The following are the bills that will be voted on during the simulation event.
HR 287: McLaren Oil Exploration Bill
Summary: U.S. Oil Industry leaders believe a large oil reserve lies beneath the McLaren Wildlife Refuge in Montana. The volume of oil beneath the refuge is enough to enable the U.S. to be completely self-sufficient in oil an additional 50 years. The U.S. government owns the rights below the surface but above was recently deemed a wildlife refuge by a close margin vote.
For: The economic advantages of the oil would be significant to the state of Montana and the surrounding towns as oil companies move in to tap the 50 year reserve of oil. Isolationists believe that self-sufficiency in oil would end our interest in Middle East issues and involvement in that part of the world.
Against: Environmentalist argue that the risk of accidents such as oil spills, well fires and the construction involved to tap into the oil would severely disturb and endanger the tens of species who make the McLaren Refuge their home.
Government costs: The land is federal land that would be leased to private oil companies to extract the oil. Increased development in the area would also mean increased tax revenue from residential as well as commercially. There would be no government costs.
Current Polices/Restraints: The national economy is still very much recovering from the recent major recession. Economic growth and confidence is very important at this time. The economic boost that would accompany the exploration and oil extraction under the refuge could be enough to pull the national economy out of the recession. Improvements in slant drilling may be a solution however, there are still risks for accidents and leakage up into the refuge. There is no information on if the President will sign this bill.
Lobbies: Oil Companies, Environmentalists, Isolationists, conservative economists.
HR 274: Montgomery-Mathyson Clean Air Act
Summary: In two years, reduce "Greenhouse Gas” emissions across the board by 20% each year for the next 5 years (targeting manufacturing companies, coal-fueled power companies, and automobile emissions).
For: The U.S. should lead the way in the world to reduce pollution significantly so that other countries will follow. Proponents cite global warming symptoms such as increased ocean levels, warmer temperatures, and more violent weather activity to encourage alternative manufacturing processes and alternative fuels to reduce pollutants. This bill is a vital turning point for the world and U.S. environmentalists. The new technologies/emission control services developed to comply with this bill can be "sold" to foreign governments to off-set R&D and implementation costs.
Against: The costs to comply with reduction would force manufacturing companies to spend 50% more on clean air emissions controls threatening profits and jobs (R&D, implementation, maintenance). Costs would either be absorbed by higher product prices and or loss of jobs. Many small manufacturing companies would be forced out of business unable to pay for the expensive emissions controls.
Government Costs: Additional monitoring and inspections from the EPA would incur a budget increase of less 5%. The cost of this bill is passed on to companies thru fees, licenses and preparatory inspections. The increased budgetary costs are for additional personnel to conduct more thorough and advanced inspections and for the development of more precise testing equipment.
Current Policies/Restraints: The President would seriously consider signing the bill as long as there are no amendments or terms within the bill that would provide additional tax incentives or loopholes for big businesses. Coal-fired power plants are already spending largely in emissions control measures, this would double their costs.
Lobbies: Big Manufacturing/Automobile companies & unions, Small Business Interests, Environmentalists, Alternative Energy firms, Research Labs.