The Maryland Senate voted down a major piece of Gov. Martin O'Malley's environmental agenda yesterday amid a squabble among Democrats over how much money should be dedicated to rate relief for consumers coping with rising utility bills.
The Senate voted 25-21 to reject the bill setting out how money from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative would be used. Lawmakers say the initiative could generate about $140 million every year through fees on industry, which will have to buy pollution credits through auctions beginning this year, but some estimates put the figure much higher.
O'Malley, a Democrat who made energy policy a cornerstone of his agenda, had proposed using at least some of the money for energy efficiency and conservation programs to help reach his goal of reducing energy consumption in the state by 15 percent over the next seven years. The vote does not negate the new cap-and-trade system, but it puts in flux how the proceeds would be spent.
The unexpected defeat reflected how anxious lawmakers are about the effect of soaring energy prices on constituents and left the administration scrambling to resurrect the proposal, which proponents say would help consumers in the long run.
"The governor hopes that the Senate will reconsider the legislation in the coming days," said O'Malley spokesman Rick Abbruzzese. "It's important legislation that will allow us to invest in our energy future and at the same time provide some additional relief to Maryland families."
Sen. Thomas "Mac" Middleton, chairman of the Finance Committee, said he planned to ask the Senate to reconsider the vote today. If that procedural move doesn't work, he said the House of Delegates also is considering the bill, and that he could try to move their version through his chamber.
"It's the governor's bill, and it's very important to him, and as a committee chairman, I certainly don't want to lose a bill on the floor," the Charles County Democrat said. "There's a lot of dynamics here, and these are very complex bills."
Deciding how to divide the proceeds has proved particularly thorny. Some lawmakers want more money for programs that would help consumers save energy through incentives to use new, efficient appliances and other technologies. Other lawmakers argue that much more of the money should be returned to consumers in the form of rebates.
