REAL MISSOURI VOICES ON ...

... Jim Talent Putting Oil Companies Before Missouri

"$14 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies."

Talent Rewards Oil Industry With at Least $14 Billion Worth of Tax Breaks and Subsidies Since 2005.  Talent's votes for the 2005 Energy Bill and 2006 Tax Reconciliation showered the oil and gas industry with at least $14 billion in tax breaks and subsidies.  [Vote 213, 7/29/05; Vote 118, 5/11/06]

• $9 Billion, At Least, When Talent Voted For Pork-Riddled Energy Bill  The 2005 Energy bill gave billions in tax breaks and subsidies to the oil and gas industries, which are already profitable and mature, unlike the renewable sector, which is still in its infancy. 
  
  
  • $2.6 billion:  The energy bill would also allow oil companies to immediately write off costs associated with expanding the capacity of existing refineries and tax credits to allow companies to deduct 50% of the cost of certain equipment used at oil refineries to refine liquid fuels.  [CNN, 7/28/05]
    
    
  • $7 Billion: The energy bill inserted at the last minute, thanks to Representative Joe Barton, an obscure provision on new drilling incentives that included waiving royalty payments for drilling for gas and oil in the Gulf of Mexico, offshore Alaska and the Outer Continental Shelf and public land in Alaska.  It also allowed oil companies drilling on public land to pay taxpayers in oil instead of cash.  Months after the bill was passed, the Bush administration confirmed that a royalty provision in the final energy bill could mean another $7 billion in oil industry tax breaks over five years, a number that could potentially go as high as $28 billion.  [New York Times, 3/27/06; Vote 213, 7/29/05]
    
    
• $5 Billion When Talent Voted To Let Big Oil Keep Tax Breaks  In May 2006, Congress and Bush signed into law another tax bill that allowed oil companies to keep $5 billion in unnecessary tax breaks.  The same tax bill also gave the average Missourian a $20 tax cut.  [ Washington Post, 4/26/06; Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 5/11/06; Vote 118, 5/11/06]

"Repeatedly votes against alternative energy"

Talent Consistently Opposes Renewable Energy, Including Ethanol, Wind and Biomass. In Talent's 20-year government career, he has consistently opposed alternative energy measures.

2005: Talent Opposed Giving Tax Credits to Wind Farms.  In 2005, Talent voted FOR an amendment to the Energy Bill that barred federal subsidies for all wind power projects that fell within 20 miles of "high scenic areas."  Only 32 Senators voted for the amendment and it was rejected. [Vote 150, 6/22/05 ]

2005: Talent Opposed Increasing Renewable Energy.  In 2005, Talent voted against an amendment to a bill that would mandate renewable energy sources comprise at least 10% of the electricity sold by utilities by the year 2020.  The amendment passed 52-48, but it was dropped from the final energy bill.  [Vote 141, 6/16/05 ]

Longtime Ethanol Opponent Talent has Voted SEVEN Times Against Funding Ethanol Proposals in his 20-Year Career.

1. 2006: Talent Opposed Funding Cellulosic Ethanol, Extending Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit and Clean Energy Bonds.  In 2006, Talent voted against an amendment to a bill that would have funded cellulosic ethanol initiatives and extended the renewable energy production tax credit and clean renewable energy bonds programs for an additional four years.  The amendment provided for the following funding: Biomass cellulosic fuels ($250 million), Cellulosic biomass ethanol conversion assistance ($250 million), Renewable energy R&D Solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, hydropower ($290 million).  The amendment failed 46-54.  [Vote 42, 3/14/06 ]
   
   
2. 2005: Talent Voted To Almost Eliminate Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Program for Farmers that Helped Fund Ethanol Plants.  In December 2005, Talent cast the deciding vote to almost entirely eliminate the popular and successful Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency program for farmers, cutting it from $23 million to only $3 million.  The Energy Efficiency program has doled out more than $66 million in grants for 400 clean energy projects in Rural America since 2003, including ethanol plants. These projects, valued at over one billion dollars, include bioenergy projects, wind power, and energy efficiency improvements. [Vote 363, 12/21/05; "Senate Passes Deficit Reduction Act Of 2005: Renewable Energy Programs Cut," Environmental and Energy Institute, 12/19/05]
   
   
   • MO Ethanol Plant Received Grant.  There were three recipients in MO for the Energy grants, including Bootheel Ethanol, LLC, which received $500,000.  [Rural Development Agency, USDA]
     
     
3. 2004: Talent Opposed Stand-Alone Renewable Fuel Mandate.  In April 2004, Talent opposed a Daschle amendment to the Internet Tax bill that would have required that gasoline sold in or introduced into the United States contain renewable fuel in specific amounts, beginning with 3.1 billion gallons in 2005 and increasing each year to 5 billion gallons in 2012.  Amendment failed to pass.  [Vote 73, 4/29/04] 
   
   
4. 1996: Talent Voted to Cut Funding to Renewable Energy (including Cellulosic Ethanol) Programs.  In 1996, Talent opposed an amendment to restore $42 million for renewable energy and research and development.  The amendment passed 279-135.  The amendment restored funding to develop wind and solar energy technology at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado.  Bob Noun, a spokesman for the NREL, said without the extra funding, NREL would have had to shut down wind energy research and scale back on solar and biomass energy programs. [Vote 358, 7/25/96; Denver Post, 7/26/96]
   
   
5. 1995: Talent Voted Against Funding for Solar Energy Technology, Biomass and Other Renewable Energy Technology.  In 1995, Talent voted against an amendment to earmark $45 million to implement the Innovative Renewable Energy Technology Transfer Program, which encouraged the export and commercialization of U.S. technologies in renewable energy, including for biomass technology to produce ethanol.  Republicans were attempting to slash the renewable energy budget by 43% from 1995.  The amendment was sponsored by Republican Representative Scott Klug (R-WI) and passed the House.  Passed 214-208.  [Vote 488, 7/12/95; Department of the Navy Energy Program]
   
   
6. 1990: Vetoed Funding Ethanol Production Fund.  As the House Minority Leader, Talent led his party's efforts in 1990 to support Governor John Ashcroft's veto of $125,000 to the Missouri Qualified Fuel Ethanol Producers Incentive Fund established in 1988.  Ashcroft vetoed the funding because "it is unlikely that funds will be needed in Fiscal Year 1991 for this new program."  [Veto Vote on House Bill 1007, 1990 House Journal, p. 34]
   
   
7. 1988: One of Only 21 to Oppose Creating Ethanol Production Fund and Reducing Gas Tax.  Talent was one of only 21 representatives to vote against creation of the Missouri Qualified Fuel Ethanol Producers Incentive Fund.  fuel ethanol producers would receive monthly grants equal to 20 cents per gallon of fuel ethanol produced.  The bill also included a two-cent per gallon tax break on ethanol-blended gasoline.  The Ethanol bill was signed into law.  [Senate Bill 600, 1988 House Journal, p. 1673]

[ Go Back ... ]