If the national energy bill is passed by the U.S. Senate, "We will have a natural gas pipeline. You can count on it."
That from Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who says finding the two votes needed to pass the bill will be "difficult, but I believe we can get them."
In an interview, Stevens told the Journal he believed that his colleagues will return from their holiday break understanding that "most people in this country want that bill passed." He said what's holding up passage isn't what's in the energy bill - it's what's not in it, such as tougher mileage standards for cars and a way to sue manufacturers of the gasoline additive MTBE.
But even if the energy bill does pass, it will be missing a guaranteed price floor provision, and ConocoPhillips officials have said that means they can't take part in the gas line project.
| [an error occurred while processing this directive] |
Stevens said there's a way to solve the problem: have the state of Alaska provide the price guarantee. He reached that conclusion after talks with the people who were fighting the pricing mechanism. They told him their biggest concern is that if the price of natural gas falls below $3.25 per thousand cubic feet, the primary beneficiary of the mechanism would be the state, which owns one-eighth of the gas and gets additional revenue through severance taxes.
"They didn't want federal taxpayers guaranteeing a price when the state of Alaska is the biggest beneficiary," Stevens said.
So Stevens thinks the state should step in with a price floor guarantee of its own: in times of low prices, to ratchet down its taxes and/or royalty payments enough to reassure the bondholders that their investment in the pipeline is safe.
"What have we got to lose?" Stevens asked. "Once the price goes back up, the producers pay us back for what was deferred.
"I've talked to the governor about this and I think it's doable."
Another bill held up last year for lack of votes to quell a filibuster was the omnibus budget measure, which provides funding for eight federal departments. Stevens said he's been told that two of four needed votes have signed on in recent weeks, so he's hopeful it, too will pass in the early days of the congressional session. He said the bill has numerous appropriations for Alaska, except for military spending, which has already passed.
Military construction projects in Alaska are numerous these days, largely for two reasons: completion of the national missile defense system and preparations for the arrival of a new Stryker Brigade to the state. "I believe construction is pretty much at its peak now, and for the next two years," Stevens said.
The senator said he thinks the likelihood of shutting down any of Alaska's military bases is low. "I think the concept of base closures will not be applicable to our four bases," is how he put it. "The military stationed here can be deployed anywhere in the world in nine hours. Nobody else can say that."
Stevens said he expects a fight over deployment of new C-17 military cargo planes to Alaska bases, with some people pushing for basing the planes in the Midwest. He said it's critical to have them where the troops are. "The rapid deployment forces we've been using to keep the peace are in Anchorage and Honolulu," he said. "We don't want them to have to wait an additional five hours (for the planes to arrive)."
Besides the energy and omnibus appropriations bills, Stevens is hoping for action on a handful of other measures in 2004. One of them is tort reform, which would limit the size of lawsuit damage awards. That, in turn, would help hold down increases in the cost of health care, he said.
Otherwise, Stevens doesn't expect Congress to accomplish much in 2004. "It's going to be a very difficult year," he said. "It's an election year."
