Order Code RL33521
Gasoline Prices:
Legislation in the 110th Congress
Updated August 16, 2007
Carl E. Behrens
Specialist in Energy Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Carol Glover
Information Research Specialist
Resources, Science, and Industry Division

---

Gasoline Prices: Issues for the 110th Congress
Summary
The high price of gasoline was an important consideration during the debate on
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005), P.L. 109-58. As prices continued to
surge, the continuing crisis renewed attention on some issues that were dropped or
compromised in the debate over P.L. 109-58, as well as to a number of initiatives to
reduce the impact of high prices on consumers. However, the 109th Congress
adjourned after passing only one of them: a measure lifting some restrictions on oil
and gas leasing in the Gulf of Mexico.
Continued high gasoline prices, and the change in leadership in the 110th
Congress, put the energy issue in the forefront, and the House passed H.R. 6, the
Creating Long-Term Energy Alternatives for the Nation (CLEAN Energy) Act of
2007, as part of its “100 hours” program at the beginning of the first session.
President Bush, in his State of the Union speech on January 23, proposed cutting
gasoline consumption by 20% in 10 years through increased fuel economy standards
and use of alternative fuels. He also proposed expanding the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve (SPR) to 1.5 billion barrels.
On May 23, the House passed a bill (H.R. 1252) banning and punishing the sale
of gasoline at “unconscionably excessive” prices when the president declares an
“energy emergency.”
The Senate on June 21 passed its version of H.R. 6, including price-gouging
provisions similar to those in H.R. 1252 and an increase in Corporate Average Fuel
Economy (CAFE) standards.
On August 4 the House passed H.R. 3221, the New Direction for Energy
Independence, National Security, and Consumer Protection Act. Included in the bill
as passed was H.R. 2776, the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act,
which would repeal some of the tax benefits to domestic oil and gas producers
included in EPACT 2005 and increase tax benefits for renewable energy and
conservation.

A large number of factors have combined to put pressure on gasoline prices,
including increased world demand for crude oil and limited U.S. refinery capacity to
supply gasoline to a growing national economy. The war and continued violence in
Iraq have added uncertainty, and threats of supply disruption have added pressure,
particularly to the commodity futures markets.
The gasoline price surge has stimulated much legislative activity, but without
the urgency of previous energy crises. In part, this may be due to the fact that there
has been no physical shortage of gasoline or lines at the pump. In addition, the
expectation of former crises — that prices were destined to grow ever higher — has
not been prevalent.

---

Contents
Most Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Legislative Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Why Are Prices So High? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Crude Oil Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Gasoline Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Policy Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Oil-Related Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Reducing Impacts on Consumers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Mid- to Long-Term Supply and Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
ANWR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Savings Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
OCS Leasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Refinery Revitalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
For Additional Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
CRS Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
List of Figures
Figure 1. Average Daily Nationwide Price of Unleaded Gasoline,
January 2002-July 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Figure 2. China’s Oil Production and Consumption, 1986-2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Figure 3. U.S. Gasoline Consumption, January 2000-June 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Figure 4. Nominal and Real Price of Gasoline, 1973-2005 and April 2006 . . . . . 5
Figure 5. Consumer Spending on Oil as % of GDP, 1970-2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

---

Gasoline Prices: Issues for the
110th Congress
Most Recent Developments
Gasoline prices surged over $3.00 per gallon in the spring of 2007 and stayed
near that level as the summer driving season began and continued maintenance
problems in several U.S. refineries led to tightness in the gasoline supply. (See
Figure 1.) Meanwhile, consumption of gasoline continued above 9 million barrels
per day (mbd) after setting a summer peak of over 9.5 mbd during 2006. (See Figure
3.)
The continued high prices ensured that energy would remain on the agenda in
the new Congress, and on January 18, 2007, the House passed H.R. 6, the Creating
Long-Term Energy Alternatives for the Nation (CLEAN Energy) Act of 2007, as part
of its “100 hours” program at the beginning of the first session. President Bush, in
his State of the Union speech on January 23, proposed cutting gasoline consumption
by 20% in 10 years through increased fuel economy standards and use of alternative
fuels. He also proposed expanding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to 1.5
billion barrels.
On May 23, the House passed a bill (H.R. 1252) banning and punishing the sale
of gasoline at “unconscionably excessive” prices when the president declares an
“energy emergency.” (See “Price Gouging,” below.)
On June 21, the Senate passed its version of H.R. 6, including price-gouging
provisions similar to those in H.R. 1252 and an increase in Corporate Average Fuel
Economy (CAFE) standards. (See “Fuel Economy,” below.)
On August 4 the House passed H.R. 3221, the New Direction for Energy
Independence, National Security, and Consumer Protection Act. Included in the bill
as passed was H.R. 2776, the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act,
which would repeal some of the tax benefits to domestic oil and gas producers
included in EPACT 2005 and increase tax benefits for renewable energy and
conservation.
Background and Analysis
Legislative Activities
The persistence of high gasoline prices has led to a broad spectrum of proposed
new legislation. Despite passage of the major Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-
58), many Members have continued to explore a variety of measures to increase

---

CRS-2
supply and reduce demand in the short term, and to reduce the impact of high prices
on consumers. The change in leadership in the 110th Congress is also reflected in
revisiting longer-term policies that were left behind in the process of reaching
agreement on P.L. 109-58.
This report reviews the major legislative initiatives to deal with the gasoline
price issue. To put these proposals in perspective, it first describes some of the
factors that have led to the high prices of both crude oil and gasoline.
Why Are Prices So High?
The run-up of gasoline prices that began in spring 2004 (see Figure 1) climaxed
a period of almost five years during which gasoline prices demonstrated a great deal
of regional volatility but less of an increase at the national level. In 2004, a large
number of factors combined to exert pressure on gasoline prices in all parts of the
country. Some of these factors have affected the price of crude oil, and others the
cost of producing and marketing gasoline.
Crude Oil Prices. Past energy crises have demonstrated that oil is traded in
a world market, in which events in remote areas affect the price of crude for almost
everyone. As a result, the price of crude oil is set through the interaction of world
demand and supply. Major factors in the run-up of crude oil prices have been the
sharply increased consumption of imported oil by China (see Figure 2) and the
continuing possibility of a supply disruption, either from violence or terrorism in the
Middle East, or from natural disasters like Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005.
Figure 1. Average Daily Nationwide Price of Unleaded Gasoline,
January 2002-July 2007
3.40
3.20
3.00
2.80
2.60
2.40
2.20
2.00
1.80
Dollars per Gallon
1.60
1.40
1.20
1.00
r
t
r
t
r
t
r
t
r
t
r
Jul
Jul
04
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
n '02 Ap
Oc n '03 Ap
Oc
Ap
Oc n '05 Ap
Oc n '06 Ap
Oc n '07 Ap
Ja
Ja
Jan '
Ja
Ja
Ja
Source: Daily Fuel Gauge Report, American Automobile Association, [http://www.fuelgaugereport.
com], compiled by CRS.
Notes: Prices include federal, state and local taxes. Last date above is July 27, 2007.

---

CRS-3
World demand for crude oil grew by 4% in 2004 but moderated to 1.4% in 2005
and 1.1% in 2006. It is forecast to grow by 1.7% in 2007.1 World supply, at 84.5
million barrels per day in 2005, was less than 1 million barrels per day more than
demand, leaving relatively little excess supply to draw on if the market was disrupted
by natural or political disasters. When excess supply on the market is low, prices
tend to rise and become more volatile.
Figure 2. China’s Oil Production and Consumption, 1986-2006
8,000
Consumption
7,000
y
a
r D 6,000
e
P
Net Imports
5,000
ls
rre 4,000
a
B
d 3,000
Production
n
a
s 2,000
ou
Th 1,000
0
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
Source: EIA, Country Analysis Brief — China, August 2006, at [http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/
China/Oil.html].
Note: 2006 is January through August only.
Gasoline Prices. Higher prices for crude oil translate directly into higher
prices for gasoline. Crude oil accounts for about 54% of the cost of gasoline.
Refining, distributing, and marketing account for about 30% of the cost of gasoline,
and taxes account for about 16%.2 Whether the crude oil a refiner processes is
purchased on the open market or is produced by the oil company itself, higher costs
for any element in the cost of gasoline are likely to be passed on to consumers. A
number of factors have aggravated the pressure on gasoline prices, including limited
refining capacity in the United States, the range of fuel blends required to meet air
pollution requirements, and the mandated use of ethanol as an additive. Perhaps
most important, U.S. demand for gasoline has increased as economic growth has
continued (see Figure 3).
The 2004 price surge intensified discussion of energy policy and led to further
calls for passage of energy legislation. However, until the climax of the Katrina
1 International Energy Agency, Oil Market Report, December 13, 2006, pp. 4-6.
2 Energy Information Administration data based on June 2006 data and a base price of
gasoline of $2.89 per gallon. See Gasoline & Diesel Fuel Update [http://www.eia.doe.gov].

---

CRS-4
disaster, the urgency of previous energy crises had been lacking. Throughout the
period, U.S. gasoline consumption continued to rise. In part, this may be because
although the price of gasoline in nominal terms set a record, in real terms it did not
appear to be reaching the level of the Iranian crisis years of the early 1980s (see
Figure 4); that is, until Katrina pushed it toward the $3.00-per-gallon mark. Further,
unlike the earlier crises, there was no physical shortage of gasoline and there were no
lines at the pump, except in local disaster-affected areas.
Figure 3. U.S. Gasoline Consumption, January 2000-June 2007
10
9.5
y
a
9
er D
ls p
e 8.5
arr
B
n
io
ill
8
M
7.5
7
Jan
Jul
Jan
Jul
Jan
Jul
Jan
Jul
Jan
Jul
Jan
Jul
Jan
Jul
Jan Jun
'00
'01
'02
'03
'04
'05
'06
'07
Monthly Averages
Annual Averages
Source: EIA, Monthly Energy Review, July 2007, Table 3.4.
As Figure 5 indicates, by the early 1990s the proportion of consumer
expenditures on oil and gasoline had declined from the high levels of the 1970s and
early 1980s. Data are not yet available to indicate what effect the price run-up
starting in 2004 has had on this measure. Perhaps most important, the common view
during the earlier crises was that oil prices not only were high, but were destined to
become ever higher in the coming years. This view is no longer prevalent, and the
general expectation has been that the price increase is a temporary phenomenon,
although lasting longer than expected. The current crisis has led to some analytical
speculation that world oil production has peaked, but additions to proved world oil
reserves seem to contradict that thesis. Most oil industry analysts appear confident
of a long life remaining for the resource and argue that if oil is replaced, it will be
because of improved alternative technologies, not because the world is running out
of oil.

---

CRS-5
Figure 4. Nominal and Real Price of Gasoline, 1973-2005 and
April 2006
n
ollaG rep sralloD
Source: EIA, Monthly Energy Review, May 2006, Tables 1.6 and 9.4, calculated by CRS.
Figure 5. Consumer Spending on Oil as % of GDP, 1970-2001
10
8
6
4
2
0
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Sources: Calculated by CRS with data from EIA, Annual Energy Review 2005, Table 3.5. GDP from
Bureau of Economic Analysis, Department of Commerce.

---

CRS-6
Policy Options
The several energy crises of the past led to major legislative action, twice in the
1970s and once following the 1991 Gulf War. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 differs
from the previous actions because Congress had been considering major energy
legislation for three years before the situation became a nationwide concern. By the
time the bill finally moved through Congress, the major issues had already been fully
debated and the final version differed little from previous initiatives, except for
resolving a number of issues that had blocked passage before.
As in previous legislative energy debates, a major policy divide existed between
those who view the gasoline-fueled automobile as a temporary necessity to be
tolerated only until a substitute fuel or alternative means of transportation can be
developed, and those who expect oil to be the same dominant transportation fuel in
the indefinite future that it is at present. Compromise agreements have been reached
via a combination of measures that enhance the development of alternatives or
restrain the growth in demand for oil, on the one hand, and those that increase
production or reduce the cost of supplying that demand, on the other, and this process
led to passage of the comprehensive Energy Policy Act of 2005.
However, as gasoline prices continued to surge, and damage to Gulf of Mexico
oil and gas resources and facilities by Hurricane Katrina was assessed, calls for
further measures to address the crisis were heard, although the 109th Congress
adjourned after passing only one bill, lifting some restrictions on oil and gas leasing
in the Gulf of Mexico. Continued price pressure, and the change in leadership in the
110th Congress, has already stimulated further legislative initiatives.
The following section describes legislation taken up during the second session
of the 109th Congress, as well as proposals being considered currently.
Oil-Related Legislation
Reducing Impacts on Consumers. A number of proposals are aimed at
easing the impact of high prices on consumers, or are aimed at the oil industry’s
price-making policies.
Price Gouging. The rapid increase in gasoline prices following the Katrina
disaster led to allegations of price gouging. P.L. 109-58 included a provision
requiring the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to conduct an investigation into price
gouging in the recent increases in gasoline prices. H.R. 3893, as passed the House
October 7, 2005, included provisions requiring FTC to define price gouging and
penalize violators.
After gasoline prices surged again in April 2006, momentum increased for
various price-gouging proposals. Several initiatives that would impose windfall
profits taxes on crude oil profits were also introduced. On May 3, the House passed
the Federal Energy Price Protection Act, H.R. 5253, by a vote of 389-34. The bill
would have required the FTC within six months after passage to issue rules defining

---

CRS-7
price gouging in crude oil, gasoline, diesel, home heating oil, and biofuel, and would
prohibit gouging so defined.
The issue reemerged in the 110th Congress as gasoline prices surged past $3.00
per gallon. On May 23, 2007, the House passed the Federal Price Gouging
Prevention Act (H.R. 1252). The bill would ban sale of gasoline at “unconscionably
excessive” prices during energy emergencies declared by the president, and impose
heavy fines and imprisonment for violations. The White House complained that the
bill could result in gasoline price controls, and threatened to veto it, but the House
vote of 284-141 indicated enough support to override a veto.
The Senate, in passing its version of H.R. 6, the Creating Long-Term Energy
Alternatives for the Nation (CLEAN Energy) Act of 2007 on June 21, included a
price-gouging provision similar to that in H.R. 1252.
Tax Provisions. EPACT 2005 included several provisions to encourage
production of oil and gas on federal lands. The Senate, in considering its version of
H. R. 6, discussed the possibility of revising the tax structure, but did not include
them in the bill. On August 4 the House passed the Renewable Energy and Energy
Conservation Tax Act, H. R. 2776, which would repeal some of the EPACT 2005
provisions and redirect the tax relief to renewable energy and conservation. It then
attached H.R. 2776 to H.R. 3221, The New Direction for Energy Independence,
National Security, and Consumer Protection Act, which it had passed earlier that day.
“Boutique” Fuels. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 had some provisions
related to local requirements for specific blends of gasoline, but some proposed
legislation is aimed at further reducing “boutique fuels” requirements that, according
to some observers, make the national gasoline market less flexible. H.R. 3893, the
Gasoline for America’s Security Act of 2005, passed by the House October 7, 2005,
by a vote of 212-210, would among other provisions require the Environmental
Protection Agency to develop a Federal Fuels List and to limit local gasoline blends
to those on the list. (For details, see CRS Report RL31361, “Boutique Fuels” and
Reformulated Gasoline: Harmonization of Fuel Standards, by Brent D. Yacobucci.)
Other boutique fuels legislation has also been proposed.
Mid- to Long-Term Supply and Demand. Most proposals affecting supply
and demand of crude oil and gasoline would not affect the current short-term crisis
but would be aimed at longer term trends.
Fuel Economy. Corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards also have
a long history of controversy, going back to their establishment in the 1970s. In the
mid-1990s, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was
considering a rulemaking that would result in increased standards for light-duty
trucks (including sport utility vehicles), but for several years, Congress included in
its annual appropriation for NHTSA a measure prohibiting NHTSA from analyzing
or undertaking such a ruling. That prohibition was dropped in the FY2004 NHTSA
appropriations, and a final rule issued by NHTSA in April 2003 requires a boost in
light-truck fuel economy to 22.2 miles per gallon by model year 2007. In the summer
of 2005, the Bush Administration proposed new fuel economy standards for light
trucks, to take effect in the 2008 model year.

---

CRS-8
During House floor debate on P.L. 109-58, an amendment to increase fuel
economy standards to 33 miles per gallon over 10 years was defeated by a vote of
177-254. A more general amendment to the House bill, requiring the Administration
to take “voluntary, regulatory, and other actions” to reduce oil demand in the United
States by 1 million barrels per day from projected levels by 2013 was defeated 166-
262. The measure was included in the bill passed by the Senate but was dropped in
conference.
Continued high gasoline prices have raised congressional interest in higher
mandated CAFE standards again. On January 22, a bipartisan group of 10 Senators
introduced S. 357, the Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act, which would raise standards
for SUVs and passenger cars to 35 mpg by 2019. The President argues that standards
should be set by the executive branch, not by Congress, and in his State of the Union
speech on January 23, he set a goal of reducing gasoline consumption by 5% by 2017
through more stringent standards. The White House said that would be the
equivalent of increasing CAFE standards 4% per year starting with model year 2010.
On June 21 the Senate passed its version of H.R. 6, the Creating Long-Term
Energy Alternatives for the Nation (CLEAN Energy) Act of 2007. Included is a
provision, not in the House-passed version, to raise CAFE standards for cars, light
trucks, and SUVs, to 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
ANWR. Oil and gas exploration and development of part of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) have been controversial for many years. This was part of
the early proposals for legislation that eventually became the Energy Policy Act of
1992, but was dropped in the face of strong opposition in both houses. Support for
action grew gradually through the decade, along with technological developments
that advocates claimed would reduce the environmental impact of development.
Numerous attempts to open the region for leasing were made, and both the House and
the Senate at various times approved measures that included leasing provisions, but
none of them survived to become law during the 109th Congress.
On August 4, 2007, during House consideration of H.R. 3221, Representative
Barton offered a motion to recommit the bill with instructions to substitute an
amendment. The amendment was a comprehensive energy bill that included, among
other provisions, opening ANWR for oil and gas leasing. The motion to recommit
was defeated by a vote of 169 ayes to 244 noes.
Savings Goals. A number of legislative proposals would have set goals for
reducing oil consumption. An example is the Enhanced Energy Security Act of 2006
(S. 2747), introduced by Senator Bingaman May 4, 2006, which would have required
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to develop an action plan to
save 2.5 million barrels per day (mbd) in 2016, 7 mbd in 2026, and 10 mbd in 2031.
President Bush took up the idea in his State of the Union speech on January 23,
2007, calling for a cut in gasoline consumption of 20% in 10 years, through a
combination of increased fuel economy standards (see above) and increased
mandated use of alternative fuels (see below).

---

CRS-9
OCS Leasing. The moratorium on oil and gas leasing in the Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS), except in the central and western Gulf of Mexico and some
parts of Alaska, was subject to much controversy during consideration of P.L. 109-
58. A proposal to allow states to voluntarily opt out of the moratorium was dropped
under threat of filibuster, and a measure to order the Department of the Interior to
perform an inventory of OCS resources barely survived the debate.
Following the disruption of production by Katrina, momentum to lift the
moratorium increased, along with efforts by Gulf states to increase their share of
revenues from oil and gas production in the Gulf of Mexico. This movement
culminated in S. 3711, the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006, which lifted
some restrictions in Gulf of Mexico oil and gas leases and increased revenue sharing
for Gulf producing states. The Senate passed S. 3711 on August 1, and its provisions
were included in H.R. 6111 (P.L. 109-432), the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of
2006, which passed the House on December 8 and the Senate the following day. (For
details, see CRS Report RL33493, Outer Continental Shelf: Debate Over Oil and
Gas Leasing and Revenue Sharing, by Marc Humphries.)
Representative Barton’s proposed energy bill, which he submitted in the form
of a motion to recommit H.R. 3221 on August 4, 2007, included a provision to open
up the OCS to oil and gas leasing beyond 100 miles of the coast. The motion to
recommit was defeated by a vote of 169 ayes to 244 noes.
Another issue regarding OCS leasing concerns a number of leases issued in
1998 and 1999 which granted royalty relief under certain conditions without
including a price threshold. Several initiatives to force renegotiation of these
contracts have been proposed, including the House-passed version of H.R. 6, the
CLEAN Energy Act. Similar provisions, including denial of new Gulf of Mexico
leases to lessees holding leases without price thresholds, and establishing
“conservation of resources” fees, are included in H.R. 3221, as passed by the House
August 4, 2007. (For details on OCS royalty relief issues see CRS Report RS22567,
Royalty Relief for U.S. Deepwater Oil and Gas Leases, by Marc Humphries.)
Refinery Revitalization. P.L. 109-58 contained some provisions to
encourage construction of new oil refineries, but the damage to refining facilities
caused by Katrina in the Gulf of Mexico area led to calls for further measures. On
September 28, 2005, the House Energy and Commerce Committee reported out H.R.
3893, the Gasoline for America’s Security Act of 2005, and the House passed the bill
October 7 by a vote of 212-210. A similar bill was introduced in the Senate
September 26, as the Gas Petroleum Refiner Improvement and Community
Empowerment Act, S. 1772, but the bill was rejected October 26 by the Environment
and Public Works Committee by a vote of 9-9.
On June 7, 2006, the House passed the Refinery Permit Process Schedule Act
(H.R. 5254), by a vote of 238-179. The bill would have required the President to
appoint a “federal coordinator” to organize the permitting of new refineries.
Presidential Proposals: Alternative Fuels. In his January 31, 2006,
State of the Union message, President Bush set the goal of breaking the U.S.
“addiction to foreign oil” and of “replacing” more than 75% of oil imports from the

---

CRS-10
Middle East by 2025. The main thrust of the presidential initiative was to increase
funding for research in producing ethanol from plant fiber biomass (rather than from
corn), for improved batteries for hybrid automobiles, and for hydrogen fuels.
In his most recent State of the Union speech, on January 23, 2007, the President
went further, setting a goal of reducing gasoline consumption by 20% in 10 years,
through a combination of more stringent fuel economy standards and setting a
mandatory renewable fuels standards of 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternate
fuels by 2017, about five times the current consumption. The current target, set in
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58), is 7.5 billion gallons by 2012.
On June 21, the Senate passed its version of H.R. 6, the Creating Long-Term
Energy Alternatives for the Nation (CLEAN Energy) Act of 2007, including a
provision requiring production of 36 billion gallons of ethanol in 2022.
Legislation
H.R. 6 (Rahall)
Creating Long-Term Energy Alternatives for the Nation (CLEAN Energy) Act
of 2007. Passed by the House January 18, 2007. Passed the Senate (amended) June
21, 2007.
H.R. 1252 (Stupak)
Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act of 2007. Passed by the House May 23,
2007.
H.R. 2776 (Rangel)
Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2007. Passed by the
House August 4, 2007, by recorded vote: 221 - 189. The text of H.R. 2776, as passed
by the House, was appended at the end of the text of H.R. 3221.
H.R. 3221 (Pelosi)
New Direction for Energy Independence, National Security, and Consumer
Protection Act. Passed by the House August 4, 2007, by recorded vote: 241 - 172.

---

CRS-11
For Additional Reading
CRS Reports
CRS Report RL33523, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR): Controversies for
the 109th Congress, by M. Lynne Corn, Bernard A. Gelb, and Pamela Baldwin.
CRS Report RL31361, “Boutique Fuels” and Reformulated Gasoline:
Harmonization of Fuel Standards, by Brent D. Yacobucci.
CRS Report RS22236, Gasoline Price Increases: Federal and State Authority to
Limit “Price Gouging,” by Adam Vann.
CRS Report RL33290, Fuel Ethanol: Background and Public Policy Issues, by
Brent D. Yacobucci
CRS Report RL33413, Automobile and Light Truck Fuel Economy: The CAFE
Standards, by Brent D. Yacobucci and Robert Bamberger.
CRS Report RL33982, Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE): A Comparison
of Selected Legislation in the 110th Congress, by Brent D. Yacobucci and Robert
Bamberger.

---