An Energy Bill Both Parties Can Love

WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 25: U.S. Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) speaks during a news conference September 25, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The House leadership held the news conference to call on the Congress to pass a clean debt ceiling increase. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
National Journal
Clare Foran
Nov. 22, 2013, 12:07 p.m.

While the pas­sage of a raft of GOP-backed en­ergy bills this month ap­peared to widen the di­vide between House Demo­crats and Re­pub­lic­ans, a pair of law­makers has forged a genu­inely bi­par­tis­an plan to in­crease en­ergy ef­fi­ciency in the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment.

Reps. Peter Welch, D-Vt., and Cory Gard­ner, R-Colo., in­tro­duced a bill Thursday to al­low fed­er­al agen­cies to ex­pand the use of util­ity en­ergy ser­vice con­tracts, which are agree­ments with util­it­ies spe­cify­ing “the amount of en­ergy sav­ings it will achieve through ret­ro­fits and oth­er meas­ures,” ac­cord­ing to a news re­lease about the bill. “The util­ity is then paid for its per­form­ance out of the sav­ings it achieves.”

The le­gis­la­tion would al­low agen­cies to enter in­to these per­form­ance con­tracts for up to 25 years, ac­cord­ing to Welch and Gard­ner.

“The bill would al­low private con­tract­ors to in­crease en­ergy ef­fi­ciency in fed­er­al agen­cies,” Gard­ner told Na­tion­al Journ­al Daily. “The longer con­tract leads to great­er en­ergy sav­ings, and it’s a way to max­im­ize the sav­ings to the tax­pay­er.”

This isn’t the first time Welch and Gard­ner have col­lab­or­ated on an en­ergy-ef­fi­ciency meas­ure. The pair un­veiled a sim­il­ar plan to pro­mote en­ergy sav­ings in fed­er­al build­ings last Ju­ly, and Welch is a co­spon­sor of a bill put for­ward with Rep. Dav­id McKin­ley, R-W.Va., that would serve as a com­pan­ion to a Sen­ate en­ergy-ef­fi­ciency bill in­tro­duced by Sens. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., and Rob Port­man, R-Ohio.

The util­ity ser­vice-con­tract bill dropped this week also has a com­pan­ion meas­ure in­tro­duced by Sens. Bri­an Schatz, D-Hawaii; Lamar Al­ex­an­der, R-Tenn.; and Dan Coats, R-Ind.

So far none of the pro­pos­als has made it out of com­mit­tee. What’s dif­fer­ent this time around, con­gres­sion­al aides say, is that House lead­er­ship wants to see bi­par­tis­an le­gis­la­tion pass, in part, as a show of unity fol­low­ing the di­vis­ive par­tis­an battles sur­round­ing the gov­ern­ment shut­down.

“All of us know that the shut­down and the con­flict polit­ics that came out of it have their lim­its,” Welch said. “If we find com­mon ground on something, that will be good for the in­sti­tu­tion and for both parties.”

Welch and Gard­ner say they have also been work­ing be­hind the scenes to build a broad con­sensus for en­ergy ef­fi­ciency, point­ing to a let­ter signed this month by 70 Demo­crats and 47 Re­pub­lic­ans in the House, along with Sens. Chris­toph­er Coons, D-Del., and John Booz­man, R-Ark. The let­ter to the White House, dated Nov. 4 and re­leased Wed­nes­day, calls on Pres­id­ent Obama to ex­tend a dir­ect­ive to in­crease en­ergy-ef­fi­ciency ef­forts in fed­er­al agen­cies.

Gard­ner said he has spoken with House Ma­jor­ity Whip Kev­in Mc­Carthy, R-Cal­if., about mov­ing ad­di­tion­al en­ergy bills to the floor next year, in­clud­ing en­ergy-ef­fi­ciency le­gis­la­tion.

When asked wheth­er he thought the le­gis­la­tion would gain trac­tion in the deeply di­vided lower cham­ber, Gard­ner com­men­ted: “I think it can. If you’re look­ing for a trail­blazer bill to show that you can cre­ate good policy with broad sup­port, this bill is the per­fect ex­ample.”

Welch agreed. “Con­gress has got to get things done, and the only way we’ll do that is by find­ing com­mon ground,” he said. “Is­sues in en­ergy are con­ten­tious but ef­fi­ciency isn’t. Every­one agrees we need to have this done, so right now what we’re do­ing is try­ing to smooth all the edges down and make sure that we do this in a way that works for both sides.”

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
8 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
8 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
8 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
8 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
9 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×