September 14, 2013
The voice of legislation aids us in understanding the views of our representative body. Energy is an inextricable link to powerful change on the Hill that can only be possibly understood under the umbrella of an energy mix platform. It is novel to say that almost every week new legislation is being introduced and voted upon with long-lasting policy implications effecting businesses and consumer practices, as well as cost.
Another such voice is “Heller Introduces Amendment To EPA Legislation” in his efforts to stop the loss of jobs as the platform for the bill (S.1363). The changes from “Heller Amendment to Shaheen-Portman Energy Efficiency Bill to Improve Transparency at EPA” as an act to ask the EPA to report any spending over a Billion.
Mesquite Citizen Journal reported on new legislation that is notable to keep abreast of current trends in energy politics. The “U.S. Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) introduced his bill, the Energy Consumers Relief Act (S. 1363), as an amendment to the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act (S. 1392) on Thursday, Sept. 12. Heller’s amendment will help protect Americans from new billion-dollar Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations that would increase energy prices and destroy jobs. It was “on July 25, 2013, Senator Heller introduced a stand-alone bill called the Energy Consumers Relief Act of 2013 an amendment (1893).”
The platform to amending the bill is to retain jobs. The opportunity in the energy mix scenario is to grow well placed blue-to-white collar jobs shoring-up the middle class and educating the bottom to rise distributing the economic pool for sustainability.
Heller stated, the “Billion-dollar EPA regulations are not the answer. Not only do they increase energy prices, but they jeopardize Nevada’s core industries. Policies like these contribute to preventing a real recovery at a time when Nevadans need it most.”
To provide more detail it was offered that the following points related specifically, the legislation will:
- Require that prior to finalizing any energy-related rule costing more than $1 billion, the EPA must submit a report to Congress detailing certain costs and benefits of the rules, as well as the impact on energy prices and jobs.
- Prohibit EPA from finalizing a rule if the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with other relevant agencies, determines the rule would cause significant adverse effects to the economy.
But more importantly with the document is the wording under (B) any impact on fuel diversity of the electricity generation portfolio of the United States or on national, regional, or local electric reliability; (C) any adverse effect on energy supply distribution, or use die to the economic or technical infeasibility of implementing the rule or; (D) any other adverse effect on energy supply, distribution, or use..” are key elements for understanding.
Click here for a PDF of the amendment.