production, natural gas, and other renewable energy sources.
Voted YES on protecting middle-income taxpayers from a national energy tax.
Congressional Summary:
On budget resolutions, it shall not be in order in the Senate to consider any bill or amendment that includes a National energy tax increase which would have widespread applicability on middle-income taxpayers.
The term "middle-income" taxpayers means single individuals with $200,000 or less in adjusted gross income and married couples filing jointly with $250,000 or less.
The term "widespread applicability" includes the definition with respect to individual income taxpayers.
The term "National energy tax increase" means any legislation that the Congressional Budget Office would score as leading to an increase in the costs of producing, generating or consuming energy.
Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Sen. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R, SC): The climate change proposal that was in the President's budget would create a massive tax increase on anybody who uses energy, and that would be every American middle-class family, which already has a tough time getting by. This [amendment creates a procedure to block] any bill that would raise the cost of energy on our middle-class families who are struggling to get by. I ask the Senate to rally around this concept. We can deal with climate change without passing a $3,000-per-household energy tax on the families of America who are having a hard time paying their bills.
Opponent's argument to vote No:No senators spoke against the amendment.
Voted YES on requiring full Senate debate and vote on cap-and-trade.
Congressional Summary:AMENDMENT PURPOSE: To prohibit the use of reconciliation in the Senate for climate change legislation involving a cap and trade system.
Sec. 202 is amended by inserting at the end the following: "The Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Budget shall not revise the allocations in this resolution if the legislation is reported from any committee pursuant to sec. 310 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974."
Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Sen. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R, SC): This idea to most people of a debate about reconciliation probably is mind-numbing and not very interesting. But there is a process in the Congress where you can take legislation and basically put it on a fast track. It is subject to 50 votes.
The whole idea of the Senate kind of cooling things down has served the country well. In that regard, to end debate you need 60 votes. If 41 Senators are opposed to a piece of legislation, strongly enough to come to the
floor every day and talk about it, that legislation doesn't go anywhere. If you took climate change and health care, two very controversial, big-ticket items, and put them on the reconciliation track, you would basically be doing a lot of damage to the role of the Senate in a constitutional democracy.
Senator Byrd, who is one of the smartest people to ever serve in the Senate about rules and parliamentary aspects of the Senate, said that to put climate change and health care reform in reconciliation is like "a freight train through Congress" and is "an outrage that must be resisted." Senator Conrad said: "I don't believe reconciliation was ever intended for this purpose."
I think both of them are right. Under the law, you cannot put Social Security into reconciliation because we know how controversial and difficult that is. I come here in support of the Johanns amendment that rejects that idea.
Opponent's argument to vote No:No senators spoke against the amendment.
Voted NO on tax incentives for energy production and conservation.
OnTheIssues.org Explanation:A "Cloture Motion" would end debate on the bill, and then allow a vote on passage. This motion failed (3/5ths of the Senators must vote YEA), based on objections of how the new incentives would be paid for.Congressional Summary:A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide Tax incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, and to provide individual income tax relief.
TITLE I--ENERGY TAX INCENTIVES
Sec. 102. Production credit for electricity produced from marine renewables.
Sec. 104. Credit for residential energy efficient property.
Sec. 106. New clean renewable energy bonds.
Part II--Carbon Mitigation Provisions
Sec. 112. Expansion and modification of coal gasification investment credit.
Sec. 115. Carbon audit of the tax code.
Sec. 121. Inclusion of cellulosic biofuel in bonus depreciation for biomass ethanol plant property.
Sec. 122.
Credits for biodiesel and renewable diesel.
Sec. 124. Credit for new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicles.
Sec. 127. Transportation fringe benefit to bicycle commuters.
Sec. 146. Qualified green building and sustainable design projects.Opponents argument for voting NAY:Sen. SPECTER: H.R. 6049 would revive important tax provisions that expired at the end of 2007 and extend provisions that are set to expire at the end of 2008. I support extension of the R&D tax credit, the renewable energy tax incentives, and many other important provisions in this package.
Despite the positive elements of this legislation, the main sticking point is whether temporary extensions of tax relief should be offset with permanent tax increases elsewhere. The White House issued a statement recommending a Presidential veto of this bill in its current form. [Vote NAY to] allow the Senate to work its will and pass legislation that can be quickly signed by the President.
Reference: Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act;
Bill HR6049
; vote number 2008-150
on Jun 17, 2008
Voted NO on addressing CO2 emissions without considering India & China.
OnTheIssues.org Explanation: This is a motion on an omnibus spending bill, sending instructions to the committee resolving differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. Sen. Boxer introduced this motion, and Sen. DeMint introduced a counter-motion. Voting for the Boxer motion means you favor Boxer's method over DeMint's method, which means speeding up Congressional action on global warming.Opponents argument for voting NAY:Sen. DeMINT. When we are talking about trade agreements, there needs to be a level playing field. This motion would prevent Congress from passing any law with new mandates on greenhouse gas emissions that would harm the U.S. economy or result in job loss unless both China and India had the same mandates--in other words, if we had a level playing field. It is not going to help the environment in the United States or the world if we pass mandates that raise the cost of doing business in our country, if we create mandates that do not exist in
India or China.Proponents argument for voting YEA:Sen. BOXER. I rise to speak against the DeMint motion and in favor of the Boxer motion. The DeMint motion is a throwback to 10 years ago when everybody, including myself, was saying we better watch out and not do anything about global warming until the undeveloped world acts. We cannot do that anymore. This is a time when we need to stand up as the leading country in the world and say that we can fight global warming, and we can win this fight.
But what happens with the DeMint motion, he gives China and India a veto power over what we should be doing. Imagine saying we are not going to do anything about human rights until China acts. Why would we give up our chance to take the mantle of leadership and finally grab hold of this issue? I cannot look into the eyes of my grandchildren and tell them: Sorry, I am giving over my proxy to China & India, and I can't do anything about it.
Develop technology for carbon dioxide sequestration.
Barrasso introduced developing technology for carbon dioxide sequestration
Greenhouse Gas Emission Atmospheric Removal Act or the GEAR Act -
Declares that it is the policy of the United States to provide incentives to encourage the development and implementation of technology to permanently remove greenhouse gases (GHGs) from the atmosphere on a significant scale.
Establishes within the Department of Energy (DOE) the Greenhouse Gas Emission Atmospheric Removal Commission.
Provides financial awards on a competitive basis to entities for the achievement of milestones in developing and applying technology that could significantly slow or reverse the accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere by permanently capturing or sequestrating those gases without significant countervailing harmful effects.
Vests title to intellectual property arising from any awards in U.S. entities. Bars title transfer to an entity not incorporated in the United States until the first obtained patent expires. Authorizes the United States to reserve a license to have such property practiced on its behalf.
Open the Outer Continental Shelf for oil & gas leasing.
Barrasso co-sponsored opening the Outer Continental Shelf for oil & gas leasing
A bill to address record high gas prices at the pump, and for other purposes. The Gas Price Reduction Act amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) to prescribe procedures for petition, by the governor of a state with a new producing area within the offshore administrative boundaries beyond the state's submerged land, to make the new producing area available for oil and gas leasing.
Repeals the prohibition against funding: (1) regulations regarding a commercial leasing program for oil shale resources on public lands; or (2) an oil shale lease sale.
Instructs the Secretary of Energy to: (1) expand and accelerate research and development efforts for advanced batteries; and (2) implement a direct loan program for up to 30% of the costs of advanced battery production.
Expresses the sense of the Senate that the federal government should implement policies to increase federal purchases of plug-in electric drive vehicles.
Report to Congress on the international regime for regulating trading in energy commodity futures and derivatives.
Source: Gas Price Reduction Act (S.3202) 08-S3202 on Jun 26, 2008
Establish energy security strategy with domestic production.
Barrasso co-sponsored establishing energy security strategy with domestic production
The Secretary of Energy shall conduct an analysis of all policies of the Federal Government (including mandates, subsidies, tariffs, and tax policy) that encourage, or have the potential to encourage, energy production in the United States; with recommendations to reduce:
the dependence of the United States on foreign sources of energy;
the quantity of air pollutants in the environment;
greenhouse gas emissions; and
the cost of energy.
Every 4 years, the President shall develop an energy security strategy that proposes comprehensive and long-range energy policies for the United States to reduce:
the dependence of the United States on foreign sources of energy;
the quantity of air pollutants in the environment;
greenhouse gas emissions; and
the cost of energy.
Every 4 years, the President shall describes the latest energy security strategy, including:
an estimate of the domestic and foreign energy supplies needed to meet the projected energy demand of the United States; and
a summary of research and development efforts funded by the Federal Government to achieve the strategy.
Source: Better Energy Strategy for Tomorrow Act (BEST Act; S.3240) 08-S3240 on Jul 10, 2008
Allow horizontal drilling into Alaska's Coastal Plain.
Barrasso signed No Surface Occupancy Western Arctic Energy Act
No Surface Occupancy Western Arctic Coastal Plain Domestic Energy Security Act: Authorizes exploration, leasing, development, and production of oil and gas from the Western Coastal Plain.
Defines the Western Coastal Plain as the area of Coastal Plain: (1) that borders the land of Alaska to the west and Alaska offshore waters of the Beaufort Sea on the north; and (2) from which the Secretary of the Interior finds oil and gas can be produced through horizontal drilling or other subsurface technology from sites outside or underneath the Coastal Plain surface.
Authorizes the Secretary to establish a competitive oil and gas leasing program that will result in an environmentally sound program for the exploration, development, and production of the oil and gas resources of the Western Coastal Plain.
Considers such program to be compatible with the purposes for which the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was established.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) establish lease sale procedures; and (2) offer for lease those tracts the Secretary considers to have the greatest potential for the discovery of hydrocarbons.
Prescribes a scheme for the allocation of revenues produced by bonus, rental, and royalty revenues from the federal oil and gas leasing and operations authorized under this Act, requiring 50% to be paid semiannually to the state of Alaska, and the remainder to designated federal entities.
