Date: 15-Jun-10
Country: US
Author: Timothy Gardner and Richard Cowan
 

The United States Capitol building is seen as legislators move into a weekend of crucial health care deliberations in Washington March 19, 2010.
Photo: Jim Bourg

The U.S. Senate was set on Thursday to vote on a bill blocking the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating pollution blamed for global warming, in a test of lawmakers' resolve for tackling broader climate legislation this year.

The Republican-inspired measure, which President Barack Obama vows to veto if it unexpectedly passes the Democratic-controlled Congress, would stop regulations the EPA plans to set in place early next year to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from large factories and electric power utilities.

But critics of the bill argue that it also would stymie the Obama administration's efforts to improve vehicle pollution control standards, resulting in greater U.S. reliance on imported oil.

Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who represents the oil-producing state of Alaska, kicked off a day-long debate of her bill, saying the EPA regulations "would reduce emissions at an unreasonably high cost and with an unnecessarily bureaucratic process."

Murkowski has never predicted victory on the proposed EPA ban, but a close vote is expected. Even if it were to pass the Senate, it faces an uphill fight in the House of Representatives.

The Obama administration prefers that Congress write comprehensive climate control legislation. But with the Senate unable so far to pass such a bill, it is preparing to move ahead with regulations, which already face legal challenges.

Murkowski also has argued that Congress, not the EPA, should be in charge of setting climate control policy.

While she has pushed legislation to encourage the use of more alternative fuels, Murkowski has not yet forcefully come out in favor of any broad climate-control legislation that many experts think is necessary to keep Earth's temperatures from rising to dangerous levels.

The EPA regulations follow a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the agency has the power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. But Murkowski said that going forward with the new regulations on businesses would threaten the U.S. economy as it is struggling to rebound from a recession.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who opposes Murkowski's measure, called it "a great big gift for Big Oil," by keeping gasoline-hungry vehicles on the road.

Environmentalists cited figures estimating that blocking the EPA from regulating carbon emissions would stop the conservation of 455 million barrels of oil over the lifespan of cars made in 2012-2016.

And Reid dismissed Murkowski's argument that she is trying to save the battered U.S. economy.

"This resolution does nothing to create jobs in Nevada or any place else in our country. It does create jobs where we're importing oil -- the Middle East, Venezuela and places like that," Reid, who represents Nevada, said.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said if EPA regulations were imposed, they would "raise the price of everything from electricity, to gasoline, to fertilizer, to food on our supermarket shelves." He has used the same argument against Democratic climate control legislation.

Emotions were running high early in the debate on the bill, which the White House and environmental groups have worked hard to defeat.

California Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer displayed an enlarged photograph of a bird drenched in oil from the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, as she took the floor to argue against Murkowski's bill.

Republicans have accused Democrats of exploiting that disaster by linking it to the debate over EPA regulation of carbon emissions, which come from using oil- and coal-fueled energy.

(Editing by Paul Simao)