Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission

The 110th Congress already is counting the days until adjournment. When one factors in the August recess and the targeted end of September adjournment, there are few working weeks left in this session. As usual, the annual appropriations bills are a top priority, but few now expect Congress to be able to pass any of the bills. This would mean that the bills would be rolled into a continuing resolution that would need to be passed before final adjournment by this Congress, even in a lame-duck session after the election.

Energy is certainly in the news in Washington, and around the country. High gasoline prices and their impact on the economy are driving a lot of charges and counter-charges on Capitol Hill as to which party has been responsible. Public opinion may at some point force reconsideration of legislation that would open up additional public lands to development, including offshore. While Republicans are in the process of developing legislation to do just that, one should view it more in the context of defining a campaign issue than as legislation anyone expects to pass in this session, although this could change.

Democrats are also introducing energy legislation to show constituents that they're taking action in light of rising energy prices. As Democrats are in control it is easier for them to move bills to the floor for a vote. One such bill dealt with leasing of federal lands onshore and offshore. The Democrats are claiming that oil and gas companies are sitting on leases which they could be producing. To address this "problem" House leadership brought a “use it or lose it” bill, HR 6251, to the floor the day before the Independence Day recess. While it failed to garner the 2/3 vote necessary under a suspension of the rules the House has scheduled another vote on a bill that includes “lose it or lose it” language, HR 6515, as Compact Comments goes to “print" (July 21). Readers may want to take a look at the legislation on the Thomas Web site and weigh in with their congressional delegation should they have opinions on the bill. On this issue, readers may also be interested in perusing Senator Domenici’s floor statement or a letter to House leadership from the president of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists.

One energy issue that seems to have been dispensed with for this session of Congress is the Warner-Lieberman climate change bill. Supporters had high hopes that legislation would be passed. And even though it would be vetoed by President Bush, the measure would give them legislation ready to be introduced, passed and signed into law early in the 111th session of Congress. As it turned out, the bill had to be pulled because opposition was stronger than expected, opposition which included some Democrats and many Republicans. The prevailing view is that major changes will now be needed before the bill is ready to be considered again.

Other legislation that failed to pass in the Senate recently was an energy package that would have revoked a number of oil company tax breaks and instituted a windfall profits tax. Had the bill passed, President Bush had threatened to veto it.

Additionally, the House failed to pass in late June, HR 6346, the Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act, which would have made it unlawful during a period proclaimed by the president to be an energy emergency to sell petroleum distillate at prices deemed excessive or as taking unfair advantage of the public. President Bush had promised to veto that legislation also.

Congress is expected to consider anti-speculation legislation any day. There are attempts being made in the House and Senate to craft a bipartisan bill.

Finally, concerning net receipts sharing, the news is not looking good for repeal. On the Hill in February discussed the unfortunate return of “net receipts sharing,” something IOGCC members thought finally had been dispensed with in 2000 after an active effort by the organization. 

The House and Senate Interior Appropriations Committees included the provision in their bill last year (accepting the proposal contained in the president’s budget), resulting in a 2 percent charge to states out of their share of royalties from federal lands for Fiscal Year 2008. As part of the president’s budget again this fiscal year (FY 2009), it appears likely at this juncture that the provision will once again be contained in the House Interior Appropriations Committee bill, currently awaiting markup by the full committee. Particularly for IOGCC members who’s states have Congressmen on the House Appropriations Committee, it is suggested that an immediate call to them on this issue might be in order. Please call me (202-416-5062) for additional details.