Lobbyists for Washington’s most powerful industry groups admit they probably won’t be able to stop President Obama’s climate-change agenda. But with a new coalition launching Thursday, they’re nonetheless seeking to shape — and slow down — that agenda with both inside-the-Beltway lobbying and state grassroots work.
“We’re not trying to stop EPA. That boat has sailed,” said one industry official involved in the coalition to be named Better Energy Future. It includes more than 70 organizations, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers.
“The goal here is to work on the mechanics of how they move forward with this, make sure they take the time that should be required for the largest regulatory regime in the history of this country.”
On Capitol Hill, though, the boat has not yet sailed. House Republicans plan to bring to the floor in early March legislation that would require congressional approval of Environmental Protection Agency regulations slashing carbon emissions from the nation’s existing power plants. In the Senate, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is pushing a disapproval resolution under the Congressional Review Act — a legislative tool used just once successfully since its creation in 1996 — to stop EPA’s draft rules on new power plants.
“I think it’s important for everyone to express their voice,” said the industry lobbyist when asked whether political-messaging efforts on Capitol Hill could muddle the lobbying push by the new coalition. “EPA is moving, and frankly the chances of Congress doing anything to change that are pretty slim.”
Plans for the coalition will be announced at the Chamber Thursday morning by leaders of several major industry groups, including Jay Timmons, president and CEO of NAM; Karen Harbert, president and CEO of the Chamber’s Institute for 21st Century Energy; and officials from the American Petroleum Institute, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, the National Mining Association, The Fertilizer Institute, the Portland Cement Association, and the American Farm Bureau Federation.
“Up until this point, the companies that belong to these associations and the associations themselves have been getting involved in this issue,” said Mike Duncan, president and CEO of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. “But the partnership is going to make this a much more focused and targeted effort, and you’ll see a much louder voice, with a bigger megaphone, emerge.”
In interviews, industry sources involved noted that the law EPA is using to regulate carbon emissions from power plants — the Clean Air Act — eventually will require the agency to regulate carbon from other corners of the economy. The Obama administration so far has focused almost exclusively on rules for coal-fired power plants, but the law (unless it’s changed) does require EPA to eventually promulgate similar carbon rules for other types of power plants, such as those fired by natural gas, and also other sectors, like petrochemical facilities, refineries, and manufacturing plants.
“The reason why it’s such a broad and diverse coalition is because they all understand they’re next,” said a second industry lobbyist involved in the effort.
Proponents of EPA’s climate rules agree with this basic premise, too. “It may take years, but the more we can cut carbon pollution and reduce the threat of climate change, the better off we’ll be in the future,” said David Di Martino, a communications consultant working with a broad coalition of national environmental groups defending EPA’s work.
Di Martino expressed skepticism at the notion that the new industry coalition was not going to try to scuttle EPA’s rules altogether. “Maybe some of the member companies with reasonable positions on climate change are having an influence,” Di Martino said. “However, there is no question that this new coalition is out to weaken any kind of sensible safeguards against carbon pollution [from] power plants.”
Some leaders of the coalition say they may encourage EPA to allow some sort of voluntary approach, a regulatory route environmentalists would surely balk at.
“Rather than a top-down approach, we’re hoping that EPA will let industry become an equal partner in this effort,” said Dale Moore, executive director for public policy at the American Farm Bureau Federation. “A number of different industry sectors involved in the coalition have been trying and working on this to varying degrees, and what we want to show is that if we take this approach, it could either work in conjunction with or in some cases even supplant an enforcement-based regulatory approach.”
The White House is committed to finalizing EPA’s carbon rules for power plants before Obama leaves office. It’s much harder for a future president to undo final, rather than proposed, rules. Indeed, the timeline is probably Obama’s biggest obstacle, and that’s not lost on those leading the industry coalition.
“This shouldn’t be forced because the administration only has three years. That’s not a good enough reason to get things wrong,” the first industry lobbyist said. “And I think EPA appreciates that. They’ve been very cautious to their potential legal liability as far as how the specifics of these rules are written.”
The industry coalition will focus on grassroots efforts in energy-intensive states throughout the country, including encouraging states and other organizations to write comments to EPA and the White House about how to craft the rules. EPA’s rules for existing power plants, due out in draft form in June, will eventually require states to write implementation plans.
“States need to appreciate this is coming and need to be prepared for how they’re going to implement it,” said the first industry lobbyist.
To be sure, lobbying inside the Beltway will continue. To wit: Chamber President Tom Donohue met with EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy on Tuesday to talk about, among other things, her agency’s climate rules. In a statement, a Chamber spokesperson declined to provide details other than to say they discussed “ways to work together on areas where there is common ground.”
Meanwhile, McCarthy will be touting her agency’s climate agenda in two separate MSNBC shows on Thursday.
What We're Following See More »
President Obama became a surprise topic of contention toward the end of the Democratic debate, as Hillary Clinton reminded viewers that Sanders had challenged the progressive bona fides of President Obama in 2011 and suggested that someone might challenge him from the left. “The kind of criticism that we’ve heard from Senator Sanders about our president I expect from Republicans, I do not expect from someone running for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Obama,” she said. “Madame Secretary, that is a low blow,” replied Sanders, before getting in another dig during his closing statement: “One of us ran against Barack Obama. I was not that candidate.”
It’s all about the 1% and Wall Street versus everyone else for Bernie Sanders—even when he’s talking about race relations. Like Hillary Clinton, he needs to appeal to African-American and Hispanic voters in coming states, but he insists on doing so through his lens of class warfare. When he got a question from the moderators about the plight of black America, he noted that during the great recession, African Americans “lost half their wealth,” and “instead of tax breaks for billionaires,” a Sanders presidency would deliver jobs for kids. On the very next question, he downplayed the role of race in inequality, saying, “It’s a racial issue, but it’s also a general economic issue.”
It’s been said in just about every news story since New Hampshire: the primaries are headed to states where Hillary Clinton will do well among minority voters. Leaving nothing to chance, she underscored that point in her opening statement in the Milwaukee debate tonight, saying more needs to be done to help “African Americans who face discrimination in the job market” and immigrant families. She also made an explicit reference to “equal pay for women’s work.” Those boxes she’s checking are no coincidence: if she wins women, blacks and Hispanics, she wins the nomination.
Under pressure from a judge, the State Department will release about 550 of Hillary Clinton’s emails—“roughly 14 percent of the 3,700 remaining Clinton emails—on Saturday, in the middle of the Presidents Day holiday weekend.” All of the emails were supposed to have been released last month. Related: State subpoenaed the Clinton Foundation last year, which brings the total number of current Clinton investigations to four, says the Daily Caller.