The U.S. Congress is trying again to pass an energy bill. Seems like an admirable task. This country could certainly use a more effective energy policy. National energy legislation could be a vehicle to get there but, unfortunately, probably not the legislation that will make it out of Capitol Hill. The 2003 energy bill was an amalgamation of giveaways to special interest groups: the nuclear industry, farmers, and the coal states, just to name a few. The automotive industry that might have been put upon to deliver better fuel-efficiency solutions was left totally unscathed by the 2003 legislation. Detroit voters, it seems, were not only important but unyielding during last year’s national election cycle.

Despite the vow of the chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Senator Domenici, to work more collaboratively with Democrats to get a substantive, passable bill, many Washington insiders are still predicting that the energy bill won’t see the light of day. Word in the back hallways is that the Bush administration has no plans to invest political capital to make things happen. The betting is that the U.S. will have no meaningful energy policy for the next four years, if ever. To clinch this inactivity, cynics say we will similarly have no response to the goals of the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, which took effect last week, except some research and development activity, too small to be effective, in one or two clean coal demonstration projects and hydrogen-use technologies.

While our national representatives in Congress dither with lobbyists and corporate campaign donors, the blue states are gearing up into action.

New York is an important state in this regard. It not only has mandated that renewable energy should constitute 25% of the state’s electricity by 2013, but it is also considering cap and trade programs in carbon management and other aggressive legislation on emission controls.

California is another leader. Its renewable portfolio standard law (RPS) calls for 20% renewable energy share by 2017. Moreover, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has already approved regulations to reduce significantly exhaust from cars and trucks by 2016. The ruling means that automakers will be forced to provide individual passenger cars with average fuel economy of 25% to 35% higher than present, potentially forcing Detroit to put significantly more efficient hybrid electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on the road to retain market share. The response to California’s ruling is typical. The industry is suing to prevent implementation. But the die of political will is cast. Other states, notably New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey, are watching carefully with plans to follow suit if the legal dust clears.

It remains unclear whether the new national energy bill under consideration will end up promoting renewable energy standards as a key national strategy for the country. Federal funding for solar energy research and development is embarrassingly small at only $80 million a year. But it probably doesn’t matter, given state-level policy. The number of states with RPS laws (over 20 now) continues to grow. Moreover, 14 states have renewable energy funds. New York State, for example, will give out $14 million a year through its Smart Energy program, California $135 million a year through 2012.

Industry’s response to the blue states has been to run to Congress, the president, and the courts for protection. But in doing so, they do themselves harm. Smart businesses respond to sea change. The Bush administration can save an old coal plant here and there, but for how long? There are a lot of cars, electricity, and fuel to be sold in blue states. Soon, they might offer carbon credits. And, the trend line extends out of this country to Europe, Japan, and even China. Big Business can fight the blue states, but is it really a battle they can win in the long run? I suggest not. Companies are spending valuable dollars to prevent the inevitable, all the while wasting the chance to get out in front of foreign competitors whose governments are already on the new energy and environmental-policy bandwagon.

Ms. Myers Jaffe is a research fellow at Rice University.