Washington Outlook
Edited by Richard S. Dunham
What's Greener and Has Legs? Bush's Energy Plan
For much of George W. Bush's first six months, energy policy has been an oily albatross around his neck. The President's plans to step up drilling on federal lands, expand nuclear power, soften environmental safeguards, and increase refinery capacity were panned by the public and marked the abrupt end of his honeymoon. With Bush being bashed as a shill for Big Oil, you'd think his energy plan would be dead and buried. Well, think again.
Three unexpected events have converged to alter the landscape dramatically. First, Bush has responded to slipping polls by shifting his rhetoric from boosting the energy supply to energy efficiency and conservation--which puts him on the same page as congressional Democrats and GOP moderates. "Their energy policy is no longer exclusively supply-oriented," says Representative Sherwood L. Boehlert (N.Y.), a prominent pro-environment Republican. "The policy that's evolving will be significantly improved."
In addition, the falling prices of natural gas and gasoline in recent weeks have alleviated the crisis atmosphere on Capitol Hill and prompted both sides to tone down the blame game.
Finally, because of the Democratic takeover of the Senate, Jeff Bingaman (N.M.), a business-friendly consensus-builder, replaces pro-oil stalwart Frank H. Murkowski (R-Alaska) atop the Senate Energy Committee. Says American Gas Assn. lobbyist Rick Shelby: "There's a real basis for optimism in terms of being able to hammer out a compromise."
The endgame for the energy bill can be compared with another issue close to Bush's heart: education. Just as the President backed away from school vouchers for private and religious schools, he may give up on drilling Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and on protected federal lands.
At the same time, Democrats appear prepared to give ground on three of Bush's top priorities: increased oil and gas drilling in the continental U.S., incentives to expand refinery capacity, and the reauthorization of the about-to-expire Price-Anderson Act, which protects nuclear power generators from excessive liability. "My view is that about 90% of what is in his so-called energy plan" is acceptable, Bingaman says.
On July 25, the Energy Committee will take up a Bingaman bill that could become the vehicle that all sides use to ride to the finish line. Still, Democrats will push for more conservation provisions than the White House is ready to embrace. They'll try to force auto makers to boost fuel efficiency. And they'll create incentives for companies to build more-efficient appliances.
GLARING OMISSION. There is increasing evidence that the White House is losing its fighting spirit over what once was a cornerstone of the Bush agenda. On July 9, Bush urged Congress to act on his top priorities: education, a patients' bill of rights, and faith-based initiatives. The glaring omission of energy left many industry reps quaking in their boots. "We're concerned that the White House is backing off," says one lobbyist. And Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle told BusinessWeek on July 10 that "there's a good deal of consultation" between the White House and Democrats. "I'm hopeful we can find as much opportunity on energy as we did on education," he said.
With an attitude like that, the outcome could be an energy plan that generates broad bipartisan support--as long as the White House remains willing to settle for a bit less than a full tank. Bush would get most of what he wants, he could declare victory over the energy crisis, and he could insulate himself from charges that he is a pawn of Big Oil. It seems like a no-brainer.
By Laura Cohn, with Lorraine Woellert and John Carey
CAPITAL WRAPUP
Outreach, Microsoft Style
Microsoft, it seems, will be Microsoft. Because Microsoft has been declared an unlawful monopolist by the Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, few experts think the company can persuade the Justice Dept. to drop its landmark case outright. But such dim prospects haven't deterred a Microsoft-funded group called Americans for Technology Leadership (ATL). Created in 1999 to develop grassroots support for the software giant, it recently launched one of its most aggressive campaigns. ATL has engaged telemarketers to make unsolicited calls seeking permission to use selected citizens' names on letters to Congress demanding that Justice drop its antitrust case. The callers offer to draft the missives, route them to the appropriate politicians, and pay the postage.
What makes the campaign particularly odd is that it comes as conciliatory moves are being made by Microsoft headquarters. On June 27, the company announced that its upcoming Windows XP would not include a controversial feature called Internet Explorer Smart Tags. And on July 11--the same day a BusinessWeek reporter received one of the phone solicitations--Microsoft announced it would give computer makers greater latitude to install non-Microsoft icons on the Windows desktop.
Will ATL change its hardball tactics? "Microsoft's competitors do the same type of thing," says ATL President Jonathan Zuck, who calls the campaign part of "an ongoing effort to reach out to the general public and encourage them to let their opinions be known."
By Dan Carney
|