Preview Newsletter
PM ACC 11/7/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) Democrat Sean Casten Declares Victory over U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam in Pivotal 6th Congressional District
Nov 6, 2018 | Chicago Tribune
By Patrick M. O'Connell, Ted Gregory and Michael Hawthorne
In one of the nation’s most closely watched campaigns of the midterm elections, political newcomer Sean Casten declared victory over incumbent Republican U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam in the suburban 6th Congressional District, turning a longtime-GOP stronghold into a critical win... -
(ACC Mentioned) K Street Contemplates Divided Government
Nov 6, 2018 | Politico
By Marianne Levine
...David Fischer is a partner for IBEX Partners’ legal and regulatory affairs division. He was previously senior director in the American Chemistry Council’s chemical products and technology division... -
Meet the New Agenda Setters in the House
Nov 7, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
In winning control of the House of Representatives, Democrats take over the chairman’s seat in the chamber’s committees. Here are the men and women likely to be setting the agenda for key committees, and what policy changes to expect from them. -
In Rebuke of Trump Administration, Voters Deliver Strong Backing for Public Health and Environmental Protection
Nov 7, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
The results of the mid-term elections are a repudiation of President Trump’s pro-polluter agenda that could not have come at a more critical time for the health and well-being of every American, said Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook. -
Retaking House, Democrats Cast Their Eyes on Environmental Oversight
Nov 7, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
Officials at agencies with energy and environmental missions can confidently expect greater scrutiny from the 116th Congress now that Democrats will control the lower chamber. -
Washington State Weighs Policy Options on Flame Retardants
Nov 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Lisa Martine Jenkins
Washington state officials are to meet with flame retardant stakeholders this week, the latest step by the Department of Ecology (ECY) and Department of Health (DOH) in their ongoing effort to address the substances and to consider a more preventative approach. -
UK Government Pressed to Clarify Post-Brexit Reach Approach
Nov 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A House of Lords report has urged the British government to clarify "as a matter of urgency" whether it would automatically accept EU27-led chemical REACH registrations into a UK system in order to avoid a "cliff-edge" of potentially losing access to 16,000 substances. -
EU Outlines New Strategy on EDCs
Nov 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
The European Commission will launch a comprehensive screening of existing legislation related to endocrine disrupting chemicals, as part of a long-overdue strategy that targets harmonised identification criteria and coherent policies. -
EU Commission Drops Move to Soften Pesticides EDC Ban
Nov 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
The European Commission has dropped a controversial proposal to amend the pesticides law in relation to endocrine disrupting chemicals, after failing to garner enough support from member states. -
Ballot Measures Taking Aim at Climate Change, Fossil Fuels Fall Short
Nov 7, 2018 | Washington Post
By Brady Dennis and Dino Grandoni
Efforts to nudge the nation away from burning fossil fuels and toward harnessing renewable sources of energy were rejected by voters Tuesday across a swath of resource-rich Western states. -
Midterms Shift Balance in Washington for Oil Sector
Nov 7, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
After almost a decade of oil-friendly Republicans controlling Congress, the energy sector faced a dramatically different landscape Wednesday on Capitol Hill. -
Colorado Election Results Portend Continued Energy Fight
Nov 7, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Ben LeFebvre
Democrats won control of Colorado's government last night and mustered a respectable vote for an anti-fracking measure, portending more twists and turns for the state’s oil and gas industry, analysts said. -
Dem Wins Coastal House Seat on No-Drilling Platform
Nov 7, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Rob Hotakainen
Democrat Joe Cunningham, a political novice and former ocean engineer, scored a big upset in South Carolina early today after making opposition to offshore drilling and seismic testing a top issue in his campaign. -
Michigan Governor May Take Aim at Enbridge Line 5; Nebraska Elects Keystone Xl Supporter
Nov 7, 2018 | Platts
By Meghan Gordon and Brian Scheid
Michigan's next governor may push to shut Enbridge's 540,000 b/d Line 5 pipeline, an aging system that remains a key route for light crude and NGLs to the US Midwest and Ontario. -
Democratic Gains Deflate Climate Caucus
Nov 7, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Adam Aton
Democrats built a House majority by hollowing out the Climate Solutions Caucus. -
Clashes on Climate Expected After Big Win by Democrats
Nov 7, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Mark K. Matthews
The U.S. Capitol could boil with pitched political battles over the environment for the next two years after Democrats captured control of the House in yesterday's midterm elections but missed seizing the Senate. -
EPA Loosens Air Pollution Permit Requirements for Some Projects
Nov 7, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Trump administration is implementing a policy meant to make it easier for facilities that produce air pollution to make changes without going through a complex permitting process.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
Nov 6, 2018 | Chicago Tribune
By Patrick M. O'Connell, Ted Gregory and Michael Hawthorne
In one of the nation’s most closely watched campaigns of the midterm elections, political newcomer Sean Casten declared victory over incumbent Republican U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam in the suburban 6th Congressional District, turning a longtime-GOP stronghold into a critical win for Democrats as they worked to take control of the U.S. House of Representatives.
“It wasn’t the party that won. It was our values,” said Casten, a clean-energy businessman from Downers Grove.
Casten made criticism of President Donald Trump a central theme of his campaign. The Democrat said Roskam, a six-term congressman, had not done enough to stand up to the president.
“The arc of justice bends slowly,” Casten said to cheering supporters at the IBEW Local 701 Union Hall in west suburban Warrenville. “People jumped up and tugged that arc back in the right direction.”
Casten also focused on health care, climate change, the Republican tax bill, LGBTQ rights and gun control.
In a brief session with reporters after his concession speech, Roskam acknowledged the president’s unpopularity in the 6th District.
“That’s obvious, and I think there was some manifestation of that today on Election Day, but in my view, it’s very difficult to be that speculative about different things,” he said. “I will leave it to the analysts to figure out.”
Roskam thanked his supporters and campaign staff gathered at the Arrowhead Golf Club in his hometown of Wheaton.
“I wish I’d won the election tonight, but I didn’t,” Roskam said. “So what you do is you deal with it. You rub some dirt on it and you deal with it.
Before taking his place behind the lectern, Roskam called Casten to congratulate him about three hours after the polls closed.
“I told him (Casten) this is a great job and he’s going to love it,” Roskam said. “I wish him the very best.”
A few people called out “2020,” a reference to the next congressional elections. After his short speech, Roskam filed through the crowd to shake hands.
At Casten’s gathering, which turned into a victory party, the crowd cheered loudly whenever television reports showed Democrat wins across the country, including in the next-door 14th Congressional District, where Lauren Underwood unseated U.S. Rep. Randy Hultgren.
Casten thanked Roskam for his service and said he would savor the victory, then turn his attention to representing the district.
“My job is to represent everyone in the district. At the end of the day, the office is bigger than the woman or man who holds it,” Casten said. “… We’re going to celebrate a bit and then get back to work.”
The Democrat also referenced the Sunday campaign appearance of former President Barack Obama, who visited Chicago to stump for Illinois Democrats.
“I never thought that the second coolest thing to happen this week was meeting President Obama,” Casten said. At the end of the rally at the UIC Pavilion, Casten gave Obama a big hug.
Casten ended his victory speech Tuesday by leading the crowd in a Sam Cooke singalong.
With more than half of precincts reporting, Casten had 53 percent compared with 47 percent for Roskam, according to unofficial vote totals. The results may not include all early voting tallies.
The west and northwest suburban district, which includes portions of DuPage, Lake, McHenry, Cook and Kane counties, is among several dozen swing districts from coast to coast that will determine which party controls the U.S. House of Representatives.
Roskam was trying to win a seventh term. Casten was trying to capitalize on voters’ distaste for Trump in a district that voted for Hillary Clinton by 7 percentage points in 2016. Roskam had not faced this strong of a challenge since his initial congressional campaign in 2006, when he defeated now-U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth in a Democratic wave election.
In a sign of the pivotal nature of the campaign, the race drew more than $11 million from outside groups. The candidates spent millions more on ads that blanketed the television airwaves and social media sites for weeks. Big-name politicians from each side of the aisle visited the district during the final stretch to campaign for both men.
For all of the candidates’ differences on policy matters, the election was often about one topic: Trump. Casten was not shy about criticizing the president. Roskam tried to keep Trump supporters on board while also appealing to independent and centrist Republican voters who do not like the president, arguing he stood up to the president when necessary and does not condone Trump’s often caustic Twitter postings. Roskam called Trump’s showing a “mixed bag,” emphasizing a booming economy under Republican control while distancing himself from the president’s inflammatory language and comments.
Unlike other Republican candidates in Illinois, Roskam did not attend a Downstate rally with Trump in the final weeks of the campaign. Casten, meanwhile, received the support of Obama during a weekend get-out-the-vote event for Democrats at the UIC Pavilion. While Clinton defeated Trump two years ago in the 6th District, Mitt Romney received more votes in the district than Obama in 2012.
Casten, 46, tried to connect Roskam with Trump throughout the campaign. He also touted his energy background to talk about climate change and spoke often about issues that may resonate with the district’s many college-educated, middle-class voters: gun control, health care and the potential ramifications of the Republican tax bill on state and local taxes.
Roskam, 57, had attempted to walk a tightrope with regard to the president and even tried to tie his opponent to Trump by emphasizing the Democrat’s language choices and his pointed, sometimes sarcastic, comments and criticism of Republicans on Twitter. Instead of appearing with Trump, Roskam campaigned with U.S. Sen Marco Rubio, R-Fla. and U.S. Rep. Steve Scalise, the third-ranking member in the House, who visited the district for fundraising appearances in an effort to provide a final push for the incumbent Republican.
Roskam, especially in the final weeks of the campaign, attempted to make the race a referendum on the tone of politics, criticizing Casten’s demeanor on the trail as “the politics of ridicule” and arguing voters should not want a representative that reflects the divisive nature of the president. Casten was unabashed in his critique of the president and Republicans who he said have not stood up to Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric.
Casten also was critical of Roskam’s response to the crisis involving the Sterigenics facility in Willowbrook, near the 6th District’s southern edge, which is under fire for emitting ethylene oxide, a highly potent, cancer-causing gas. The gas is made by Dow Chemical, Union Carbide, Shell and several other members of the American Chemistry Council, which purchased $209,000 in television advertisements in support of Roskam early in the campaign.
Roskam replaced conservative icon U.S. Rep. Henry Hyde in Congress, but much of his old territory in eastern DuPage County is now represented by U.S. Reps. Mike Quigley of Chicago and Raja Krishnamoorthi of Schaumburg, both Democrats.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/elections/ct-met-illinois-6th-district-peter-roskam-sean-casten-20181106-story.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) K Street Contemplates Divided Government
Nov 6, 2018 | Politico
By Marianne Levine
K STREET CONTEMPLATES DIVIDED GOVERNMENT: No one knows what will happen when voters finish casting their ballots today, but Democrats are favored to retake the House and Republicans are favored to hold the Senate — which would mean a return to divided government. Gridlock has meant less business on K Street in the past, since clients generally are most eager to hire lobbyists when Congress is working on legislation they favor or working on bills they fear. But this time could be different, since House Democrats have indicated they’ll launch investigations that could make corporate America nervous. “That will throw off a lot of work for law firms” with lobbying practices, Rich Gold, the leader of Holland & Knight’s public policy and regulation group, said in an interview. Those firms include Holland & Knight, Hogan Lovells, K&L Gatesand Covington & Burling.
— “I’m more optimistic than pessimistic” about divided government, said Marc Lampkin, the managing partner of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck’s Washington office. Regardless of what happens today, Washington will almost instantly find itself in a presidential election cycle as soon as control of Congress is clear. “That will necessarily change the nature of Washington,” Lampkin said. “That may be the bigger impediment than divided government.” While a slowdown in business is possible, “I think it’s still important for clients to be at the table,” said Darrell Conner of K&L Gates. “They’re at risk.”
LOBBYISTS LOOK TO INFLUENCE CONGRESSIONAL BLACK, HISPANIC CAUCUSES: If Democrats do take the House, many committee chairmen will be members of the Congressional Black Caucus or the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. That’s made lobbyists with connections to those caucuses suddenly in demand. United by Interest, a lobbying firm started earlier this year by four Democrats with ties to those caucuses and two Republicans, has signed its first lobbying client: the American Petroleum Institute. Mike Williams,Jennifer Stewart and Ebony Simpson will lobby on issues “affecting the upstream, midstream, and downstream sectors of the oil and gas industry,” according to a disclosure filing. (United by Interest also now has a new website, created by Dionna Dorsey.)
— The law and lobbying firm Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner, meanwhile, has struck up a partnership with Pine Street Strategies, touting the relationships that Pine Street’s Don Calloway has to the Congressional Black Caucus. “Our combined ties to Missouri, the Congressional Black Caucus, and more broadly in the House and Senate will allow us to offer even greater bipartisan and bicameral counsel to our clients." Jack Oliver and Broderick Johnson of Bryan Cave said in a statement.
Good afternoon, and welcome to PI. Today’s the day. Where are you watching the election tonight? Follow the election results here and POLITICO’s live analysis here. Get out and vote. And as always, send us your tips and whatever you overhear at BLT: tmeyer@politico.com and mlevine@politico.com. You can also follow us on Twitter: @theodoricmeyer and @marianne_levine.
** A message from Phone2Action: When the midterms end, the legislative and regulatory battles begin. Elevate your grassroots game and advance your cause with Phone2Action. We give you the technology to launch campaigns, mobilize supporters, and connect them to elected officials and regulatory agencies. To learn about the platform behind 35M+ lawmaker connections, visit https://phone2action.com/building-influence **
TOP TECH EXECUTIVES DONATE LITTLE IN 2018: “The top executives at Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft have stayed on the political sidelines during the 2018 midterm elections, opting not to donate to federal candidates who might advance Silicon Valley’s political agenda — or battle back President Trump,” The Washington Post’s Tony Romm reports. “Two years ago, these tech leaders emerged as some of Trump’s biggest critics, challenging his administration publicly on issues including immigration, climate change and gender equality. Personally, though, they’ve declined since then to write checks to congressional office-seekers who might serve as a bulwark against the White House, federal records show.”
— “Apple CEO Tim Cook so far has backed one Democratic lawmaker in California, after spending nearly $500,000 — almost entirely on Democrats, and a few Republicans — during the 2016 presidential race, according to data published by the Federal Election Commission. Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive of Facebook, and Larry Page and Sergey Brin, co-founders of Google parentAlphabet, so far haven’t written any checks to federal candidates, the records show. All three companies declined to comment for this story.” Full story.
ACCOUNTING FIRMS DONATE TO RACES IN VIRGINIA, TEXAS: “Five candidates running for the U.S. Senate and House are proving popular with the largest U.S. accounting firms this election season,” Bloomberg Tax’s Amanda Iacone reports. “The Big Four firms and individuals associated with those firms poured thousands of dollars into the campaigns of Beto O’Rourke, Barbara Comstock, Martha Roby, Heidi Heitkamp and Kyrsten Sinema. All five currently serve in Congress and their home districts stretch from Alabama to North Dakota. Two are Republicans and three are Democrats. All but one are in the middle of hotly contested races and are among the most expensive contests in the nation this fall.
— “The firms collectively spent millions contributing to Democrats and Republicans alike this election cycle but the five candidates were among the biggest beneficiaries of that support, according to a review of campaign finance data compiled by Open Secrets, which tracks U.S. political spending. In a statement, Deloitte LLP told Bloomberg Tax that its non-partisan political action committee aims to support candidates from both parties that ‘understand and advocate for policies that promote economic growth and job creation.’ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Ernst & Young LLP, and KPMG LLPdeclined to comment about their political spending.” Full story.
POLITICO Pro announces dedicated California coverage: On Nov. 7, there will be a new authority on California politics and policy. Just in time to help policy professionals and business leaders in the Golden State navigate the twists and turns of a new administration, POLITICO California Pro is the only tool that will arm you with a team of state-level experts. Learn more.
MEANWHILE IN THE STATES: The soda industry has spent millions of dollars to combat soda taxes ahead of the midterms, Kaiser Health News' Liz Szabo reports. “In recent years, it has been largely successful in shutting down new taxes, except in a handful of major cities. The industry is now pushing statewide measures billed as grocery tax bans that strip cities and towns of their ability to tax soda. Two of these initiatives will be on the ballot Tuesday in Washington and Oregon. Arizona and Michigan already ban localities from enacting soda taxes.
— “In California, where four cities have soda taxes, the beverage industry pressured lawmakers this summer into accepting a 12-year moratorium on local taxes on sugar-sweetened drinks. Some lawmakers say Californians are being ‘held hostage’ over the measure by the soda industry, which spent $7 million on a ballot initiative that would have made it much harder for cities to raise taxes of any kind. The beverage industry dropped the initiative after lawmakers agreed to the moratorium. The sweetened-beverage industry is also cultivating relationships with doctors and scientists, which public health advocates say they've seen before.”Full story.
— Mike Telliga is joining Amway’s Washington office as senior principal for federal affairs and top lobbyist on the Hill. He was previously chief of staff to Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.).
— Sarah Mamula is assistant vice president of public affairs at the Bank Policy Institute. She was previously senior director of the Global Women’s Innovation Network.
— David Fischer is a partner for IBEX Partners’ legal and regulatory affairs division. He was previously senior director in the American Chemistry Council’s chemical products and technology division.
SPOTTED: Out campaigning for Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.), who’s facing a tight race, in the final days of the campaign, according to a PI tipster: Brian Sutter of Capitol Hill Consulting Group; Matt Mika of Tyson Foods,Andrew Szente of Best Buy and Nick Hawatmeh of Sen. John Kennedy’s (R-La.) office.
ON THE CALENDAR:
— Nelson Mullins’ government relations team will discuss the election results on Thursday at the firm’s D.C. office. The event will take place from 9 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/politico-influence/2018/11/06/k-street-contemplates-divided-government-402896
-
Meet the New Agenda Setters in the House
Nov 7, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
In winning control of the House of Representatives, Democrats take over the chairman’s seat in the chamber’s committees. Here are the men and women likely to be setting the agenda for key committees, and what policy changes to expect from them.
House Ways & Means Committee
Massachusetts Rep. Richard Neal is poised to get the post he’s been eyeing for years: The chairmanship of the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over taxes, trade, health care and Social Security. Mr. Neal, the 69-year-old former mayor of Springfield, Mass., was first elected to Congress in 1988 and represents the western part of the state.
Mr. Neal took over the panel’s top Democratic spot from retiring Rep. Sander Levin of Michigan and is unlikely to face a challenge within the party.
As chairman, Mr. Neal would try to strengthen the Affordable Care Act, roll back some of last year’s tax cuts and promote policies to encourage more saving in retirement accounts. He would also gain the power to obtain and analyze President Trump’s tax returns, giving Ways and Means an important piece of the oversight authority Democrats can exercise.
Mr. Neal would succeed Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas, the chief author of the 2017 tax law. No Democrats voted for the law, and the Ways and Means panel is where the party will begin holding hearings on the law’s effects and sorting out its alternative proposals as Democrats aim for control of the White House in 2021.
— Richard Rubin
House Committee on Energy and Commerce
The Energy and Commerce Committee oversees health-care legislation in the House. Rep. Frank Pallone has been the top Democrat on the committee since 2014 and is expected to ascend to the chairman position.
Mr. Pallone, 66 years old, has served in Congress since 1988, representing coastal New Jersey. In his time in Congress, he has largely focused on health-care policy and environmental issues, specifically to stop ocean dumping and offshore oil and gas drilling in the Atlantic region.
He plans to meet with members to discuss plans to lower health-care and prescription drug costs for consumers, a core plank of House Democratic lawmakers’ agenda for the next Congress. Mr. Pallone would also like to increase support for Medicaid in order to combat the opioid epidemic, as many people who need treatment use government health care.
Mr. Pallone also promised members that they would conduct stronger oversight of the Federal Communications Commission, which the committee oversees. The lawmaker said that Congressional supervision of the agency had been lacking during the Trump administration.
—Natalie Andrews
House Financial Services Committee
California Rep. Maxine Waters is the front-runner to become the new chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee, and would be both the first woman and African-American to head the panel.
Ms. Waters is the ranking Democrat on the committee, and is widely expected to chair it. Next in line would be Rep. Carolyn Maloney of New York.
Ms. Waters has spent more than three decades as a politician representing the Los Angeles area, in the California assembly and, since 1990, the U.S. House. She has been one of the most aggressive Democratic critics of President Trump.
She has said she would make housing finance a top priority. The committee also faces thorny debates around marijuana banking, financial technology, and government insurance for floods and terrorist attacks. Ms. Waters also is likely to probe big banks and the Trump administration, including the Treasury Department and other agencies her committee oversees. She has previously suggested that Wells Fargo & Co. should be broken up for repeated consumer abuses, and demanded information on Deustche Bank AG’s loans to Mr. Trump. But she hasn’t wielded the subpoena authority that comes with the chairman’s gavel. On the regulatory front, a likely target is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Democrats helped created the new agency in 2010 and believe GOP leadership is trying to neuter it.
Her elevation will present a striking contrast to the Republicans on the committee, who have praised Trump-nominated financial regulators, pursued legislation to roll back bank rules, and generally avoided publicly grilling Wall Street executives. Ms. Waters is expected to change tack on all counts. She also could shift gears on oversight of the Federal Reserve. She is less likely than Republicans to seek limits on the Fed’s discretion in steering the economy, and more likely to focus on other issues such as the Fed’s big-bank rules, and how Fed policies impact minorities and the poor.
—Ryan Tracy
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Rep. Adam Schiff of California is the current ranking member and has earned wide praise from fellow Democrats for his handling of the politically sensitive investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. A former federal prosecutor, Mr. Schiff is 58 years old and has served in Congress since 2001.
The future leadership of this panel is dependent on the outcome of the speaker’s race. Unlike other panels, the membership of the intelligence committee is entirely at the direction of congressional leadership.
The custom is that a Democrat can serve four years as ranking member or chairman. Mr. Schiff has already spent four years as ranking member. He is a close ally of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who is widely expected to keep him on despite the custom. However, Ms. Pelosi may not have the support within the Democratic caucus to win the speakership. If Mr. Schiff doesn’t become chairman, Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut has the most seniority and is a respected member of the panel.
If Democrats retake the House, they’re likely to reopen the investigation into Russian election interference during the 2016 campaign. The panel’s Democrats dissented from the report issued by the GOP majority, saying that major lines of inquiry went unexplored.
Rep. Devin Nunes (R., Calif.) is the outgoing chairman of the panel. Under his tenure, relations on the committee sunk to new lows—mostly over his handling of the panel’s Russia investigation. Notably, he pursued a politically divisive investigation into the origin of a surveillance warrant on a Trump adviser during the presidential campaign and was forced to step aside from leadership of the panel’s Russia investigation over his closeness with the White House.
—Byron Tau
House Appropriations Committee
Rep. Nita Lowey of New York, the panel’s top Democrat, is expected to become its next chairwoman, making her the first woman to lead the powerful panel. Ms. Lowey, 81 years old, is now in her 15th term in the House and a longtime fixture on the Appropriations Committee.
A reliable ally of House Democratic leaders, Ms. Lowey would take the lead writing the spending bills needed to fund the government. Congressional leaders typically strike an agreement on the overall funding level, but leave it to the appropriations panel to divvy it up between agencies.
She is expected to write dramatically different bills from those drafted by its current chairman, Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R., N.J.), who is retiring in the face of a tight re-election campaign. Ms. Lowey has championed women’s reproductive rights and teen-pregnancy prevention, and wouldn’t seek to block Planned Parenthood from receiving federal funding, as House Republicans have sought.
She has also advocated for gun control and would seek new funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to research gun violence. Under Ms. Lowey, Democrats on the committee would also be expected to push to head off oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and fund more research into climate change. Under Mr. Frelinghuysen, the House’s spending bills included many of President Trump’s priorities, including $5 billion in funding for the border wall, which Democrats oppose.
—Kristina Peterson
House Foreign Affairs Committee
Rep. Eliot Engel of New York is in line to take over the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Mr. Engel, 71 years old, is a veteran of Congress since 1989, representing parts of the Bronx and Westchester County.
He isn’t expected to be challenged for the job. But other members of the panel to watch as potential leaders if Mr. Engel falls short: Reps. Gerry Connolly of Virginia, Gregory Meeks of New York or David Cicilline of Rhode Island.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee is typically less partisan than most panels given its focus on such foreign policy issues as human rights, democracy promotion and the impact of U.S. decisions around the globe. But under Democratic leadership, there will be questions about the Trump administration’s management of the State Department, diplomatic decisions around Iran, North Korea and Israel as well as other topics.
The outgoing chairman, Rep. Ed Royce of California, is retiring from Congress after reaching a term limit for his leadership of the panel. From the perch, he had been a harsh critic of the Obama administration. In the Trump years, he has focused on issues like human trafficking and terrorist financing.
—Byron Tau
House Armed Services Committee
Washington Rep. Adam Smith, the ranking Democratic member of the House Armed Services Committee, is expected to get the nod to become chairman. Mr. Smith, 53, would succeed Texas Republican Rep. Mac Thornberry, who has chaired the committee for the last three years. Mr. Smith, a one-time Washington state senator, was elected to the House of Representatives in 1997. He has been Armed Services ranking member since 2015.
The Armed Services Committee, dealing with military matters, has a tradition of bipartisanship, and Mr. Smith has worked with Mr. Thornberry on legislation including military policy and spending bills.
Mr. Smith has also been a champion of Democratic positions. Earlier this year, he opposed a Trump administration proposal—which ultimately was dropped—to use Pentagon funds to start construction of a southern U.S. border wall.
The next few years are seen as critical for the committee. The Pentagon’s budget, now free of budget caps, is expected to level off after next year, posing a challenge to efforts to fund military readiness improvements—training, equipment and force strength—as well as modernization and procurement efforts needed to counter a rising China and a more aggressive Russia.
During his tenure, Mr. Thornberry has focused on military preparedness, improving acquisition, and bolstering the defense budget. He has also pushed for reforms within the Pentagon to save money on overhead.
—Gordon Lubold
House Judiciary Committee
Rep. Jerrold Nadler is the favorite to become the new chairman of the Judiciary Committee. A New York City Democrat, Mr. Nadler, 71 years old, represents a district that encompasses the west side of Manhattan, lower Manhattan and several neighborhoods in Brooklyn. He’s a veteran of the 1998 impeachment of Bill Clinton, having served on the Judiciary Committee and become something of an expert on impeachment proceedings.
Mr. Nadler was elected to the top Democratic spot on the committee by his peers after the resignation of Michigan Rep. John Conyers earlier this year and is expected to easily become chairman. If he falls short, California Rep. Zoe Lofgren has also expressed interest in the job.
Democrats on the panel have vowed to conduct aggressive oversight of Mr. Trump’s relationship with the Justice Department, the FBI and the special counsel’s office. The panel is also the front line of defense on questions of impeachment and executive wrongdoing. Beyond that, Mr. Nadler has said he would like to take up legislation to curb gun violence.
The current Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.) is retiring from Congress. Under his leadership, the panel has been conducting a politically charged investigation into whether there was any bias at the Department of Justice or FBI during the 2016 campaign.
—Byron Tau
House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Maryland’s Rep. Elijah Cummings is expected to take over the reins of Congress’s most powerful investigative body. Elected in 1996, Mr. Cummings represents a district that encompasses a large part of Baltimore. He’s a veteran of congressional oversight fights—he’s been the top Democrat on the panel since 2010 and also served as the ranking member of the contentious House Benghazi committee which investigated the 2012 terrorist attack.
Mr. Cummings isn’t expected to face any internal challenges for the job this year. But Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia is considered a top contender for the chairmanship at some point. He represents a suburban Washington district and has extensive experience dealing with federal workforce and oversight issues. Rep. Carolyn Maloney of New York has the most seniority on the panel and also has previously run for the top job.
Democrats on the committee expect to pursue a robust investigative agenda that will touch on many of the controversies in the Trump administration. The panel has a wide mandate to look for waste, fraud and abuse anywhere in the federal government. Democrats are expected to look into Mr. Trump’s possible business conflicts of interest, personnel decisions within the administration, spending decisions, guilty pleas by Trump confidants and many other issues that should make the oversight panel one of the busiest.
The current chairman is Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, who is retiring from Congress. He believed in a very narrow mandate for the job, keeping the panel focused on such issues as the census, postal reform and streamlining government programs. Mr. Gowdy’s approach drew criticism from Democrats, who said Congress has abdicated its responsibility to conduct aggressive oversight of Mr. Trump and his subordinates.
—Byron Tau
House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, the committee’s ranking Democrat, would be the favorite to become chairman. Mr. DeFazio, 71 years old, is now serving his 16th term in Congress, representing coastal counties south of Portland to the California border. A former congressional aide, he served as a county commissioner before being elected to Congress in 1986.
From his position in the Democratic minority, Mr. DeFazio has expressed a willingness to work with the Trump administration. He was among the Democrats who initially applauded Mr. Trump’s talk of a major federal infrastructure-rebuilding effort, only to denounce the administration’s eventual proposal, which would have relied on local governments to raise the majority of the money. Mr. DeFazio labed that idea a “scam.”
Mr. DeFazio would succeed Rep. Bill Shuster of Pennsylvania, who is retiring from Congress. Mr. Shuster was able to win committee support, and backing from Mr. Trump, for a plan to privatize the country’s air traffic control system, but was thwarted by opposition in the Senate. A five-year reauthorization of the FAA that passed both chambers left out Mr. Shuster’s privatization proposal. Mr. DeFazio likewise opposes the privatization plan.
Mr. DeFazio would also likely take a tougher line on commuter and freight railroads that have failed to meet deadlines to install anti-crash technology called “positive train control” or PTC. PTC was first mandated in 2008, and Mr. DeFazio has voiced frustration at the slow pace of installation, even after Congress extended it to the end of 2018.
—Ted Mann
House Committee on Agriculture
Rep. Collin Peterson, a Minnesota Democrat who served as the Agriculture Committee’s chairman from 2007 through 2010, is expected to regain the panel’s helm.
Mr. Peterson, 74 years old, worked as a certified public accountant before he was elected to the House in 1990. One of the House’s most conservative Democrats, Mr. Peterson represents a rural, agricultural district that President Trump won by more than 30 percentage points in 2016. His district is so large that he often travels around it in a single-engine plane.
Mr. Peterson is known for taking a bipartisan approach to farm legislation—as well as to some of his hobbies. He has played guitar in several rock bands with lawmakers from both parties, including one called “The Second Amendments.”
The House earlier this year passed a farm bill drafted by Chairman Mike Conaway (R., Texas) that tightened work requirements for those receiving food stamps. Mr. Peterson opposed that provision and would likely make more modest tweaks to the food-stamp program in upcoming farm legislation. He is also expected to pay special attention to the commodities biggest in his district, including sugar beets and dairy, as well as animal health.
—Kristina Peterson
House Committee on Homeland Security
The clear frontrunner for the chairmanship is current ranking member Rep. Bennie Thompson, 70 years old. He is a senior Democrat from Mississippi who has been a member of the committee since its origins 16 years ago, when the U.S. was entering the post-9/11 era. When the Democrats took control of the House in 2006, Mr. Thompson served as its chairman and it’s widely expected that he would resume the role.
Though the Homeland Security Committee has historically worked in a bipartisan fashion, there has been some tension in recent months between Mr. Thompson and the current chairman, Texas Republican Rep. Michael McCaul, who could become the ranking member in the next Congress should the GOP lose its majority.
Mr. Thompson has criticized Mr. McCaul for not spending enough time focusing the committee on the issue of election security and the integrity of U.S. elections, a topic Mr. Thompson is expected to focus on when he resumes the chairmanship.
—Joshua Jamerson
House Committee on Natural Resources
Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva
, currently the ranking Democrat on the Natural Resources Committee, is poised to become the chairman. A co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Mr. Grijalva is a liberal member of the party and has served in Congress for more than a decade.
“I see nobody else on the committee challenging him for the expected chairmanship,” said Nick Rahall, a former Congressman who led the Natural Resources committee the last time Democrats controlled the House.
The committee is likely to dig into the performance of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, according to a Democratic aide, investigating his alleged involvement in a Montana real-estate deal backed by oil magnate Halliburton , which he has denied. Mr. Grijalva will also take steps to enhance environmental protections and restrictions on the use of federal land, while current Republican committee Chairman Rob Bishop has sought to roll them back.
—Andrew Duehren
House Budget Committee
Rep. John Yarmuth of Kentucky, the panel’s top Democrat, is considered the frontrunner to become its next chairman. Mr. Yarmuth, 71 years old, is currently in his sixth term in the House. A former Senate aide, Mr. Yarmuth also worked for years in the media, writing columns for a Louisville weekly newspaper he founded and debating politics on television.
Currently the only Democrat in the Kentucky congressional delegation, Mr. Yarmuth generally sides with Democratic party leaders, but has said he can be more skeptical when it comes to federal regulations.
Mr. Yarmuth has used his position as the top Democrat on the budget committee to challenge years of Republican budget blueprints seeking to reduce federal spending, particularly through cuts to safety-net programs such as Medicare. He said recently that if he takes the panel’s helm, he would hold a hearing on “Medicare for All,” a single-payer system in which the government, not insurance companies, typically pays health-care providers for treating patients.
Mr. Yarmuth would succeed GOP Chairman Steve Womack of Arkansas, who only recently took the panel’s reins after Rep. Diane Black (R., Tenn.) launched an unsuccessful gubernatorial bid.
One of the biggest hurdles facing the Budget Committee will be the expiration of the two-year budget deal struck between President Trump and congressional leaders in February, which runs through September 2019. Since imposing spending caps in 2011, lawmakers have reached agreements to lift spending above those limits. But Republicans have pushed for larger increases in defense spending, while Democrats have said non-military spending should get a comparable boost.
—Kristina Peterson
House Committee on Education and the Workforce
Virginia Rep. Bobby Scott, the first African-American to serve in the House’s Virginia delegation since reconstruction, will take the helm of the Education and the Workforce Committee.
A lifelong advocate for increased student and worker protections, Mr. Scott is likely to take up a reauthorization of the law governing higher education next year. A draft bill released by committee Democrats in July shows they would likely concentrate on college affordability, in part by making federal financial aid more generous and cracking down on for-profit colleges using unethical recruiting practices that leave students with long-term debt they can’t pay back. One area the bill is unlikely to touch: free college, an idea popular with the left that many democratic policymakers think unworkable.
Mr. Scott, who opposed the nomination of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, is also likely to call her in for more committee hearings, on issues ranging from guns in schools to civil rights protections and the secretary’s agenda to deregulate the for-profit college industry.
Mr. Scott, 71 years old, has also expressed interest in several hot-button labor issues, including raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour and pushing mandatory paid family leave. His committee has introduced additional legislation that would increase labor-union protections, after a Supreme Court decision in June gutted a core pillar of public-sector union strength.
Also, look for the newly-Democratic committee to weigh a name change—to the Committee on Education and Labor—its erstwhile title until Republicans under former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich adopted the word “workforce,” a word preferred by employers. The committee’s name has seesawed along with control of Congress ever since.
—Michelle Hackman
House Committee on Rules
Massachusetts Rep. Jim McGovern is expected to chair the Rules Committee, which decides how or if legislation can be debated or changed when it comes to the House floor.
One of the first agenda items in the new Congress is to pass a rules package dictating how it will be run. Under the direction of Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Mr. McGovern, 58 years old, has been meeting with Democrats and Republicans to see what rules changes lawmakers want to see.
Mr. McGovern assumed the post of top Democrat on the committee when Rep. Louise Slaughter, the ranking Democrat, died in March. Because the Rules Committee follows seniority rules, he is seen as the most likely chairman.
Mr. McGovern may focus on allowing more members to offer amendments to legislation on the floor and have wider debates on legislation. The Republican chairman, Rep. Pete Sessions, approved a record-setting number of closed rules to the House floor—meaning that no amendments were allowed.
The rules package may also focus on ethics reforms, such as banning members of the House from serving on the boards of publicly held companies.
The voting rights of House delegates, which represent U.S. territories and Washington D.C., could also change. When Democrats held the House from 2008 to 2011, they expanded the voting rights of delegates—though only so that the vote had no ultimate effect on a measure’s outcome. When Republicans took the majority, they removed those privileges. Of the six nonvoting delegates, the majority are Democrats, so the Rules Committee could change the rules to expand their voting power.
Mr. McGovern has a long history with the committee. From 1982 to 1996, Mr. McGovern worked as an aide for the then-chairman of the Rules Committee. He was elected to Congress in 1996.
—Natalie Andrews
House Committee on Veterans Affairs
The top-ranking Democrat on the House Veterans Affairs Committee, Rep. Tim Walz of Minnesota, announced last year that he wouldn’t run for re-election to his House seat this year to vie for the governorship of his home state, leaving unclear who would lead the committee in the event of a Democratic takeover in the House.
Mr. Walz assumed the ranking-member role after a brief fight for the job with fellow Democrat Rep. Mark Takano of California, who eventually conceded the position and was named vice ranking member.
Mr. Walz hasn’t said who he is supporting to become the top Democrat on the committee. Mr. Takano, 57 years old, has been filling in as de facto ranking member when Mr. Walz is on the gubernatorial campaign trail and unable to attend hearings, and he appears to be the frontrunner.
However, he will face a battle with fellow California Rep. Julia Brownley, 66 years old, to take the gavel, according to people familiar with the matter. Ms. Brownley said months ago she would seek the top spot.
Both Democrats arrived in Congress in 2012 and have become well known for their work on veterans issues, with Ms. Brownley serving as the top Democrat on the subcommittee that deals with veterans’ health care. Mr. Takano regularly grills Department of Veterans Affairs officials at hearings and has demonstrated a willingness to spar with the Trump administration on key issues.
In the next Congress, lawmakers likely will focus on the process of instituting a new law regarding private care for veterans and a handful of other measures passed in the first two years of the Trump administration. The committee likely won’t focus on crafting extensive new legislation. Instead, it will work out its oversight role for the VA, which has undergone regular leadership and policy changes since a 2014 wait-time scandal brought attention to the department and its shortcomings.
—Ben Kesling
https://www.wsj.com/articles/meet-the-new-agenda-setters-in-the-house-1541586602
-
Nov 7, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
The results of the mid-term elections are a repudiation of President Trump’s pro-polluter agenda that could not have come at a more critical time for the health and well-being of every American, said Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook.
“President Trump was right,” said EWG President Ken Cook. “The election was a referendum on his presidency and policies, and the results are a disaster for his administration but good news for the American people.”
“This emphatic rejection by voters of President Trump and all the damage he’s done to public health and the environment these last two years is one of the most significant election results in decades,” said Cook. “It’s now crystal clear that millions of Americans from every region and background have had enough of the administration’s blistering assault against literally every effort to safeguard people and the environment from pollution.”
With Democrats taking control of the House of Representatives in January, Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., will become the chairs of powerful committees. Their long records of support for the environment and public health indicate they will serve as a much-needed check on the Trump administration’s pro-polluter agenda.
Pallone will become chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee with oversight of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration. DeFazio will chair the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which has jurisdiction over water resources, among other key environmental programs.
“There has never been a more important time to have someone like Frank Pallone assume the role of top cop on behalf of public health,” said Cook. “Rep. Pallone, Rep. DeFazio and other public health champions will soon have the authority to check a president and those in Congress who are working against the health of their own constituents.”
“The Trump administration and pro-polluter members of Congress will finally be forced to answer for rubber-stamping toxic chemicals and pesticides on behalf of the chemical industry,” Cook said.
“It’s hard to measure the harm done by the Trump administration to the EPA and its work to reduce exposure to toxic contamination in our air, water and consumer products,” he added . “But the people, not polluters, won tonight. With Frank Pallone and other public health champions in charge of the House, the American people will finally have a team in power pushing back on their behalf.”
Among the issues that could see early action before the Energy and Commerce Committee in the new Congress include passing much-needed legislation to revamp the failed federal cosmetics law, a plan to address the widespread and growing PFAS water contamination crisis, and critical oversight of EPA’s implementation of the new Toxic Substances Control Act.
https://www.ewg.org/release/rebuke-trump-administration-voters-deliver-strong-backing-public-health-and-environmental
-
Retaking House, Democrats Cast Their Eyes on Environmental Oversight
Nov 7, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
Officials at agencies with energy and environmental missions can confidently expect greater scrutiny from the 116th Congress now that Democrats will control the lower chamber.
But Democrats lack a 60-vote threshold in the Senate to pass legislation that is not bipartisan. And Democratic aides in Congress largely agreed that the most their party can hope for is shedding light on any missteps they see from the Trump administration on policy or implementation.
One Democratic aide suggested that a Democrat-led House can now publicly discuss a lack of transparency at several federal agencies that was previously only known due to media reports of internal administrative directives.
A Morning Consult/Politico survey conducted Nov. 2-4 asked registered voters about their priorities for what Congress should do in the new session. Among energy and environmental issues polled, addressing environmental concerns such as drinking water, wastewater and emissions drew the most interest, with 35 percent of voters considering it a top priority for lawmakers. That included 46 percent of Democrats, 34 percent of independents and 26 percent of Republicans.
Another of voters’ top energy and environment priorities is for Congress to bring greater oversight to the Trump administration’s actions in that area, selected by 34 percent of voters, and passing legislation to make infrastructure more resilient to severe weather. The poll surveyed a national sample ranging from 928 to 1,964 registered voters.
Fewer voters saw bills to address nuclear waste storage or tax credits for renewable energy or electric vehicles as a top priority.
Of course, energy and the environment were rarely top of mind for most voters, compared to issues such as health care. For example, 71 percent of voters in the survey said addressing the rising cost of health care merits being a top priority for Congress, and 79 percent said the same about passing legislation to protect patients from surprise medical bills.
In addition to providing more money for green energy and drinking water infrastructure, Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce, plans to focus on the actions of the EPA, according to his spokesman.
Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), who has long served as ranking member of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee on House Energy and Commerce, is particularly interested in addressing climate change and the impact of energy production on the environment, according to her communications director, Lynne Weil.
She also wants to address water quality and ensure that the Environmental Protection Agency legally implements the amendments to the 2016 Toxic Substances Control Act, which regulates chemicals in the United States, and will have more opportunity to examine those issues in a majority-Democratic House, said Lynne Weil, DeGette’s communications director.
Congress also has a role to play in ensuring ethics rules are followed at the agencies, though Weil was uncertain where that would fit in terms of legislative priorities, she said on Nov. 1, ahead of the election.
Ryan Johnson, communications director for Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), who is ranking member of the Energy and Commerce’s Energy Subcommittee and is likely to become its chairman next session, said Nov. 1 that Rush “believes that Congress should fulfill its Constitutional duty by providing vigorous oversight of the Trump Administration,” regardless of which party is in power.
https://morningconsult.com/2018/11/07/retaking-house-democrats-cast-eyes-environmental-oversight/
-
Washington State Weighs Policy Options on Flame Retardants
Nov 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Lisa Martine Jenkins
Washington state officials are to meet with flame retardant stakeholders this week, the latest step by the Department of Ecology (ECY) and Department of Health (DOH) in their ongoing effort to address the substances and to consider a more preventative approach.
A 2016 law banned five flame retardants from children’s products and directed the state to act on six others:
· IPTPP (isopropylated triphenyl phosphate);
· TBB ([2-ethylhexyl]-2,3,4,5- tetrabromobenzoate);
· TBPH (bis [2-ethylhexyl]-2,3,4,5- tetrabromophthalate);
· TCPP (tris [1-chloro-2-propyl] phosphate);
· TPP (triphenyl phosphate); and
· V6 (bis[chloromethyl] propane-1,3-diyltetrakis [2-chloroethyl] bisphosphate).
As a consequence, officials are seeking input about potential policy options and considering presentations on fire safety.
The timeline for these discussions has been extended to balance other "priority" DOH work. Officials now expect to post a draft report with findings, policy options and recommendations for stakeholder review and comment by April 2019, with a final report for the legislature by July that year.
Washington is not the first US state to restrict the use of certain flame retardants in products. California, Minnesota and Washington, DC have made similar moves but the state was the first to restrict the use of TBBPA, according to NGO, Washington Toxics Coalition.
Issues under consideration
The November stakeholder meeting at the DOH offices in Tumwater, southwest of Seattle will follow others in June and September.
The DOH, ECY and stakeholders considered grouping chemicals for easier safety assessments, at the most recent.
"Cumulative impacts seem so critical, and working one chemical at a time doesn’t seem efficient," Laurie Valeriano, executive director of Toxic-Free Future, said, according to draft meeting notes.
"Grouping chemicals should be included in the conversation. The rational approach is to look more broadly at a group of chemicals instead of individual chemicals," she added.
But Steve Scherrer, of Lanxess Solutions – which develops, manufactures and markets engineered industrial specialty chemicals – disagreed.
Reviewing chemicals one-by-one has "some advantages since they are regulated individually and made by different companies," he said. Grouping chemicals together would not be a "scientific approach", he added.
The group also discussed safer alternatives assessments and different flame retardant regulations in various markets. And the ECY and DOH presented toxicity information on the substances under review and identified certain data gaps.
The upcoming meeting will see a shift in focus to flame retardant usage in certain products, including building insulation, residential furniture and juvenile products, according to an agenda.
https://chemicalwatch.com/71649/washington-state-weighs-policy-options-on-flame-retardants
-
UK Government Pressed to Clarify Post-Brexit Reach Approach
Nov 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A House of Lords report has urged the British government to clarify "as a matter of urgency" whether it would automatically accept EU27-led chemical REACH registrations into a UK system in order to avoid a "cliff-edge" of potentially losing access to 16,000 substances.
The report, Brexit: chemical regulation, was released on 7 November following a subcommittee inquiry into the implications of Brexit for the UK’s continued participation in REACH.
If the UK government would accept such registrations, the report asked how it would address concerns over use of chemicals for which it cannot access information that supports the registration.
It also called on Whitehall "immediately to clarify" in what circumstances it would be possible for UK chemical manufacturers and importers to transfer registrations to an EU-based party before exit day. Where this is not currently possible, the government must work with Echa to enable transfers to take place, it said.
Last month, the UK’s Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said companies would need to submit a "full" data package in order to register chemicals under a UK version of REACH in a no-deal Brexit scenario. It was met with disbelief from industry.
Database
Swift progress towards establishing a UK chemicals database is "crucial", the report said. It requested the government publish details of progress and set out intentions for functionality, both immediately post-Brexit and longer term.
"We have serious doubts about the government’s ability to populate a UK chemicals database with the necessary data," it said. Junior environment minister Thérèse Coffey’s proposal to "copy and paste" registration information from companies based in other member states is "not credible and raises serious legal concerns", it added.
The government should "as a matter of urgency" set out an alternative, "more considered" approach to securing this information, in the event consent is not granted.
What is also "extremely concerning" is that it may not be possible to establish which of the existing REACH registrations originate from UK companies. Whitehall must set out the steps it is taking to resolve this, it said.
Other issues
The report said it is also "deeply concerning" that the government "has not started making preparations" to equip a UK body responsible for regulating chemicals post-Brexit. It must also clarify means by which "independent, expert and transparent" chemical risk assessments will take place.
The subject of costs was also raised. It is unclear whether either UK- or EU-27-based companies would be charged for registering a substance with a UK REACH system. The government needs to clear up the matter and explain what steps it intends to take to "mitigate the economic impact" of the UK’s potential withdrawal from REACH, it said.[
Lord Robin Teverson, chairman of the House of Lords EU Energy and Environment subcommittee which released the report, said that although it welcomes the government’s aim to remain part of the REACH system after Brexit, its negotiation red line on the UK’s membership of the single market "makes that highly unlikely".
That means, he added, government "urgently needs to be working on a Plan B, and that simply hasn’t happened, which leaves the sector facing a huge cliff-edge on the day we leave the EU".
https://chemicalwatch.com/71655/uk-government-pressed-to-clarify-post-brexit-reach-approach
-
EU Outlines New Strategy on EDCs
Nov 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
The European Commission will launch a comprehensive screening of existing legislation related to endocrine disrupting chemicals, as part of a long-overdue strategy that targets harmonised identification criteria and coherent policies.
In a Communication issued to the European Parliament and Council of Ministers, the EU executive says the new strategy is built "for the years to come" and will aim to minimise the overall exposure of humans and the environment to endocrine disruptors.
It follows persistent calls from NGOs and member states for the Commission to pull in the reins harder on EDCs, and after several years of deadlock on issues such as testing methods and identification criteria.
The strategy plans to launch a fitness check of all existing legislation that the Commission says will take for the first time a "cross-cutting look" at the chemicals. It will pay "particular attention" to areas that lack specific provisions, such as toys, cosmetics and food contact materials, it adds.
The fitness check, which will include a public consultation, will identify possible gaps, inconsistencies or synergies in different legislation, and assess their "collective impact". This will enable the Commission to decide whether legislative changes are necessary.
The Communication – an update of the EU's approach to EDCs after almost 20 years – lays down the aims of the strategy as:
· minimising overall exposure to endocrine disruptors, paying particular attention to important life periods, such as pregnancy and puberty;
· accelerating development of a thorough research basis, building on existing knowledge and focusing on areas where gaps exist, including cocktail effects; and
· promoting active dialogue with all stakeholders: the Commission will organise an annual forum on EDCs; explore possibilities to include them in an existing international system for classification of chemicals; and launch a one-stop web portal on EDCs for EU citizens.
Other initiatives are also being considered to "step up" implementation of existing policies, it says, including identification of EDCs, improving communication throughout supply chains by REACH safety data sheets, and further regulatory action.
Environment Commissioner Karmenu Vella said the strategy confirms that the Commission takes endocrine disruptors "very seriously" and "intends to strengthen" efforts to minimise exposure.
Coherent approach
The Communication argues for a "coherent" approach to EDC identification across all relevant EU legislation, based on the definition of the World Health Organization. The criteria recently adopted for pesticides "constitute a first step in that direction", it says.
The pesticides criteria ended the parliamentary impasse on identification, but the Commission has faced more demands for a harmonised approach on tackling EDCs.
The Communication acknowledges many of those concerns, saying that horizontal criteria "should be further considered" to avoid the potential risk that a substance is identified under one piece of legislation and not under another.
Reaction
Cefic welcomed the proposal for a fitness check. The new strategy "rightfully identifies" focus areas of more investment in research and improvements in testing methods, said director general Marco Mensink.
The European Consumer Organisation (Beuc) also gave the thumbs up. "Too much time has been wasted bickering about definitions and testing methods," said director general Monique Goyens, and the strategy is a "real chance to tackle the problem head on".
However, EDC-Free Europe, a coalition of more than 70 NGOs, said it was disappointed by the "lack of ambition" especially since this was one of the main messages that came out of the public consultation this summer.
Its key demand for a concrete action plan is "glaringly absent", it said, and any policy moves are further delayed by the Commission's decision to conduct another fitness check "even though there is already a review of EU chemical legislation ongoing".
EDC-Free Europe will now appeal to Parliament and the Council "to require more ambitious and concrete EU and national action on EDCs", it said.
https://chemicalwatch.com/71675/eu-outlines-new-strategy-on-edcs
-
EU Commission Drops Move to Soften Pesticides EDC Ban
Nov 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
The European Commission has dropped a controversial proposal to amend the pesticides law in relation to endocrine disrupting chemicals, after failing to garner enough support from member states.
The EU executive had sought to change the wording of the plant protection products (PPP) Regulation to 'negligible risk' instead of 'negligible exposure' to determine exceptions from a ban on EDCs, but faced heavy criticism from NGOs which called the move "deeply troubling".
Member states discussed the amendment at a meeting of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed (SCoPAFF) on 23-24 October, but "it was clear that no qualified majority was there in support for this change", a Commission spokesperson told Chemical Watch.
Several member states did not have a position and the discussion was closed without a vote, the Commission said. It was the second time SCoPAFF reported on the proposal after member states took a similar stance at a meeting in July.
The issue had long been a sticking point in the adoption of criteria to identify EDCs, until the Commission separated the PPP amendment from them last year. The criteria were finally adopted in April.
NGOs have repeatedly slammed the pesticides amendment saying it would "water down" an existing ban on spraying in fields.
Hormone disruptors are banned in pesticides in the EU, except if industry can prove ‘negligible exposure’ – for example in conditions where this is well controlled, such as in closed areas where workers wear protection.
The hazard-based approach was agreed because the use of pesticides in open fields can contaminate the surrounding environment, putting residents, animals and ecosystems at risk.
'Good news'
Pesticides Action Network (PAN Europe) said it was "good news" that the Commission backtracked on the proposal. This meant that the hazard approach on endocrine disrupting pesticides "is not challenged anymore".
It signals the Commission has "stopped undermining democratic rules", said Hans Muilerman, PAN Europe's chemicals coordinator.
NGOs had criticised the Commission for "overstepping its power" since it did not have the mandate to change the original derogation in the PPP without the agreement of the European Parliament and Council of Ministers.
Despite the Commission's withdrawal, ClientEarth lawyer Apolline Roger was cautious, however. She said: "We will still need to be vigilant to ensure the proposal does not come back" in the context of the Commission's Refit check of the pesticides law.
Dr Roger urged the Commission "not to attempt" to change the wording via legislative procedure and "accept that the current criteria must remain".
The Commission has recently said it is finalising its fitness check of chemicals legislation excluding REACH. Due by the end of the year, the exercise will cover the PPP and the biocidal products Regulation.
Separately, the Commission is set to adopt on 7 November a Communication outlining its long-awaited framework on EDCs.
https://chemicalwatch.com/71656/eu-commission-drops-move-to-soften-pesticides-edc-ban
-
Ballot Measures Taking Aim at Climate Change, Fossil Fuels Fall Short
Nov 7, 2018 | Washington Post
By Brady Dennis and Dino Grandoni
Efforts to nudge the nation away from burning fossil fuels and toward harnessing renewable sources of energy were rejected by voters Tuesday across a swath of resource-rich Western states.
The failure of environmental ballot measures in Arizona, Colorado — and the likely defeat of a proposal to impose fees on carbon emissions in Washington state — underscore the difficulty of tackling a global problem like climate change at the state and local level, where huge sums of money poured in on both sides.
Even as a United Nations-backed panel of scientists recently warned that the world has barely a decade to radically cut its emissions of greenhouse gases that fuel global warming, the Trump administration has been busy expanding oil and gas drilling and rolling back Obama-era efforts to mitigate climate change. Environmental advocates and Democratic lawmakers have placed much hope in state and local governments to counter those policies.
But while Tuesday saw the election of numerous candidates dedicated to climate action, individual ballot measures aimed at the same goal largely floundered.
Voters in Arizona, one of the nation’s most sun-soaked states, handily shot down a measure that would have accelerated its shift toward generating electricity from renewables, particularly solar. Residents in oil- and gas-rich Colorado defeated a measure to sharply limit drilling on state-owned land.
Even in the solidly blue state of Washington, initial results looked grim for perhaps the most consequential climate-related ballot measure in the country this fall: a statewide initiative that would have imposed a first-in-the-nation fee on emissions of carbon dioxide, the most prevalent of the greenhouse gases that drive global warming. While voters in King County, home to Seattle, turned out heavily in favor of the measure, residents across the rest of the state largely opposed it.
One bright spot for environmental advocates came in Nevada, where voters appeared poised to pass a measure similar to the one Arizonans rejected. It would require utilities to generate 50 percent of their electricity from renewables by 2030. The proposal was leading handily with most votes tallied Wednesday. But before the measure could become law, it has to survive a second vote in 2020.
Since President Trump took office, a handful of states — notably California — have vowed to serve as a counterweight on energy and environmental policy to a president who frequently dismisses the government’s own findings that human activity is warming the globe. In September, California codified into law a commitment to produce 100 percent of its electricity from carbon-free courses by 2045.
But Tuesday’s ballot-question results demonstrate the limits to which other states are willing to follow California’s lead — particularly when campaigners against the proposals emphasize the potential impact on pocketbooks.
“What we learned from this election, in states like Colorado, Arizona, and Washington, is that voters reject policies that would make energy more expensive and less reliable,” Thomas Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance, an industry-backed, free-market advocacy group, said in a statement.
Supporters and proponents poured an eye-popping amount of money, more than $54 million, into the fight over the future of energy in Arizona. Only two Senate races in the country — in Florida and Texas — saw more spending this year.
The influx of cash underscores how much both sides believed was at stake. The ballot initiative would have amended the Arizona constitution to require electric utilities to use renewable energy for 50 percent of its power generation by 2035. That might seem easily within reach in sunny Arizona. But the state now gets only about 6 percent of its energy from the sun.
The state’s biggest utility, Arizona Public Service, or APS, emerged as the most fervent opponent of the proposal, pouring more than $30 million into a political action committee called Arizonans for Affordable Electricity. In an aggressive ad campaign, the group argued that the measure would cost households an additional $1,000 a year.
“We’ve said throughout this campaign there is a better way to create a clean-energy future for Arizona that is also affordable and reliable,” APS chief executive Don Brandt said in a statement Tuesday evening.
Meanwhile, an alliance of dozens of organizations called Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona, argued that the shift toward cleaner energy will improve public health and create good jobs in the state. The group got a huge assist from California billionaire investor and political activist Tom Steyer, who donated the lion’s share of the nearly $23.6 million raised through the end of September.
Twenty-nine states and the District already have programs, known as Renewable Portfolio Standards, or RPS, that require utilities to ensure a certain amount of the electricity they sell comes from renewable resources. But only a fraction of those have targets as ambitious as the ones proposed this year in Arizona and Nevada. For instance, New York and New Jersey also have targets of 50 percent renewable energy by 2050. Hawaii would require 100 percent of its energy to be from renewable sources by 2045.
During the 2018 campaign, however, 11 Democratic candidates for governor vowed to try to get all of their respective states’ electricity from “clean” energy sources by the middle of the century, according to surveys done by the state affiliates of the League of Conservation Voters. Several of those candidates, including Jared Polis in Colorado, won their races.
In Colorado, environmental advocates failed to pass a measure known as Proposition 112. The initiative would have required new wells to be at least 2,500 feet from occupied buildings and other “vulnerable areas” such as parks and irrigation canals — a distance several times that of existing regulations. It also allows local governments to require even longer setbacks.
As oil production has soared in Colorado in recent years and the population has grown, more and more residents are living near oil and gas facilities. Those who supported the ballot measure argued it was necessary to reduce potential health risks and the noise and other nuisances of living near drilling sites. Opponents countered that the proposal would virtually eliminate new oil and gas drilling on nonfederal land in the state — they have derided it as an “anti-fracking” push — and claimed it would cost jobs and deprive local governments of tax revenue.
The industry-backed group, Protect Colorado, raised roughly $38 million this year as it opposed the controversial measure, which it says would “wipe out thousands of jobs and devastate Colorado’s economy for years to come.” By contrast, the main group backing the proposal, known as Colorado Rising for Health and Safety, raised about $1 million.
“We appreciate Colorado voters who realized what a devastating impact this measure would have had on our state’s economy, school funding, public safety and other local services, ” Karen Crummy, spokeswoman for Protect Colorado, said in an email late Tuesday.
Separately, Chip Rimer, chairman of the board for the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, called Proposition 112 “an extreme proposal” that would have devastated the state’s economy. “Moving forward we will continue working together with all stakeholders to develop solutions that ensure we can continue to deliver the energy we need, the economy we want and the environment we value,” he said in a statement.
Coloradans also rejected a separate but related measure Tuesday that would have amended the Colorado constitution to allow property owners to seek compensation if government actions devalue their property. The proposal has been sharply criticized by dozens of city councils and panned by Gov. John Hickenlooper (D), who called it “a dangerous idea” in which “unscrupulous developers and speculators could make claims on local governments for literally anything they think has hurt the value of their land.”
Meanwhile, in Washington, the effort to put a price on carbon emissions appeared on the verge of defeat early Wednesday, with 56.3 percent of voters rejecting the measure and 43.7 percent supporting it with two-thirds of votes counted. An official at the Washington secretary of state’s office said the vote-by-mail system in the state means it could take several days for a final vote tally.
Known as Initiative 1631, the measure would have made Washington the first state in the nation to tax carbon dioxide — an approach many scientists, environmental advocates and policymakers argue will be essential on a broad scale to nudge the world away from its reliance on fossil fuels.
But that proposal, like other environmental initiatives across the country, faced a bitter fight, pitting Big Oil refiners against a collection of advocates that includes unions, Native American groups, business leaders like Bill Gates and former New York mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, as well as the state’s Democratic governor, Jay Inslee.
It also has set a state spending record along the way for a state ballot initiative. The group pressing for the carbon fee, known as the Clean Air, Clean Energy coalition, has raised more than $15 million. Meanwhile, oil companies belonging to the Western States Petroleum Association pumped more than $31 million into opposing the measure.
The initial $15-a-ton fee would have kicked in beginning in 2020, then increased $2 per ton (plus inflation) each year until 2035, when it would either freeze or rise, depending on whether the state had met its targets to slash greenhouse gas emissions.
Climate campaigners did win at least one victory Tuesday in the Sunshine State. Florida voters, perhaps with the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill still fresh in mind, overwhelmingly decided to amend the state’s constitution to ban offshore oil and gas in state waters.
But even then, it was unclear whether offshore drilling alone motivated 69 percent of voters to support the measure, because it was paired with a proposal to prohibit indoor vaping.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/11/07/ballot-measures-taking-aim-climate-change-fall-short/?utm_term=.4d9e113e38cb
-
Midterms Shift Balance in Washington for Oil Sector
Nov 7, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
After almost a decade of oil-friendly Republicans controlling Congress, the energy sector faced a dramatically different landscape Wednesday on Capitol Hill.
Where Republicans pushed an end to the oil export ban and looser environmental regulations around drilling, the new Democratic-led House is expected to be more interested in combating climate change than boosting oil and gas production.Recommended Video
Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., who is expected to chair the House Energy and Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., who is expected to chair the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said last week that Democrats would "focus on the need to address climate change by looking at its impacts on our communities and economy, and by holding the Trump administration accountable for dangerous policies that only make it worse."
Without key allies like Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, who lost to political newcomer Lizzie Fletcher, and Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Dallas, who lost to former NFL player Colin Allred on Tuesday, the oil sector is likely to be front and center as Democrats look to curb the deregulatory agenda pursued by President Donald Trump.
But looking across the nation, Tuesday's election did not come without some good news for Texas' oil business.
A proposed carbon fee in Washington state was defeated in a referendum, as was a Colorado proposal to ban oil and gas drilling within roughly half a mile of buildings. Rep. Carlos Curbelo, R-Fla., who has been campaigning for a carbon tax, narrowly lost his re-election bid.
And with Republicans still controlling the White House and Senate, Democrats will have their work cut out for them in pursuing any legislation that does not carry GOP support.
"With a divided government, I don't see a path forward," Matt Nugen, director of government relations at the Milwaukee-based power company WEC Energy Group, said at an event hosted by the American Gas Alliance last month.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Midterms-shift-balance-for-oil-sector-13370829.php
-
Colorado Election Results Portend Continued Energy Fight
Nov 7, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Ben LeFebvre
Democrats won control of Colorado's government last night and mustered a respectable vote for an anti-fracking measure, portending more twists and turns for the state’s oil and gas industry, analysts said.
Voters flipped the state senate to the Democrats and picked Democrat Rep. Jared Polis to become their new governor Tuesday, giving the party unified control of state government for the first time since 2014, according to the Denver Post. Meanwhile, the defeat of Proposition 112 — which would have forced drilling activities to be set back 2,500 feet from occupied structures — wasn’t resounding enough to allow the industry to rest easy, said Jon Haubert, a Colorado-based energy consultant.
“While voters may have signaled 2,500-foot setbacks may be taking it too far, there is no reason to believe the newly Democrat-controlled state legislature and governor wouldn’t start prodding and poking to discover what increased distance voters would support, be it 2,000 feet or some other harmful, arbitrary distance,” Haubert said.
Proposition 112, which effectively would have banned fracking in most of the state, may have failed, but it still won 43 percent of the vote despite industry outspending its supporters by more than 40-to-1, noted Amy Jaffe, an energy analyst and senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
“The Colorado win was too close a call to reflect as a singing endorsement of the importance of oil and gas jobs and revenues,” Jaffe said.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Dem Wins Coastal House Seat on No-Drilling Platform
Nov 7, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Rob Hotakainen
Democrat Joe Cunningham, a political novice and former ocean engineer, scored a big upset in South Carolina early today after making opposition to offshore drilling and seismic testing a top issue in his campaign.
Cunningham won in the state's coastal 1st District, which was drawn to favor Republicans. Rep. Mark Sanford (R) holds the seat now but was ousted in the June GOP primary by Kate Arrington.
It marked the first time Democrats had flipped a House seat in South Carolina since 1986.
"This is an amazing result," said Frank Knapp, president of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce and a leading drilling opponent. "Those of us who went to bed at 12 o'clock last night thought we'd wake up to find the Republican had won that seat. We were all shocked."
The race was called at 2 a.m., with Cunningham getting slightly more than 50 percent of the vote, according to unofficial results.
President Trump's plans to allow more drilling off the coast of South Carolina have drawn overwhelming opposition in the state in the past two years, particularly in coastal regions where environmental worries run high.
As the campaign closed, Arrington allied herself closely with Trump, calling for a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border and tighter immigration controls, while Cunningham focused mainly on the drilling issue and protecting the state's beaches (see related story).
"We put a lot of effort in the district to make offshore drilling a top issue," Knapp said.
On his campaign website, Cunningham said offshore drilling and seismic testing "would be devastating to our environment and our economy." And he said his prior work was aimed at "ensuring the marine environment was protected."
"As an ocean engineer, I know firsthand how destructive drilling for oil — and even just testing for oil — can be to a coastline," Cunningham said. "That's the last thing we need here. ... I've been very clear about my opposition to drilling from day one of this campaign, while my opponent said she supported President Trump's decision to lift the ban on offshore drilling."
Drilling emerged as a campaign issue in Florida and Virginia, as well.
Florida voters passed Amendment 9, a combined measure that would permanently ban oil and gas drilling in state waters and prohibit the use of e-cigarettes and vaping devices indoors.
And in Virginia's 2nd District, where Republican Scott Taylor was defeated, Democrat Elaine Luria criticized Taylor for his past support for drilling and made it clear that she opposed any expansion. The district includes the Northern Neck of Virginia and hugs the Atlantic Ocean and Chesapeake Bay.
Reporter Kellie Lunney contributed.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/11/07/stories/1060105437
-
Michigan Governor May Take Aim at Enbridge Line 5; Nebraska Elects Keystone Xl Supporter
Nov 7, 2018 | Platts
By Meghan Gordon and Brian Scheid
Michigan's next governor may push to shut Enbridge's 540,000 b/d Line 5 pipeline, an aging system that remains a key route for light crude and NGLs to the US Midwest and Ontario.
But in Nebraska, TransCanada's 830,000 b/d Keystone XL heavy oil pipeline likely got a boost from Tuesday's election of two supporters to the state's Public Service Commission.
Michigan Governor-elect Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat who won Tuesday with about 53% of votes, has promised to dismantle an agreement reached in October between the state's term-limited current governor and Enbridge to build a utility corridor under the Great Lakes' Straits of Mackinac. The tunnel would address environmental safety concerns surrounding the 65-year-old Line 5 and house a future replacement.
Canadian pipeline capacity is so constrained that losing any throughput would exacerbate the discount at which Alberta producers must sell their oil to US prices, according to S&P Global Platts Analytics.
Whitmer also campaigned on setting a goal of 100% renewable energy for Michigan.
In Nebraska, Republicans Dan Watermeier and Tim Schram were elected to the state's PSC, which voted 3-2 in November 2017 to approve TransCanada's Keystone XL mainline alternative route through the state. Watermeier supports the project and defeated Christa Yoakum, who had promised to challenge the pipeline's approval. Schram was one of the three commissioners who voted to approve it. The state Supreme Court is reviewing the decision.
"The outcome of the Supreme Court proceeding on the approved alternate KXL route may send the question of approval for KXL back to the PSC, where approval looks likely," research firm Washington Analysis said Wednesday in a note.
Keystone XL is one of three remaining proposals for new takeaway capacity that Alberta oil sands producers are still counting on to shrink a record discount for their crude, along with Canada's newly government-owned 590,000 b/d Trans Mountain pipeline expansion to British Columbia, and a 370,000 b/d expansion of Enbridge's Line 3 into the US Midwest.
Western Canadian Select at Hardisty was assessed Tuesday at a $42/b discount to WTI, after trading at a record wide discount of $51.50/b October 11.
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/oil/110718-michigan-governor-may-take-aim-at-enbridge-line-5-nebraska-elects-keystone-xl-supporter
-
Democratic Gains Deflate Climate Caucus
Nov 7, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Adam Aton
Democrats built a House majority by hollowing out the Climate Solutions Caucus.
More than a third of the caucus' 45 Republicans won't return in the next session of Congress — a victory for environmentalists who accused the bipartisan group of greenwashing conservatives without producing legislative results. At least 10 of the defeated lawmakers had voted to denounce a carbon tax.
The marquee loss — Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.), the group's co-founder — topped a night that saw Democrats unseat at least 12 GOP caucus members and replace at least four others who retired or lost their primary. Late results in California could push those numbers even higher.
With Republicans controlling the Senate and other branches of government, some climate advocates worry that the new makeup of the caucus could widen the gap between parties. That's a bad omen for climate policy in the long term, they say.
But the group that helped devise the climate caucus sees a short-term upside to Democrats controlling the House floor.
"On the whole, it is a good night," said Steve Valk, a spokesman with the Citizens' Climate Lobby, predicting that constituent pressure would replenish the caucus' Republican ranks.
It's an open question whether the caucus returns to normal in the 116th Congress. It could transform into something different — or fizzle out.
At least 18 of the 45 caucus Republicans were re-elected. Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.), a co-founder, declined to comment on how the group would move forward or who would take up Curbelo's leadership spot.
"Maybe it'll be like you chop the head off the dragon, and there are suddenly three," said Joseph Majkut, climate policy director at the libertarian Niskanen Center.
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), a co-sponsor of Curbelo's carbon tax bill, won a second term with a lifetime League of Conservation Voters rating of 72 percent.
Also returning are Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), Fred Upton (R-Mich.), Peter King (R-N.Y.), Brian Mast (R-Fla.) and Rodney Davis (R-Ill.).
But the losses were deep, in part because the caucus roster included many Republicans from moderate, suburban districts: Barbara Comstock in Virginia, Mike Coffman in Colorado, Kevin Yoder in Kansas and Erik Paulsen in Minnesota all lost.
So did Rep. Peter Roskam of Illinois, a one-time contender for Republican whip. Reps. Dan Donovan (R-N.Y.) and Randy Hultgren (R-Ill.) were also booted after starting the cycle on firm footing. And Rep. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.), who lost his primary, saw his Republican opponent lose to a Democrat.
It's wrong to pin the fortune of climate policy on any one election, Majkut said. But ambitious climate policy needs a bipartisan coalition to survive the swings of power in Washington. And that's going to be harder now that potential Republican dealmakers are out, he said.
The caucus — which had grown to 90 members after the 2016 election — hasn't done much so far. It passed no bills. Curbelo's carbon tax legislation attracted two Republican co-sponsors, while most of the others went on record to oppose the idea.
RL Miller, the founder of Climate Hawks Vote, said her organization specifically targeted Republican caucus members to pre-empt bad climate legislation.
"My goal here has been to destroy their political power and make them fade into irrelevance. And I believe that's happened," Miller said.
Her fear: The climate caucus would produce a weak carbon tax bill with other harmful elements, Congress would water it down further, and then President Trump would stage a "grand, Nixon-goes-to-China speech" to sign a tiny carbon tax that includes EPA deregulation and retroactive immunity for fossil fuel companies.
Now with Curbelo and a few other Republicans replaced by strident pro-climate Democrats, Miller hopes the left wing of the party has the leverage to muscle green jobs into an infrastructure bill, followed by even more action under a Democratic administration.
There's no time to wait for Democrats to take full control of the government, Valk said, citing warnings by the United Nations that the world has about 12 years to halve emissions before locking in catastrophic warming.
And even in power, it's no guarantee that Democrats will prioritize climate.
They have no climate agenda waiting on the shelf. And they don't seem likely to spend the next two years figuring one out while Trump is in the White House, said Josiah Neeley of the R Street Institute.
"The House is going to be caught up in issues of investigations. ... [I]t'll be [focused on] other stuff that might not be policy related, let alone climate related," he said.
He expects a replay of 1998, when fights over impeachment and the president's behavior overshadowed everything else. And a thinner climate caucus would remove one more avenue to slip through small-bore climate policies.
"The personal stuff kinda sucks the oxygen out — even on issues where the two sides could potentially agree, they're so busy fighting each other on other stuff that nothing gets done," Neeley said.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/11/07/stories/1060105405
-
Clashes on Climate Expected After Big Win by Democrats
Nov 7, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Mark K. Matthews
The U.S. Capitol could boil with pitched political battles over the environment for the next two years after Democrats captured control of the House in yesterday's midterm elections but missed seizing the Senate.
Republicans held on to their Senate majority in part by knocking off coal-country Democrats in states such as Indiana and North Dakota, both of which President Trump carried by large margins in 2016.
Democrats' path to victory in the House often ran through suburban districts that Hillary Clinton won two years ago. Among them is Democrat Sean Casten, who toppled six-term Republican Rep. Peter Roskam on the outskirts of Chicagoland.
Casten made climate change a central plank of his platform, even dedicating his Twitter bio to that issue. It says that "after years fighting climate change as an entrepreneur," Casten is "determined to fight it as the next member of Congress" from Illinois' 6th District.
The Democratic takeover in the House promises to roil the final two years of President Trump's turbulent term. But the party's victories might also come with a cost for those seeking bipartisan solutions to global warming.
Republican losses include House incumbents who were at least amendable to talking about climate change. Others were trying to address it.
Among them was Rep. Carlos Curbelo, a Republican from South Florida who co-founded the Climate Solutions Caucus and recently introduced legislation to put a tax on carbon emissions.
He was ousted by Democrat Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, who argued on the campaign trail that a Democratic-controlled House would be more willing to directly confront global warming.
"Together we will work for a country where we finally take action to fight climate change," she said in a statement following her victory.
Yet even as Democrats made gains in some House races, they fell short in other contests in which environmental issues played a role.
In another Florida battle, Democrat Andrew Gillum lost a bruising race for governor to Republican Ron DeSantis.
Gillum was backed heavily by billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer, and Gillum said he wanted to make Florida a leader in renewable energy — especially solar.
DeSantis squeezed out a victory that might have been buoyed by his attacks on the state's sugar industry for its role in polluting Florida's waterways. His win came in spite of his skepticism toward humanity's contribution to global warming in a state that is already fighting the effects of a warmer planet.
"Even though climate concerns and clean energy concerns were front of mind for voters ... that just didn't seem to be enough to overcome entrenched partisanship," said Aliki Moncrief, executive director of Florida Conservation Voters.
Tuesday's results follow a tumultuous two years of climate politics, some of which fed into Democratic enthusiasm in congressional races nationwide.
Notable was the October release of an alarming U.N. report warning world leaders that they need to get global warming under control in a few short years or face a future plagued by food shortages and coastal flooding.
Candidates in more than a dozen Senate or gubernatorial races were asked about climate change in debates leading up to Election Day, and several Democratic candidates jumped on the U.N. findings as evidence that U.S. policymakers must take immediate action.
The findings from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change "should be a wake-up call for all of us to take climate change seriously," wrote Democrat Elaine Luria in a Twitter post last month.
Luria defeated Rep. Scott Taylor (R-Va.) in a coastal Virginia district that is experiencing rising sea levels.
Taylor acknowledged the presence of climate change but agreed with Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord, saying the move would protect the "American taxpayer from sending billions of dollars overseas."
A possible factor in the Democratic takeover of the House was an uptick in spending by environmental groups.
The League of Conservation Voters boasted last week that it had directed more than $80 million — through spending and fundraising — toward the midterm election, a record for the group.
Taylor was one target. So was Rep. Mike Coffman, a Republican in a suburban district of Denver. He lost to Democratic challenger Jason Crow and was one of about a dozen Republican members of the Climate Solutions Caucus who were defeated Tuesday alongside Curbelo, the group's co-founder.
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) is another member of the Climate Solutions Caucus, but unlike Coffman, he has voted in line with environmentalists most of the time. He had the highest green rating among House Republicans last year, according to the League of Conservation Voters.
It might have helped him win.
The LCV didn't endorse Fitzpatrick's Democratic opponent, Scott Wallace, and Fitzpatrick edged out a victory.
"In a tough midterm election, tonight brought mixed results for Republican candidates across the country," said James Dozier, executive director of Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, a group that advocates for clean energy policy on the right.
He added that Curbelo's loss was "certainly disappointing" but said lawmakers such as Fitzpatrick could pick up the banner.
"Looking ahead to 2020 and beyond, more Republicans must proactively embrace pragmatic clean energy policies that sustain economic growth, strengthen our national security and proactively address the real challenges that result from climate change," Dozier said.
In capturing the House, Democrats almost certainly will change the tenor of how Capitol Hill talks about climate change — if nothing else.
There's little chance in the next two years that Congress and the White House will agree to an ambitious climate bill with Trump in the White House, Republicans in control of the Senate and both parties primed for a fight ahead of the 2020 election.
But House Democrats could be a thorn in the side of Republicans by forcing votes on measures to combat global warming.
They'll also have control of committee chairmanships, giving Democrats the power to drill into the White House and agencies such as EPA and the Interior Department.
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), who sits on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, told E&E News last week that he expects "very aggressive oversight" (Greenwire, Oct. 31).
Trump repeatedly dismissed warnings about climate change leading up to the election. In response to the U.N. report, he questioned the motivations of the scientists behind it.
"I want to look at who drew it. You know, which group drew it," Trump said. "Because I can give you reports that are fabulous, and I can give you reports that aren't so good."
Two years into his presidency, Trump has rolled back or weakened a host of climate initiatives.
One of the first and biggest steps was his decision in June 2017 to withdraw the United States from the landmark climate accord that sought to bring the world's nations together with the shared goal of keeping climate change to a minimum.
The Trump administration also froze Obama-era plans to gradually increase fuel efficiency standards for cars in the 2020s. And it's rolling back the Clean Power Plan, which sought to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at power plants (Climatewire, Oct. 2).
Trump promoted Republican Patrick Morrisey, who failed yesterday to unseat Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia. As the state's attorney general, Morrisey tried to block the Clean Power Plan in court — a move that earned him the support of the West Virginia Coal Association.
Manchin — who has a 45 percent career rating with the League of Conservation Voters — opposed the Clean Power Plan, as well, once describing it as an "assault on our state's economy and our way of life."
He did better Tuesday than two other coal-country Democrats running for re-election.
Democratic Sen. Joe Donnelly of Indiana couldn't keep his seat against Republican Mike Braun. Donnelly was one of a handful of Senate Democrats to vote against the Clean Power Plan, but his effort to strike a more conservative tone wasn't enough to convince voters in a state that sent Vice President Mike Pence to Washington alongside Trump.
North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D) also lost — in spite of her own opposition to the Clean Power Plan. The winner in the state's Senate race was Rep. Kevin Cramer (R).
"Thank you North Dakota," Cramer wrote on Twitter after the win. "Representing you in the United States Senate will be the honor of a lifetime."
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/11/07/stories/1060105411
-
EPA Loosens Air Pollution Permit Requirements for Some Projects
Nov 7, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Trump administration is implementing a policy meant to make it easier for facilities that produce air pollution to make changes without going through a complex permitting process.
The policy published Wednesday changes how the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determines whether changes to power plants and other facilities -- like installing new equipment -- need to go through the New Source Review process. That process is an extensive analysis meant to limit emissions of air pollutants like nitrogen oxides and particulate matter.
Under the new policy, the EPA will consider different actions to be a single project for permitting purposes if they are “substantially related.” That could potentially exempt actions that increase emissions if other actions reduce them.ADVERTISEMENT
The policy is part of a series of actions the EPA has taken to overhaul the New Source Review process and narrow the projects that need go through permitting as if they were new construction.
“Previously, New Source Review regularly discouraged companies from employing the latest energy-efficient equipment,” acting EPA head Andrew Wheeler said in a statement.
“Our updates will remove undue regulatory barriers, provide greater certainty to America’s job creators and energy providers, and incentivize upgrades that will improve air quality.”
Since the EPA isn’t changing regulatory text, it did not do any cost-benefit analysis of the change, including how it might increase or decrease air pollution, or how much it could save industry.
The policy being implemented Wednesday, which isn’t treated as a regulation and doesn’t hold the weight of law, was first put forward in 2009, five days before then-President George W. Bush left office.
President Barack Obama’s administration then suspended the policy after environmental groups objected and said it would increase air pollution. Officials gathered input in 2010 on potentially reversing or changing it, but never took action.
The American Forest & Paper Association, whose member companies often are subject to EPA air pollution permitting reviews for manufacturing plants, cheered the new policy.
“Currently, companies working in good faith to comply with this component of NSR must rely on interpretations of project aggregation that are contrary to historical approaches. As a result, new manufacturing investments can be forced to be grouped together for permitting when they are economically and technically very different projects that should be considered separately — a costly process that hampers strategic business planning,” Donna Harman, the group’s president, said in a statement.
“Clear public policy that will support their ability to continuously invest in their facilities is helping to grow the economy and create American manufacturing jobs.”
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/415482-epa-exempts-some-projects-from-air-pollution-permit-requirements
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested