What: All Issues : Government Checks on Corporate Power : Agriculture : S. 14. Energy Policy/Vote to Hold Ethanol-Producers Liable for Any Negative Environmental Consequences Borne From Ethanol Use.
 Who: All Members
[POW!]
 

To find out how your Members of Congress voted on this bill, use the form on the right.

S. 14. Energy Policy/Vote to Hold Ethanol-Producers Liable for Any Negative Environmental Consequences Borne From Ethanol Use.
senate Roll Call 208     Jun 05, 2003
Y = Conservative
N = Progressive
Winning Side:
Conservative

During Senate consideration of legislation which would overhaul the nation's energy policies, Senator Frist (R-TN) added an amendment to the bill to require the use of ethanol as a gasoline additive (see Roll Call Vote #204). Progressives argued that the use of ethanol has two main drawbacks. First, the potential for environmental damage from ethanol use is not well known. Second, unlike other additives, ethanol is costly because it cannot be transported through gasoline pipelines. Ethanol use, in the view of Progressives, would have few positive impacts on the environment; the gasoline price hikes caused by the use of ethanol, then, would not be correlated with any positive environmental benefits. In an effort to guard against adverse environmental consequences from ethanol use, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) proposed changes to the Frist amendment which would have held ethanol-producing companies to the same liability standards as those for companies that produce other fuel additives (the Frist amendment would exempt companies that produce ethanol from liability for any environmental degradation that might result). Progressives supported the Boxer proposal as a way to insure that ethanol-producing companies are held accountable for any adverse consequences borne from ethanol production and use. The Boxer amendment was defeated by a 26-69 vote margin.

Issue Areas:

Find your Member of
Congress' votes

Select by Name