Senior House Energy and Commerce Committee Democrats on Thursday said a major electric utility trade group is “actively misinforming” its members about federal climate change policy and taking a position that many of the members don’t support.
Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.) criticized the American Public Power Association (APPA), which represents publicly owned utilities, for supporting a Senate proposal to limit the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.
Chairman Henry A. Waxman and Subcommittee Chairman Edward Markey today sent letters to eight oil and gas companies that use hydraulic fracturing to extract oil and natural gas from unconventional sources in the United States. The Committee is requesting information on the chemicals used in fracturing fluids and the potential impact of the practice on the environment and human health.
“Hydraulic fracturing could help us unlock vast domestic natural gas reserves once thought unattainable, strengthening America’s energy independence and reducing carbon emissions,” said Chairman Waxman. “As we use this technology in more parts of the country on a much larger scale, we must ensure that we are not creating new environmental and public health problems. This investigation will help us better understand the potential risks this technology poses to drinking water supplies and the environment, and whether Congress needs to act to minimize those risks.”
Here is the letter to Halliburton CEO David J. Lesar:
WASHINGTON (June 8, 2009) – Chairmen Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), co-authors of the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act today said that a new analysis of the bill by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) shows the legislation is a fiscally-responsible clean energy plan.
“The Waxman-Markey bill will get our planet out of the red, while helping to put our budget back in black,” said Rep. Markey. “Waxman-Markey is a win-win for America’s economy and environment.”
“This is a fiscally responsible approach,” said Rep. Waxman. “We are ensuring that the bill is deficit neutral, while protecting consumers from increases in their utilities bill, particularly low income consumers who are the most vulnerable.”
CBO’s analysis states that Waxman-Markey will raise $846 billion over the next decade in revenues from the new carbon market established by the bill, while not adding to America’s federal budget deficit. Waxman-Markey dedicates the revenues to assist consumers with the transition to a clean energy economy and for other public purposes, including energy efficiency and clean energy research and deployment. At least 50 percent of the allowances will go back to consumers — with at least 35 percent going to protect against increases in electric, natural gas, home heating and propane bills; and another 15 percent going to assist low income consumers.
Recent outbreaks of E. coli and salmonella in foods such as spinach, peanuts, and peppers have shown major gaps in our antiquated food safety laws. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that every year 76 million Americans get sick due to unsafe food products, 325,000 are hospitalized, and 5,000 die from food borne hazards. Today, the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health held a legislative hearing on the discussion draft of the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009, which will overhaul and strengthen our nation’s food safety system. As Subcommittee Chair Frank Pallone (D-NJ) explained in his opening statement, “we have heard time and again that our current food safety system is broken. It is a system that relies heavily on the FDA, rather than placing the responsibility on the manufacturers to ensure the safety of their products. It is a system that is geared toward responding to food outbreaks, rather than one that is aimed at preventing them. This system does not work.”Read the discussion draft of the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009>>
Two weeks ago, I published a post titled “Dems Finally Stop Pretending Cash-for-Clunkers Is an Environmental Bill.” Shortly after it was published, I received an email from Nichole Francis Reynolds, chief of staff to Rep. Betty Sutton (D-Ohio), who sponsored the cash-for-clunkers amendment to the Waxman-Markey energy and climate bill in the House. Reynolds told me in a subsequent phone conversation that Sutton and some of her Democratic colleagues objected to my headline, arguing that they had not changed their stance on cash-for-clunkers. Her point was that they had never pretended it was an environmental bill — to Sutton and others (though certainly not to environmental groups), it was an auto bill from the start, with some small environmental perks to boot (very small environmental perks, in fact, since the benefits would be undermined by the emissions created by manufacturing new cars). The calculus behind the bill, Reynolds said, had not changed at all.
The version agreed to by the White House and Democrats in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, while ostensibly an environmental program, doesn’t seem to be very useful either. The merits of legislation aimed solely at funneling taxpayer to auto companies can be debated elsewhere but I resent the fact that things like this are touted as environmentally friendly or green legislation. The facts indicate otherwise.
Roll Call is reporting that Representatives Waxman (D-CA) and Boucher (D-VA) have reached an agreement on several critical provisions of the American Clean Energy and Security Act. The article also confirms roughly what was expected in terms of timeline:
“We have resolved a good number of the issues,” Waxman said after a meeting with committee Democrats, adding that the bill remains on track to clear his panel next week. Opening statements are planned for Thursday with a marathon markup beginning on Monday.
“I am optimistic. I believe we will have the votes to pass the bill [next week],” Waxman said.
Sadly, in order to secure the votes he needed from his own party, Representative Waxman was forced to compromise on some key provisions of the legislation.
Bottom line: As the American Clean Energy and Security Act clears its first procedural hurdle next week (the House Energy and Commerce Committee), it will have already been significantly weakened. It is simply not as strong as a) Obama’s campaign promises, b) what Europe is doing or c) what scientists say is necessary to prevent catastrophic climate change.
Incredibly, even with massive majorities in both branches of Congress, Democratic Leadership is unable to pass a bill that does what is necessary. As I’ve mentioned previously, polluting industries continue to dominate the legislative process by bankrolling candidates who vote against environmental regulations. This problem will not go away until we fundamentally change Congress.
I’ll reserve judgment on whether I think the package moving through Energy and Commerce is worth supporting until the full details of the agreement are released on Thursday. For the time being I’ll just note that I’m extremely disappointed with the details that have emerged so far. President Obama needs to take steps to ensure that America’s climate policy is taken seriously at the international negotiations this December in Copenhagen. If he intends to expend any political capital to make that a reality he needs to do so now, before so-called moderate Democrats from coal country succeed in making the bill ineffective.
First, the Wonk Room caught caught Rep. Mike Pence repeating his well-refuted energy policy lie on MSNBC’s Morning Joe (@joenbc). Then, Brad Johnson greeted Rep. Pence with some pointed questions about the source of his information:
This afternoon, the Wonk Room interviewed Pence about Reilly’s attempts to correct the false portrayals of his own study. When asked if Reilly was wrong, Rep. Mike Pence (@repmikepence) accused the economist of “making a public policy or political conclusion”:
“I respect the work that he did. We took the number that he used [for the value of the cap-and-trade market] and divided it by the number of the households. What he’s doing, he’s not making a mathematical conclusion, he’s making a public policy or political conclusion. He believes the other side’s analysis that there’ll going to be a rebate of these revenues and job growth.”
Less than an hour after the Think Progress interview Mr. Pence appeared on MSNBC again and repeated his discredited “$3,100 energy tax” lie. Watch the incredible video below. Read the rest of this entry »
WASHINGTON, DC — Today Chairman Henry A. Waxman of the Energy and Commerce Committee and Chairman Edward J. Markey of the Energy and Environment Subcommittee announced that the Energy and Commerce Committee will hold four days of legislative hearings on the discussion draft of “The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009.”The hearings will examine the views of the Administration and a broad range of stakeholders on the discussion draft. The schedule for this week follows:
Tuesday, April 21, 2009: Day 1
Opening Statements
WHEN: 3:00 p.m.
WHERE: 2123 Rayburn House Office Building
