Search for...
OnTheIssuesLogo

Charles Melancon on Energy & Oil

Democrat


Congressional trip to Antarctica to study global warming

The panel pressed Melancon on whether a trip to Antarctica to study global warming was a good use of taxpayer dollars. "We met with scientists," Melancon said. "We were up at 5:30 a.m."
Source: WWLTV Eyewitness coverage of 2010 Louisiana Senate debate Oct 28, 2010

Funnel BP oil-leak penalties into coastal restoration

Melancon tacked two amendments onto a recently passed bill to improve oil drilling regulation. His measures called for lifting the drilling moratorium and for funneling money from oil-leak penalties against BP into coastal restoration.

Melancon said he is most proud of his non-legislative actions on the ground after BP's oil leak. During the recent oil leak, Melancon ensured that the federal government created a mobile health clinic and provided services for victims under stress, he said.

Source: Baton Rouge Advocate on of 2010 Louisiana Senate debate Oct 18, 2010

Voted NO on enforcing limits on CO2 global warming pollution.

Congressional Summary:Requires utilities to supply an increasing percentage of their demand from a combination of energy efficiency savings and renewable energy (6% in 2012, 9.5% in 2014, 13% in 2016, 16.5% in 2018, and 20% in 2021). Provides for:
  1. issuing, trading, and verifying renewable electricity credits; and
  2. prescribing standards to define and measure electricity savings from energy efficiency and energy conservation measures.
Amends the Clean Air Act (CAA) to set forth a national strategy to address barriers to the commercial-scale deployment of carbon capture and sequestration.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. ED MARKEY (D, MA-7): For the first time in the history of our country, we will put enforceable limits on global warming pollution. At its core, however, this is a jobs bill. It will create millions of new, clean-energy jobs in whole new industries with incentives to drive competition in the energy marketplace. It sets ambitious and achievable standards for energy efficiency and renewable energy from solar, wind, geothermal, biomass so that by 2020, 20% of America's energy will be clean.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. BOB GOODLATTE (R, VA-6): I agree that this bill has very important consequences, but those consequences are devastating for the future of the economy of this country. It's a fantasy that this legislation will turn down the thermostat of the world by reducing CO2 gas emissions when China & India & other nations are pumping more CO2 gas into the atmosphere all the time. We would be far better served with legislation that devotes itself to developing new technologies before we slam the door on our traditional sources of energy like coal and oil and and nuclear power. We support the effort for energy efficiency. We do not support this kind of suicide for the American economy. Unfortunately, cap and trade legislation would only further cripple our economy.

Reference: American Clean Energy and Security Act; Bill H.R.2454 ; vote number 2009-H477 on Jun 26, 2009

Voted YES on tax credits for renewable electricity, with PAYGO offsets.

Congressional Summary:Extends the tax credit for producing electricity from renewable resources:

Proponent's argument to vote Yes: Rep. RICHARD NEAL (D, MA-2): This bill contains extensions of popular tax incentives that expired at the end of last year. This needs to get under way. The R&D tax credit is important. This bill includes a number of popular and forward-thinking incentives for energy efficiency. This is a very balanced bill which does no harm to the Federal Treasury. It asks that hedge fund managers pay a bit more, and it delays an international tax break that hasn't gone into effect yet. It is responsible legislation.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. DAVE CAMP (R, MI-4): We are conducting another purely political exercise on a tax bill that is doomed in the other body because of our House majority's insistence on adhering to the misguided PAYGO rules. The Senate acted on a bipartisan basis to find common ground on this issue. They approved a comprehensive tax relief package containing extenders provisions that are not fully offset, as many Democrats would prefer, but contain more offsets than Republicans would like. Why is this our only option? Because the Senate, which has labored long and hard to develop that compromise, has indicated in no uncertain terms that it is not going to reconsider these issues again this year.

[The bill was killed in the Senate].

Reference: Renewable Energy and Job Creation Tax Act; Bill H.R.7060 ; vote number 2008-H649 on Sep 26, 2008

Voted YES on tax incentives for energy production and conservation.

OnTheIssues.org Explanation:This bill passed the House but was killed in the Senate on a rejected Cloture Motion, Senate rollcall #150Congressional Summary:A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide Tax incen Credits for biodiesel and renewable diesel.
  • Sec. 124. Credit for new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicles.
  • Sec. 127. Transportation fringe benefit to bicycle commuters.
  • Sec. 146. Qualified green building and sustainable design project
    Reference: Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act; Bill HR6049 ; vote number 2008-344 on May 21, 2008

    Voted NO on tax incentives for renewable energy.

    CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008:

    SUPPORTER'S ARGUMENT FOR VOTING YES:Rep. MATSUI: Today's debate is about investing in renewable energy, which will chart a new direction for our country's energy policy. This bill restores balance to our energy policy after years of a tax structure that favors huge oil companies. Today's legislation will transfer some of the massive profits enjoyed by these oil companies and invest them in renewable resources that will power our economy in the future.

    OPPONENT'S ARGUMENT FOR VOTING NO:Rep. SMITH of Texas: I oppose H.R. 5351. While it is well and good to encourage alternative energy development, Congress should not do so by damaging our domestic oil and gas industry. In 2006 all renewable energy sources provided only 6% of the US domestic energy supply. In contrast, oil and natural gas provided 58% of our domestic energy supply. The numbers don't lie. Oil and natural gas fuel our economy and sustain our way of life.

    Furthermore, almost 2 million Americans are directly employed in the oil and natural gas industry. Punishing one of our Nation's most important industries does not constitute a national energy policy.

    LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Bill passed House, 236-182

    Reference: Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act; Bill H.R.5351 ; vote number 08-HR5351 on Feb 12, 2008

    Voted NO on investing in homegrown biofuel.

    H.R.3221: New Direction for Energy Independence, National Security, and Consumer Protection Act: Moving toward greater energy independence and security, developing innovative new technologies, reducing carbon emissions, creating green jobs, protecting consumers, increasing clean renewable energy production, modernizing our energy infrastructure, and providing tax incentives for the production of renewable energy and energy conservation.

    Proponents support voting YES because:

    Rep. PELOSI: This bill makes the largest investment in homegrown biofuels in history. We know that America's farmers will fuel America's independence. We will send our energy dollars to middle America, not to the Middle East.

    Rep. TIERNEY: This bill incorporates the Green Jobs Act, which will make $120 million a year available to begin training workers in the clean energy sector. 35,000 people per year can benefit from vocational education for "green-collar jobs" that can provide living wages & upward mobility.

    Opponents recommend voting NO because:

    Rep. SHIMKUS: I'm upset about the bill because it has no coal provisions. What about coal-to-liquid jobs? Those are real jobs with great wages. Energy security? We have our soldiers deployed in the Middle East because it's an important national security interest. Why? We know why. Crude oil. How do we decrease that importance of the Persian Gulf region? We move to coal-to-liquid technologies. What is wrong with this bill? Everything. No soy diesel. No ethanol. No coal. Nothing on nuclear energy. No expansion. There is no supply in this bill. Defeat this bill.

    Rep. RAHALL: [This bill omits a] framework to sequester carbon dioxide to ensure the future use of coal in an environmentally responsible fashion. We can talk about biofuels all we want, but the fact is that coal produces half of our electricity for the foreseeable future. We must aggressively pursue technologies to capture and store the carbon dioxide.

    Reference: New Direction for Energy Independence; Bill HR3221 ; vote number 2007-0832 on Aug 4, 2007

    Other candidates on Energy & Oil: Charles Melancon on other issues:
    LA Gubernatorial:
    Bobby Jindal
    LA Senatorial:
    David Vitter
    Mary Landrieu

    Retiring as of Jan. 2011:
    CT:Dodd(D)
    DE:Kaufman(D)
    FL:Martinez(R)
    FL:LeMieux(R)
    IL:Burris(D)
    IN:Bayh(D)
    KS:Brownback(R)
    KY:Bunning(R)
    MO:Bond(R)
    ND:Dorgan(D)
    NH:Gregg(R)
    OH:Voinovich(R)
    PA:Specter(R)
    UT:Bennett(R)
    WV:Goodwin(D)

    Unseated as of Jan. 2011:
    AR:Lincoln(D)
    UT:Bennett(R)
    WI:Feingold(D)


    Newly elected, Nov. 2010:
    AR:Boozman(R)
    CT:Blumenthal(D)
    CO:Bennet(D)
    DE:Coons(D)
    FL:Rubio(R)
    IL:Kirk(R)
    IN:Coats(R)
    KS:Moran(R)
    KY:Paul(R)
    MO:Blunt(R)
    ND:Hoeven(R)
    NH:Ayotte(R)
    NY2:Gillibrand(D)
    OH:Portman(R)
    PA:Toomey(R)
    UT:Lee(R)
    WI:Johnson(R)
    WV:Manchin(D)


    Re-elected, Nov. 2010:
    AK:Murkowski(I)
    AL:Shelby(R)
    AZ:McCain(R)
    CA:Boxer(D)
    GA:Isakson(R)
    HI:Inouye(D)
    IA:Grassley(R)
    ID:Crapo(R)
    LA:Vitter(R)
    MD:Mikulski(D)
    NC:Burr(R)
    NV:Reid(D)
    NY6:Schumer(D)
    OK:Coburn(R)
    OR:Wyden(D)
    SC:DeMint(R)
    SD:Thune(R)
    VT:Leahy(D)
    WA:Murray(D)
    Abortion
    Budget/Economy
    Civil Rights
    Corporations
    Crime
    Drugs
    Education
    Energy/Oil
    Environment
    Families
    Foreign Policy
    Free Trade
    Govt. Reform
    Gun Control
    Health Care
    Homeland Security
    Immigration
    Jobs
    Principles
    Social Security
    Tax Reform
    Technology
    War/Peace
    Welfare

    Other Senators
    Senate Votes (analysis)
    Bill Sponsorships
    Affiliations
    Policy Reports
    Group Ratings

    Page last updated: Dec 04, 2010