An ill wind from Congress

THE COUNTRY'S most important renewable energy project is in danger of being sandbagged in Congress. An amendment to a spending bill for the US Coast Guard would grant veto power over the plan for a wind farm off Cape Cod to Governor Romney, an outspoken opponent. As important as funding for the Coast Guard is, Congress should reject this bill and stop playing games with the nation's hopes of weaning itself from fossil fuels and the greenhouse gases they emit.

The Cape Wind plan for 130 wind turbines capable of generating three-quarters of the power needs of the Cape and Islands has already undergone more than three years of regulatory scrutiny at the state and federal levels. Since passage of the federal Energy Act last summer, it faces even more monitoring under the auspices of the Interior Department.

In Massachusetts, project backers passed muster with the state's Energy Facilities Siting Board to win approval for the wind farm's cables in state waters. Years ago, that board was established to include officials from state agencies. But to keep politics out of such controversial decisions as much as possible, the siting process does not allow for a gubernatorial veto.

The wisdom of that has been proven in the Cape Wind project. While Romney has stuck to the campaign statement he made to Cape opponents that he would be against the wind farm, state officials have given it a fair hearing and decided there was no reason to deny it the right to connect to a Cape switching station. Without Cape Wind, the state has no prospect whatever of meeting its own requirement that 4 percent of its electricity come from renewable sources by 2009.

If Congress accepts the bill with the veto power for Romney, it would be a victory for the project's well-heeled opponents on the Cape and Islands, who have funded the lobbying campaign waged against Cape Wind in the backrooms of Congress. The veto provision is also a blatant example of the kind of special-interest earmarking that subverts the democratic process in Washington. Such a provision would never prevail if it were subjected to open committee hearings.

The Republican chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Pete Domenici, blasted the veto clause this week, saying ''it would be folly for us in Congress to talk about breaking our addiction to foreign oil and, at the same time, pass laws that stymie our own production of clean and renewable energies here at home." Congress should not let NIMBY property owners on the Cape and Islands deal a body blow to the most promising plan yet for steering the country away from uncontrolled global warming and dependence on foreign oil.