SECTION B
      Page 2

Energy Bill in Conference Committee
Said to Be Ineffective

Senate Moments...

First Chief Justice Rejected….

WASHINGTON (September 19, 2002) -- As Congress and the White House tout the need for increased energy security, members of the House-Senate conference committee consolidating the energy bill today further weakened the already minuscule effort to reduce oil imports.

Instead of saving fuel, changes approved by negotiators today will actually increase gasoline consumption by millions of gallons. The move comes amid rising oil prices, falling inventories and growing concern over price and supply disruptions in the Middle East.

"The energy bill now does less than nothing to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Congress undermined even the symbolic fuel economy gestures," said Daniel Lashof, a senior scientist at NRDC (the Natural Resources Defense Council). "Better technology in our cars and trucks could save 2 million barrels of oil every day, more oil than we import from Saudi Arabia. But instead Congress caved in to Detroit and the big oil companies."

Led by Reps. Billy Tauzin (R-LA) and John Dingell (D-MI), committee members voted to delay until 2012 a provision in the House bill ordering fuel economy increases that would save 5 billion gallons of gasoline by 2010. That's just six days worth of U.S. consumption. Today's move will cut the 2010 savings nearly in half.
Members also extended a loophole allowing automakers to build less efficient trucks and SUVs in return for minor modifications that let a handful of vehicle models run on corn-based ethanol as well as gasoline. The problem, according to the Department of Transportation, is that just 1 percent of the vehicles would actually use ethanol. This loophole will allow gasoline consumption to increase by as much as 9 billion gallons by 2012.
"We cannot drill our way out of this predicament," Lashof said. The United States imports more than half its oil, but has just 3 percent of known reserves. Sixty-five percent of the world's known reserves lie beneath the Persian Gulf states. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would increase world reserves by less than one-third of 1 percent.

The only way to end the economic and security risks is with better cars and better fuels, Lashof said. Earlier this year, NRDC and the Union of Concerned Scientists released "Dangerous Addiction: Ending America's Oil Dependence," detailing the security threat and offers a practical simple, five-step plan to cut the oil needed for our cars and light trucks in half, saving 5 million barrels per day by 2020.

On December 15, 1795, the Senate administered a stinging blow to one of the nation's most distinguished "founding fathers." By a vote of 10 to 14, it rejected President George Washington's nomination of South Carolina's John Rutledge to be Chief Justice of the United States.

Born to one of Charleston's elite families, John Rutledge rapidly gained political and judicial distinction during the American Revolution. At an early age, he represented South Carolina in the Stamp Act Congress and in the Continental Congress. In 1775, he helped draft the constitution for the newly formed "Republic of South Carolina" and a year later he became that republic's president. When British troops captured Charleston in 1779, the state legislature elected Rutledge governor and handed him virtually absolute power. After the war, he served as chief judge of a state court and, in 1787, played a major role in drafting the U.S. Constitution.

In recognition of these contributions, President George Washington nominated -- and the Senate quickly confirmed -- Rutledge as the first U.S. Supreme Court's senior associate justice. Although Rutledge accepted his commission, he failed to attend the Court's meetings and resigned in 1791 to become chief justice of a South Carolina court.
In June 1795, Rutledge offered President Washington his services as a replacement for the soon-to-retire Chief Justice John Jay. Washington readily agreed and, with the Senate in recess, promised to give Rutledge a temporary commission upon his arrival at the August session of the Supreme Court.

Several weeks after learning this, however, Rutledge complicated his confirmation chances by delivering a speech vehemently attacking the controversial Jay Treaty, which he believed to be excessively pro-British. Rutledge seemed blind to the fact that the president had supported -- and the Senate had recently consented to -- that difficult treaty. Many administration supporters cited this ill-timed speech as evidence of Rutledge's advancing mental incapacity. Rutledge ignored the escalating criticism and took his seat on the high court.

When the Senate convened in December, it promptly voted down his nomination. Rutledge thus became the first rejected Supreme Court nominee and the only one among the fifteen who would gain their offices through recess appointments not to be subsequently confirmed. In turning down Rutledge, the Senate made it clear that an examination of a nominee's qualifications would include his political views. Those who differed substantively from the majority of senators could expect rough going.

NEW ! Sec. B  Page 3
History Scramble

Pets of the Month