As the controversial "No More Solyndras Act" gets set to hit the House floor, the Rules Committee yesterday gave the green light for members to debate two Democratic amendments that could soften the bill but did not allow a Republican amendment that would have given the measure more teeth.

Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) said yesterday that the decision to deny his amendment floor time "bespeaks a certain lack of seriousness on the subject" by House GOP leaders.

H.R. 6213 takes its name from the solar panel manufacturer that declared bankruptcy last year after receiving a $535 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy.

Republicans contend that the measure would end the loan guarantee program that has become a focal point of their attacks on the Obama administration's energy record. But Democrats have noted that some loan guarantee applications could still be processed under the bill because of a provision that allows the agency to continue to consider applications submitted by Dec. 31, 2011.

The bill's Republican sponsors in the Energy and Commerce Committee have said that date was picked to protect DOE from liability from companies that could be harmed financially by DOE's simply pulling the plug on the program. But some conservative groups have expressed concern that the provision could allow upward of 50 projects and billions of dollars in new loans to be approved (E&E Daily, Sept. 12).

McClintock sought to close that loophole with an amendment that would have struck the pending application provision and disallowed any new loans. But the Rules Committee did not rule the amendment in order yesterday.

Of the eight amendments offered yesterday, only two were accepted for floor debate today. The first, from Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), would change the wording of the bill to indicate that the health of the government loan portfolio is strong overall and that the program has been run without political interference. The second, from House Energy and Commerce ranking member Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), would allow DOE to continue to move forward with the issuance of new loans for applications received after Dec. 31, 2011.

McClintock said he was informed that his amendment was not picked up because party leaders believe it would reduce support for the overall bill.

But McClintock said that Republicans are setting themselves up for more loan failures by not fixing the problem now.

"I think the most likely scenario is that there will be another scandal or two upcoming that will hopefully galvanize a more serious approach to these Title 17 loans," he said.

The McClintock amendment had been supported by several conservative groups.

The National Taxpayers Union supports the underlying bill for its attempt to wind down the program but has said the McClintock amendment would have been an improvement. The group's vice president of government affairs, Andrew Moylan, said yesterday that the amendment would be "an interesting window into the soul of the Republican Party" on energy issues.

Likewise, Myron Ebell, who serves as president of the Center for Energy and Environment at the free-market group Competitive Enterprise Institute, said his group supports the underlying legislation but that it could have been better if the McClintock amendment had been included.

"What we try to do at CEI is to lay out the best case for free-market policies, and we try to push the Congress as far as we can in supporting our position on issues like subsidies and mandates. But we do recognize that legislation is never as perfect as we'd like it," Ebell said. "I think the 'No More Solyndras' vote will be a good test vote, but the McClintock vote would have been a better one."