July 31, 1975
Page 26501
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, S. 598, the first annual authorization bill for the new Energy Research and Development Administration known as ERDA, is an important bill because it shapes the budgetary commitment of the one Federal agency charged with developing an energy research and development strategy. Because research and development is critical to national energy independence, the success of ERDA, in large part, will determine how well we resolve our energy problems.
The funds provided in this bill will be directed towards a wide variety of civilian R. & D. programs including coal and oil shale, solar and geothermal, conservation and basic research, fusion power and nuclear fission, waste management and operational safety. Funds also will be directed for certain military programs including nuclear reactors for naval vessels, weapons technology and materials security.
For fiscal 1976, S. 598 as reported authorizes $4.8 billion in budget authority for ERDA, which will lead to outlays of $4.3 billion. This is $555 million in budget authority and $411 million in outlays above the amount requested by the administration.
How then does this bill stack up against the budget targets set by Congress last May, when passing our budget resolution? In the national defense function S. 598 authorizes $27 million in additional budget authority, a sum consistent with the congressional budget target.
In the general science, space, and technology function S. 598 authorizes $44 million in additional budget authority. Because the target budget in this function was identical to the administration's request, this add-on exceeds the target, though by a relatively small amount.
In the natural resource, environment, and energy function S. 598 adds $485 million in budget authority and $368 million in outlays to the administration's original request for ERDA.
Although these are large sums of money they do not, by themselves, breach the budgetary target set for this function. This is so because in adopting a congressional budget target for natural resources, environment, and energy, the Congress wisely, in my opinion, allotted an additional $1.6 billion in budget authority and $1.5 billion in outlays above the President's request — in recognition that additional moneys would be needed largely for energy programs. The increase authorized by S. 598 falls within this congressionally approved target. Indeed, if appropriated, the increase would use up a significant portion of the additional funds.
I intend to vote for S. 598. It represents an energy plan which, if funded, will start us on the way toward properly utilizing the various energy sources available to us.
I wish to note, however, that this bill as reported does not incorporate the recent plan for energy policy developed by ERDA entitled "creating energy choices for the future." This plan was developed too late for inclusion in the committees' version of S. 598. However, only a few days ago, the administration sent up an amendment to H.R. 8122, the Public Works-ERDA appropriations bill, that provides for these changes. This amendment will necessitate some changes in S. 598, and it is my understanding that an amendment will be offered on the floor to effect these changes. The amendment will increase slightly the totals for each of the functional categories within ERDA.
Recently I have expressed concern about the fiscal impact of legislation in the natural resources function that the Senate may soon consider and pass. Looking down the road, it is clear that if we appropriate the full authorizations contained in everything that we now seem likely to pass, we will exceed the budgetary target for natural resources, environment, and energy.
Let me direct your attention to page 27 of the Senate budget scorekeeping report dated July 28.
Table C sets out the present situation. It shows that the additional legislation, if funded fully, would add $2.8 billion in budget authority and $1.1 billion in outlays for fiscal year 1976. If this is added to the remaining budget authority and outlays of current spending legislation, as is done in table A on page 25, the result is that the targets will be breached by $1.8 billion in budget authority and $0.2 billion in outlays, as the bottom line on page 25 clearly indicates.
If the congressional budget targets are breached, then the Senate Budget Committee, and ultimately the full Senate, will have to weigh very carefully what the appropriate response should be.
Indeed, as chairman of the Budget Committee, I myself intend to take a hard look at these forthcoming proposals and may be compelled to speak out in opposition to them if, as reported, they are likely to breach the budget targets we have set for ourselves.
Finally, let me say that I noted with interest that the Interior Committee's report on the bill mentions the Budget Committee's discussion last spring about funding levels for energy programs. While the Budget Committee, in reaching agreement on what overall level of funds would be appropriate, did not approve or disapprove specific energy programs, I am pleased by this latest indication that the new budget process is taking hold in the Senate.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD a summary of fiscal year 1976 budget authority and budget outlays under this bill as reported.
There being no objection, the summary budget was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
[Table omitted]