Thursday, Nov. 29, 2001 | 8:38 a.m.
On Tuesday the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation to extend a law that limits the financial liability for nuclear power plants hit by a catastrophic accident or terrorist attack. Under the plan, the owners of the 103 nuclear power plants in the United States pool together their insurance coverage, and their total liability is limited to $9.5 billion. If a Chernobyl-like accident were to happen, though, and the costs exceeded $9.5 billion, then U.S. taxpayers would have to foot the rest of the bill.
Nuclear power plant operators say that the government-backed guarantee is necessary if the moribund industry is to have a revival, but this is a government subsidy of the worst kind. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., who opposed the legislation, aptly described it as "highway robbery." The nuclear power industry has been in financial trouble for years because it's a polluting, high-cost source of energy. For thousands of years the waste that nuclear power leaves behind will be deadly, and it is 77,000 tons of this waste that the nuclear power industry wants to permanently bury in Nevada. A case could be made for providing a modest government investment into clean, renewable power sources -- solar, wind and geothermal are some examples -- but it is a travesty to provide taxpayer-backed insurance coverage for the nuclear power industry, which jeopardizes the env ironment.
One reason for the success of the nuclear power liability legislation is that several other measures were tacked on to the bill to make it palatable to members of Congress who had reservations about the continued government giveaway. The legislation's sweeteners were provisions to improve security at nuclear power plants, requirements that are unassailable on their own. If the provisions linked to the aftermath of Sept. 11 had been stripped from the legislation and had been considered separately -- which they should have been -- then support for the insurance subsidy would have eroded.
The nuclear power liability legislation is symptomatic of a disturbing pattern in Congress: Goodies for big businesses, and legislative responses to the events of Sept. 11, have been mixed together in legislation. For instance, the airport security bill signed into law by President Bush contained unrelated language sponsored by the House that shielded jet makers, airlines and the owner of the World Trade Center from huge damage awards connected to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. And the economic stimulus package passed by the House, ostensibly intended to jump-start the economy following the terrorist attacks, also included needless billion-dollar giveaways to major corporations through the repeal of the minimum tax that is imposed on corporations.
Although the House has passed an extension of the nuclear power insurance subsidy, the Senate has yet to act on extending the law, which is set to expire in August. The Senate should show better sense than the House and defeat the legislation that would prop up an ailing, polluting industry.
archive
