Cynics will be surprised to learn that even at a markup on an issue as political as Solyndra, a real debate on how policy is made can still break out.

It happened this morning as the House Energy and Commerce Committee marked up the "No More Solyndras Act," H.R. 6213, a controversial measure aimed at winding down the Department of Energy loan guarantee program that provided $535 million for the now-bankrupt California solar panel manufacturer.

As the markup began, Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) offered an amendment that would impose a one-year cooling-off period for the loan program before a decision is made on ending the effort. The amendment gives DOE time to study the program to see whether improvements can be made before Congress decides in 2013 to shut down the effort.

Ranking member Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) let it be known that the proposal was originally circulated by Green and the committee Chairman Emeritus Joe Barton (R-Texas) before last week's subcommittee markup.

At that markup, Green eventually offered the amendment on his own, and though it failed, Barton and Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.) crossed the aisle to support it.

Barton spoke up to clarify the history of the measure that Waxman had offered.

"My name has been used honestly," he said. "Mr. Waxman is absolutely totally correct. My good friend Gene Green and I suggested offering this as a bipartisan amendment."

But Barton said that in the wake of that discussion, Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) made it clear to him that they would not support the measure.

Whitfield said he had seen enough of the loan program -- which has now overseen loans to three companies that have since gone bankrupt -- to believe another year is not necessary to determine its fate.

"There is a difference between circulating and offering" an amendment, Barton said. "Members do lots of things before markups and it is a good thing to operate in a bipartisan fashion, but ultimately to be successful you need support not just on the minority side but also the majority side. ... Ultimately I think it's better especially when you are in the majority to support the leadership."

Barton said he would vote for the bill, but "I don't think that should bind anybody to my side other than myself."

Barton's fellow Texan, Democrat Charlie Gonzalez, praised Barton's honesty but he said he disagreed with the course of action he chose to take after learning the intentions of the panel's GOP leaders.

"I don't think any member, whether it be a Republican or Democrat, necessarily has to go with the chairman of the subcommittee or full committee if they faithfully agree that an amendment has merit," Gonzalez said.

If more members took that approach, he said, Congress would be a better place.

"Maybe if we start practicing that on the committee level it will manifest itself on the floor of Congress," Gonzalez said.

When the vote was finally called on the amendment, two Republicans joined Barton in voting for the Green amendment, Bilbray and Rep. Charlie Bass of New Hampshire. But the amendment fell a vote short of passing, 24-25.

Bill to allow inhaler sales

This afternoon, the committee also plans to mark up legislation (H.R. 6190) that would allow an asthma inhaler containing chlorofluorocarbons to be allowed back on the market for another year after it was removed by U.S. EPA at the beginning of the year. EPA took the action in accordance with the Montreal Protocol, an international agreement to phase ozone-depleting substances such as CFCs out of production.

The inhaler, Primatene Mist, was the only over-the-counter inhaler available to asthma patients, and the bill's sponsor, Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas), says that its removal has left asthma patients without an option for emergencies.

EPA and Democrats have opposed the legislation, saying it would confuse patients, undermine the transition process and send the wrong signal to other pharmaceutical manufacturers.

This morning, former Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), who now lobbies for Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, which manufactures Primatene Mist, showed up at the markup to be on hand for the vote.

"The people who use Primatene Mist are not confused. ... They want the Primatene Mist," Stupak said in an interview.

He noted that EPA originally allowed the inhalers to be produced for public health purposes and now the agency cannot tell the company how to dispose of the 1.2 million inhalers already made but pulled from the market.

Stupak noted that the total CFCs that the inhalers would create are the equivalent of one minute of the total CFCs released every day around the world.

"Let's put them out there where at least they can do some good," Stupak said.

Stupak said he was confident Burgess' bill would be passed out of the Energy and Commerce Committee and approved by the Republican-controlled House. He also said he is optimistic about the legislation's chances in the Senate.

"Before we ever started our efforts [in the House] there were senators that actually brought forth this issue and they actually had 46 votes, party-line votes," he said. "So we have to work a couple Democrats, but we're confident we can do that."