LNG is natural gas supercooled into a liquid form. This is done to more easily transport natural gas to the U.S. from destinations not linked by pipeline (for example, importing natural gas from Canada can be accomplished by sending natural gas through a pipeline; importing natural gas from Indonesia or Nigeria must be done by transporting LNG by tanker). LNG can pose significant security and environmental hazards.
In response to concerns of looming domestic natural gas shortages, disputes have arisen between states, community groups and the federal government over whether Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) represents a solution or a new problem for America's energy policy. In a distressing move on November 19, 2004, some in Congress sought to pre-empt this debate by sneaking controversial language into a conference report, without a vote, that may undermine the ability of states and local communities to have their voices adequately represented in this important debate.
In June the National Governor's Association wrote the U.S. Senate urging them to support the bi-partisan amendment to the energy bill protecting the ability of states to have adequate say over the siting and permitting of proposed LNG facilities.
The Senate ultimately rejected NGA's (and Public Citizen's) request. On June 22, 2005 the US Senate voted 52 to 45 (3 not voting) rejecting an amendment to the energy bill that would have provided Governors the right to veto proposed LNG projects (a "nay" vote is the good vote).
Previously the House, voting 237 to 194, struck down an amendment to remove language which gives the federal government exclusive jurisdiction over LNG permitting and siting. So a "no" vote forbade states from having an adequate say over the siting and permitting of LNG facilities