Editorials

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., was right when he said recently that "making good compromises is our business" in Congress.

But the bill in question -- the Democratic energy plan that passed in the House late Wednesday night -- was neither good nor a compromise.

Republicans were right to stand firm against the legislation and President Bush's pledge to veto the bill, on the off chance it were to survive the Senate, is also the correct response.

The bill is deeply flawed.

First, the legislation enacts a permanent ban on drilling for oil within 50 miles of shore -- where, as Republicans pointed out, an estimated 88 percent of the 18 billion barrels of oil there are located. Drilling past 50 miles is allowed, only if a state "opts in" with its own enabling legislation. Drilling beyond 100 miles would be allowed.

The result could well be less, not more, oil exploration -- particularly off the coast of California and in the Gulf of Mexico, both areas near the needed infrastructure.

And because the new permanent ban would apply to Alaska -- which currently has no offshore moratorium -- untold resources there would be denied.

"How much new drilling do we get out of this bill? It's zero. Just zero," noted House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio. "It's a hoax on the American people. This is intended for one reason ... so the Democrats can say we voted on energy."

Second, the bill revamps the revenue-sharing system that provides states with an incentive to allow drilling. Instead of splitting the revenues with the feds, states would receive nothing.

And the bill includes some ham-fisted efforts to wean America off oil, such as a requirement that all utilities nationwide get at least 15 percent of their electricity from solar, wind or other alternative energy sources.

There are some positive elements in the bill. It provides for a continuation of some important tax credits for alternative energy solutions.

Those tax credits, set to expire at the end of this year, are the best way for the federal government to encourage development of realistic renewable energy -- rather than heavy-handed federal mandates and pork-barrel subsidies for inferior solutions, such as ethanol and bio-diesel.

The bill would also open up the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, putting an additional 70 million barrels of light crude onto the market -- a step that could have an immediate impact on gas prices.

But these elements aren't nearly enough to make it a good bill.

And as for it being a compromise, the true nature of the Democrats' effort is seen in the fact that Speaker Nancy Pelosi allowed no amendments, no substitutes and no committee hearings, as Texas Republican Rep. Jeb Hensarling pointed out.

"I'm glad we moved the argument as far as we did," adds Congressman Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler. "But we know that not a single drop of additional oil would be produced by this bill."

Though the bill passed, it wasn't by a veto proof majority. Republicans mustn't waver in the resolve to keep a bad bill down.

()