Economy, energy still Congress' top issues - C&EN Global Enterprise

Government

Economy, energy still Congress' top issues Janice Long and Chris Murray, C&EN Washington

Last year in this space C&EN predicted that the newly elected Democratic President would have a honeymoon, for a while at least, with the Democratic majority in Congress. This honeymoon, in turn, would grease the skids for the President's legislative proposals. It seemed as if the Carter White House would be in harmony with Congress particularly in front of a backdrop of eight years of Republican control of the executive branch. C&EN was wrong, but then again so were a lot of other sages. Carter ran into trouble with Congress from the start. A key feature of his first tax proposal last year was the $50 personal rebate to all comers. Congress, despite its traditional alacrity for voting for tax cuts, didn't buy the idea—larger budget deficits were apparently more fearsome than the wrath of voters deprived of $50. This defeat was only a minor rumbling of larger problems to come. Carter's biggest confrontation with Congress came later, over what he considered to be the cornerstone of his first year in office—the energy bill, or more precisely, the energy conservation bill. Congress has adjourned without House and Senate agreement on their differing versions of Carter's plan. Administration officials optimistically predict now that House and Senate conferees will be able to work out their differences when they return refreshed to Washington on Jan. 19. Don't bet on it. They probably won't be refreshed after hearing from irate constituents about hefty increases in the social security withholding tax voted in the last minutes of the first session. Taxpayers don't like to pay more taxes and the energy package isn't much more than a tax package in disguise. Economy. The single biggest item in economic legislation in the next session will be President Carter's rumored $30 billion tax cut and reform of the tax code. As he declared so often during his campaign for the White House, Carter believes the U.S. tax law system "is a disgrace." Congress apparently doesn't quite see it the same way—after all, Congress is largely responsible for the tax code in the first place. Carter's proposed tax revisions probably will not move quickly through Congress since there are a number of key legislators on the Hill that have their own ideas about what the economy needs to get it moving at a brisker pace, particularly Congressional tax powers Rep. Al Ullman (D.-Wash.), chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee and Sen. Russell Long (D.-La.), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. A tax cut, however, likely will be separated from any tax law revisions and passed with relative ease—tax cuts, of course, are always politically popular on Capitol Hill, particularly in an election year. Of interest to colleges and students alike is a proposal from Sen. William Roth (R.-Del.) that would grant a $250-per-student tax credit for college tuition. This proposal was attached to the social security bill in the first session and it nearly prevented passage of that legislation until it was withdrawn. Critics of the Roth bill maintained that it would probably benefit high income families and would not help students pay their tuition. But, like a tax cut, Roth's idea is an "apple pie" measure that's nearly impossible to vote against. It will be back this year. Energy. Undoubtedly the primary issue of the first session of the 95th Congress, energy matters dominated the Congressional agenda in committee and on the floor. Almost 30% of Congress' total days in session last year were devoted to debate on energy matters. But despite the time spent, Congress, when it got down to brass tacks, apparently did not find the energy

Rep. Paul Rogers Health

Sen. Edward Kennedy Health

Sen. Henry Jackson Energy

Rep. Al Ullman Economy

Jan. 9, 1978 C&EN

17

crisis as urgent as President Carter did when he called it the "moral equivalent of war." Some energy legislation did get enacted, most notably the act creating the Department of Energy for incorporating more than 50 energy-related federal agencies and the first new Cabinet department created in more than a decade. And early last year Congress enacted a measure giving the President special energy authority to allocate supplies of natural gas. However, that authority expired in August. And although the Senate on the last day of the first session passed a bill to reinstate the authority to Feb. 15,1978, House passage was blocked by Rep. John Dingell (D.-Mich.), who complained that his Energy & Power Subcommittee had not been consulted on the matter. The cornerstone of the Administration energy program, the wide-ranging energy policy bills, did not get enacted. Holding them up are deep-seated differences over natural gas pricing and crude oil equalization taxes. The House voted to retain price controls on natural gas. The Senate, by a slim margin, voted to deregulate natural gas prices. The House conferees at least agree on their position. But the Senate, which appointed the whole 18-member Committee on Energy & Natural Resources, headed by Sen. Henry M. Jackson (D.-Wash.), as conferees, isn't in the same position. The committee is evenly split, nine to nine, on the question of deregulation. And they can't get 10 votes together on the issue, which makes working out a compromise difficult. There was hope just before the recess that a compromise might be worked out. House Democratic conferees, along with two Senators and Department of Energy Secretary James Schlesinger, worked out a proposal under which the price of both inter- and intrastate natural gas would be set at $1.75 per million cu ft, with the price rising rapidly thereafter, to at least $2.25 per million cu ft within three years. Price controls still would have been extended to the intrastate market but the federal government would not have been given authority to allocate the distribution of gas within a state. The Senate conferees, for a change, were united in their reaction to the proposed compromise. They voted 16 to 2 to reject it. The House conferees never even took a formal vote. And the conference ended in a squabble over who should offer a motion to adjourn until Jan. 23. The picture isn't quite so bleak for other portions of the energy policy legislation. Conferees on the coal conversion bill, H.R. 5146, have agreed on language that bars major new plants, those built after April 20,1977, from burning oil as a boiler fuel. No plant could burn natural gas as a boiler fuel after Jan. 1, 1990. And existing plants would have to switch to coal where feasible, considering expenses, ease of conversion, and environmental laws. Conferees on the utility rate reform bill, H.R. 4018, have agreed that state utility commissions will only be urged to consider federal rate reform proposals. Agreement also has been reached on some federal financing for residential, school, and hospital energy conservation measures and mandatory efficiency standards for 13 categories of appliances. Finally, conferees on the tax portions of the energy policy package have tentatively decided on a gas-guzzler auto tax that would go into effect for the 1979 model year. But they have deferred action on the much more difficult questions of taxes on industrial use of oil and natural gas and a crude oil equalization tax until an agreement is reached on gas deregulation. Whatever thefinalfate of the omnibus energy package, other energy matters will require Congressional attention. High on the list is a proposed nuclear licensing reform bill that the Administration has promised to deliver this month. Drafts of the bill already have drawn strong criticism from both industry and environmental groups and plainly it is not in for smooth sailing. Awaiting Senate floor action is a House-passed bill that sets strict conditions for the export of U.S. nuclear fuels. Awaiting House action is a Senate-passed bill to facilitate environmentally safe development of oil and other resources on the outer continental shelf. Other energy issues Congress is or will be considering include 18 C&ENJan.9, 1978

Bill and background Authorizations. (S. 1340) Sets fiscal 1978 funding levels for ERDA's civilian R&D programs at $6.1 billion

Energy. (H.R. 5263) Administration energy program tax portion provides tax on gas-guzzling autos, industrial energy use; Senate version provides mostly tax credits (S. 977, H.R. 5146) Require industries, utilities to convert to coal

(S. 701. 2057, H.R. 5037) Establish energy conservation programs for buildings, appliance efficiency standards

(S. 2104, H.R. 5289) Set totally different natural gas pricing policies

(S. 2114, H.R. 4018) Set new standards for regulating public utility rates

Environment. (S. 1952, H.R. 3199) Amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, require industrial use of best available technology to control effluents Government operations. (S. 270, H.R. 3361) Provide federal funds for individual citizens or groups participating in federal rule-making proceedings Health. (S. 1750, H.R. 8518) Delay saccharin ban for 18 months pending food additive study by National Academy of Sciences

(S. 705, H.R. 6221) Authorize HEW Secretary to license clinical laboratories, establish rules to assure quality, accuracy, precision of laboratory testing3 (S. 1831, 2040, H.R. 8891) Make major changes in FDA procedures for approving new drugs

Oceans. (S. 2053, H.R. 3350) Establish federal rules governing deep-sea mining operations

Pesticides. (S. 1678, H.R. 7073) Extend for two years essentially unchanged EPA's authority to regulate pesticides

Product liability. (S. 403, H.R. 7711) Provide federal reinsurance for companies that cannot obtain product liability insurance at reasonable rates

Proliferation. (S. 897, H.R. 8638) Set strict conditions for export of U.S. nuclear fuels, limits on importing countries' use of the fuels Research. (S. 1217, H.R. 7897) Direct HEW Secretary to promulgate guidelines, applicable to private and publicly funded research, regulating conduct of recombinant DNA research

(S. 421, 1652, H.R. 6669) Set up coordinated federal program to improve climate research, monitoring prediction

Resources. (S. 9, H.R. 1614) Revise leasing procedure for offshore oil, natural gas, tighten environmental requirements a ACS position developed.

House committee

House floor

Senate committee

Senate floor

Outlook

Science & Technology. Reported, amended 5/16/77

Amended, repassed 12/7/77

Energy & Natural Resources. Reported, amended 5/16/77

Amended, passed 6/13/77

Enactment likely

Ways & Means. Reported, amended 7/13/77


Finance. Reported, amended 10/21/77


Enactment likely

Interstate & Foreign Commerce. Reported, amended 7/19/77




Enactment likely

Banking, Finance & Urban Affairs. Reported 7/11/77. Interstate & Foreign Commerce. Reported, amended 7/19/77. Public Works & Transportation. Reported, amended 7/13/77


Energy & Natural Resources. Reported 8/18/77. Human Resources. Reported, amended 5/12/77


Enactment likely

Interstate & Foreign Commerce. Reported, amended 7/19/77


Energy & Natural Resources. Reported 9/15/77


Enactment likely

Interstate & Foreign Commerce. Reported, amended I119/77


Energy & Natural Resources. Reported 9/20/77


Enactment likely

Public Works & Transportation. Reported, amended 3/29/77. Concluded second hearings 10/18/77

Passed 4/5/77

Environment & Public Works. Reported, amended 7/28/77


Enactment certain

Enactment unlikely

Judiciary Subcommittee on Administrative Practices & Procedures. Approved, amended for full committee action 5/3/77

Judiciary. Subcommittee on Administrative Law & Government Relations approved clean bill for full committee action 5/6/77

Human Resources. Reported, amended 7/19/77. Commerce, Science & Transportation. Reported amended 7/27/77


Approved 11/23/77 P.L. 95-203

Interstate & Foreign Commerce. Subcommittee on Health & Environment will resume markup this month

Human Resources. Reported, amended 7/22/77

Passed 7/28/77

Enactment likely

Interstate & Foreign Commerce. Subcommittee on Health & Environment plans hearings in February

Human Resources. Subcommittee on Health & Scientific Research intends to begin hearings in February

Enactment likely

Interior & Insular Affairs. Ordered reported 10/26/77. Merchant Marine & Fisheries. Reported, amended 8/9/77. International Relations. Hearings scheduled 1/23/78

Energy & Natural Resources. Began markup 10/18/77

Enactment likely

Interstate & Foreign Commerce. Reported 10/3/77

Agriculture. Reported, amended 10/5/77

Passed 11/17/77


Small Business. Subcommittee on Capital, Investment & Business Opportunities plans further hearings

International Relations. Reported, amended 8/5/77


Interstate & Foreign Commerce. Began markup 9/27/77. Science & Technology. Subcommittee on Science, Research & Technology concluded hearings 10/10/77 Science & Technology. Reported, amended 5/6/77

Outer Continental Shelf. Reported, amended 8/29/77. Rules. Postponed floor action until second session 10/25/77

Passed 9/9/77

Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry. Reported, amended 7/11/77


Enactment likely

Commerce, Science & Transportation. Subcommittee on Consumer plans further hearings. Small Business. Plans further hearings in February.

Enactment unlikely

Energy & Natural Resources. Foreign Relations. Governmental Affairs. Reported, amended 10/3/77

Enactment likely

Human Resources. Reported, amended 7/22/77. Commerce, Science & Transportation. Subcommittee on Science & Space concluded hearings 11/10/77

Enactment unlikely

Commerce, Science & Transportation. Subcommittee on Science & Space began hearings 6/8/77

Enactment likely



Enactment likely

Jan. 9, 1978C&EN

19

nuclear waste disposal, state approval for siting of new nuclear power plants, nuclear power costs, the nuclear fuel cycle, oil shale technology, and coal slurry pipelines. Environment. In contrast to the fate of most energy legislation, 1977 will be remembered as a record year for environmental laws—the year in which many bills that had been hanging fire for several years found their passage eased by the presence of a Democratic President in the White House. A law providing for a federal/state program to regulate strip mining and to reclaim abandoned mines, twice vetoed by President Ford, was signed by Carter last summer. Amendments to the Clean Air Act that were brought down by a threatened filibuster on the last day of the 94th Congress also were passed. The new law extends existing allowable levels for auto exhaust pollutants through the 1979 model year, but begins tightening them in 1980, and gives most industries three more years to comply with air pollution regulations before facing heavy fines. Also enacted were amendments to the water pollution control law that extend from mid-1983 to mid-1984 rules requiring industries to install best available technology to control water pollutants. However, industry still must meet the mid-1983 deadline for cleaning up discharges of toxic pollutants. Held over for the second session was another environmental bill that amends the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act. Both chambers passed separate versions of the bill, but House-Senate conferees are not expected to meet on them until February. The most ticklish questions to be resolved in the bills revolve around the question of what to do about trade secret information submitted by manufacturers in pesticide registration applications and whether test data submitted by one manufacturer should be used to support the registration of a similar pesticide by another manufacturer. With four major environmental bills out of the way the House and Senate environmental committees probably will breathe a sigh of relief and settle down to a slower pace. But work won't grind to a halt. There are other areas that need attention. These include oil spill liability legislation, review of EPA's implementation of the Toxic Substances Control Act, the use of pesticides versus integrated pest management techniques, and a federal nonreturnable bottle bill. Health. Certain to be high on the legislative agenda in this session are several bills designed to rewrite U.S. drug laws completely. Three similar bills to do just that have been offered by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D.-Mass.) (S. 1831), Rep. Paul Rogers (D.-Fla.) (H.R. 8891), and a bipartisan effort (S. 2040) by Sen. Harrison Williams (D.-N.J.) and Sen. Jacob Javits (R.-N.Y.). Although the Kennedy bill has been reviewed by committee, all three measures were overshadowed by Congressional preoccupation with energy as the first session moved to a close. All three will come up again, though, since the Administration, through the efforts of FDA and its feisty commissioner Donald Kennedy, finally has pulled together a bill that will be transmitted to Congress shortly after it convenes. Congressional health leaders have promised to begin hearings soon on the Administration proposal, probably in February. The Administration bill embodies many of the concepts laid out in the Congressionally drafted pieces of legislation. The basic theme that runs through all these attempts at drug reform is speeding the availability of innovative drugs to the public, but at the same time ensuring that the drugs are safe. This last feature would be accomplished by instituting a so-called "Phase IV" testing requirement for all new drug approval applications—a mechanism that will allow closer monitoring of adverse drug reactions once the drugs are marketed and presumably also permit speedier removal of drugs shown to be adversely affecting too many patients. Although the spectre of federal regulation of recombinant DNA research dimmed greatly in the first session, some sort of government control over the controversial technology is still possible, despite the apparent loss of enthusiasm for such legislature (S. 1217 and H.R. 7897) by one if its original supporters, 20

C&ENJan. 9, 1978

Sen. Kennedy. Respected DNA researchers—indeed many who led the original call for a moratorium on the work three years ago—have reconsidered and now say that the technology is not as dangerous as originally feared and that reputable workers are capable of policing themselves. The Senate measure is still in committee, and it is uncertain whether it will reach the floor in this session. Meanwhile, on the House side a major series of hearings into cosmetic safety is shaping up. Engineered by the sometimes severe industry critic John E. Moss (D.-Calif.), who heads the Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations, the hearings promise to be in depth and comprehensive. Moss last November sent detailed questionnaires (loaded with "do you still beat your wife"-type questions, says an industry source) to roughly 60 "large" cosmetic makers seeking information about how they test their products for safety. Doubtless the question of carcinogenicity of permanent hair dyes will be high on Moss' list when the hearings start late in January. Federal licensing of clinical laboratories, an idea that has been kicked through the halls of Congress for years now, made some headway in the first session when the Senate passed a bill (S. 705) offered by Kennedy and Javits. The House version (H.R. 6221), drafted by Rogers, is still in committee, and was a three-way committee referral. So far the Ways & Means Committee, one of three, has not even taken up the bill. Action by the House in the second session, however, is likely. Patents. The impetus for a major change in U.S. patent law that built up in the 94th Congress with Senate passage of an omnibus patent bill apparently has dissipated. With the recent death of Sen. John L. McClellan (D.-Ark.) there is no one left in the Senate who worked on the previous patent bill or who shows any real enthusiasm for the issue. The Senate Judiciary subcommittee that handles patent issues plans no action on changing the law until and unless the House acts first. There action has not progressed much further than a briefing for the Subcommittee on Courts, Civil Liberties & the Administration of Justice's staff on patent issues, although the subcommittee has not yet made final plans for this year. Thus, any action probably will focus on bills aimed at establishing a uniform federal system for management, protection, and utilization of the results of federally sponsored scientific and technological R&D. The Senate Select Committee on Small Business already has begun hearings on the issue and Rep. Ray Thornton (D.-Ark.) has indicated that his Subcommittee on Science, Research & Technology will hold its own hearings on the issue early this year. And the Administration has promised to send up its own government patent policy bill for Congress to consider. Science. A number of science-related issues will be getting close scrutiny on Capitol Hill next year. Sen. Adlai E. Stevenson (D.-I1L), chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Science & Space, says that his subcommittee will begin hearings in February on the workings of the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy. The subcommittee also is planning hearings on materials policy and the National Bureau of Standards. The House Subcommittee on Science, Research & Technology already has held one round of hearings on NBS, where it learned that NBS and others considered it to be overworked and underfunded, and in danger of losing some of its top people. Further hearings are planned. And a Senate Judiciary subcommittee will continue work on a bill calling for mandatory chemical labeling of explosives. But before anything else Congress will be waiting for a look at President Carter's first budget, to be unveiled Jan. 23. The exact figures in the budget will be of particular interest to scientists. Last November Carter said he had taken a look at the first drafts of the government's fiscal 1979 budget and found the priority given to R&D in most agencies far too low. He therefore directed the Office of Management & Budget to raise agency "research and development items much higher," and to fund them accordingly. It will soon be known whether he changed his mind in the interest of balancing the budget. •

Economy, energy still Congress' top issues - C&EN Global Enterprise

Recommend Documents