DOCSLIB.ORG

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology House of Representatives One Hundred Fifteenth Congress

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

MAKING EPA GREAT AGAIN HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION February 7, 2017 Serial No. 115–01 Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 24–628PDF WASHINGTON : 2017 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas DANA ROHRABACHER, California ZOE LOFGREN, California MO BROOKS, Alabama DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon BILL POSEY, Florida ALAN GRAYSON, Florida THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky AMI BERA, California JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut RANDY K. WEBER, Texas MARC A. VEASEY, Texas STEPHEN KNIGHT, California DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia BRIAN BABIN, Texas JACKY ROSEN, Nevada BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia JERRY MCNERNEY, California GARY PALMER, Alabama ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia PAUL TONKO, New York RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana BILL FOSTER, Illinois DRAIN LAHOOD, Illinois MARK TAKANO, California DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii JIM BANKS, Indiana CHARLIE CRIST, Florida ANDY BIGGS, Arizona ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas NEAL P. DUNN, Florida CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana (II) C O N T E N T S February 7, 2017 Page Witness List ............................................................................................................. 2 Hearing Charter ...................................................................................................... 3 Opening Statements Statement by Representative Lamar S. Smith, Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ..................... 4 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 6 Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Member, Com- mittee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives .... 9 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 10 Witnesses: The Honorable Jeffrey Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 11 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 14 Dr. Kimberly White, Senior Director, Chemical Products and Technology, American Chemistry Council Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 19 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 21 The Honorable Rush Holt, CEO, American Association for the Advancement of Science Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 30 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 32 Dr. Richard Belzer, Independent Consultant Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 37 Written Statement ............................................................................................ 39 Discussion ................................................................................................................. 52 Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions The Honorable Jeffrey Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP ............................... 82 Dr. Kimberly White, Senior Director, Chemical Products and Technology, American Chemistry Council .............................................................................. 88 The Honorable Rush Holt, CEO, American Association for the Advancement of Science .............................................................................................................. 91 Dr. Richard Belzer, Independent Consultant ........................................................ 95 Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record Documents submitted by Representative Lamar S. Smith, Chairman, Com- mittee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives .... 102 Documents submitted by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives .................................................................................................... 113 Documents submitted by Representative Randy K. Weber, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ..................... 187 (III) IV Page Documents submitted by Representative Gary Palmer, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives .................................... 190 MAKING EPA GREAT AGAIN TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2017 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, Washington, D.C. The Committee met, pursuant to other business, at 11:04 a.m., in Room 2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith [Chairman of the Committee] presiding. (1) 2 LAMAR s. SMITH, Tsxiiis EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas CHAIRMAN RANKING M£MBER Q::ongrcss of the 'Bnitcd ~tatcs '!ilOUllC Of 'iRcprcscntatiUCll COMMITIEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 2321 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE 8U!LD!NG WASHINGTON, DC 20515~6301 (202) 225-6371 www.scien;:;e,hollse.gov Full Committee Making EPA Great Again Tuesday, February 7, 2017 11:00 a.m. 1:00 p.m. 2318 Ray bum House Office Building The Honorable Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell & Giuliani Dr. Kimberly White, Senior Director, Chemical Products and Technology, American Chemistry Council The Honorable Rush Holt, CEO, Amedcan Association for tbc Advancement of Science Dr. Richard Belzer, Independent Consultant 3 U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HEARING CHARTER Tuesday, February 7, 2017 TO: Members, Committee on Science, Space and Technology FROM: Majority Staff, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology SUBJECT: Full Committee Hearing: "Making EPA Great Again" The Committee on Science, Space and Technology will hold a hearing titled Making EPA Great Again on Tuesday, February 7, 2017, at II :00 a.m. in Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building. Hearing Purpose: The purpose of this hearing is to examine the Environmental Protection Agency's process for evaluating and using science during its regulatory decision making activities. Witnesses will discuss how EPA can pursue environmental protection and protect public health by relying on sound science. Witness List • The Honorable Jeffrey Holmstead, Partner, Bracewell LLP • Dr. Kimberly White, Senior Director, Chemical Products and Technology, American Chemistry Council • The Honorable Rush Holt, CEO, American Association for the Advancement of Science • Dr. Richard Belzer, Independent Consultant Staff Contact For questions related to the hearing, please contact Majority Staff at 202-225-6371. 4 Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Tech- nology will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is author- ized to declare recesses of the Committee at any time. Welcome to today’s hearing entitled ‘‘Making the EPA Great Again.’’ I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement and then the Ranking Member. Today, we will examine how the Environmental Protection Agen- cy evaluates and uses science in its regulatory decision-making process. Sound science should be at the core of the EPA’s mission. Legiti- mate science should underlie all actions at the Agency, from re- search to regulations, and be an integral part of justifying their ac- tions. Unfortunately, over the last eight years, the EPA has pur- sued a political agenda, not a scientific one. Time and again, we saw the EPA under the Obama Administra- tion propose regulations that would have no significant impact on the environment. For example, the so-called Clean Power Plan, pro- posed by the EPA last June, set impossible targets for carbon emis- sions. Yet even EPA data shows that this regulation would only eliminate a miniscule amount of global carbon emissions and would reduce sea level rise by only 1/100 of an inch. In fact, the EPA has proposed some of the most expensive and expansive and ineffective regulations in history. The rules proposed and finalized by the EPA placed heavy bur- dens on American families. Often, huge costs were shouldered by the taxpayer with little to show for it. And the EPA routinely relied on questionable science based on nonpublic information that could not be reproduced, a basic requirement of the scientific method. Americans deserve to see the science for themselves. If the EPA had nothing to hide, why didn’t it make the scientific data it used for its regulations publicly available? What was the EPA hiding? The Committee conducted oversight of EPA’s use of suspect science to justify its claims. Our hearings culminated in legislation that required the EPA to make its data publicly available. With the transition to a new Administration, there is now an op- portunity to right the ship at the EPA and steer the Agency in the right direction. The EPA should be open and
Recommended publications
  • In the News -- Jan. 29, 2007

    In the News -- Jan. 29, 2007

    District likely to ask for extension to meet standard BY STACEY SHEPARD, Californian staff writer Bakersfield Californian, Monday, Jan. 29, 2007 Valley air regulators will likely ask for a delay in meeting a federal air standard today. That's when the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District will release its latest draft plan for cleaning up ozone, the main ingredient in smog. The current deadline for reducing ozone to levels mandated by the federal government is 2013. "We really have a problem here that no one else in the country has to face," said Brenda Turner, a spokeswoman for the district. Ozone is created when nitrogen oxides -- emitted from vehicle tailpipes, factories and construction equipment -- react with sunlight. Increased ozone is known to aggravate lung disorders. Ozone tends to become trapped here because of the valley's shape, stagnant air and hot temperatures. To make the 2013 deadline, the valley must cut emissions by nearly 70 percent. To do that, the last version of the cleanup plan, released by the district in October, estimated it would take 7.5 billion in taxpayer dollars to fund incentive programs. Even if money weren't an issue, the district doesn't believe the technology is available yet to make the needed reductions by 2013, Turner said. That's why more time seems to be the only alternative. Potentially, the deadline could be extended out by 10 years to 2023. Doing so would drop the price to fund incentive programs to about $2 billion or less, air district officials have said. The state Air Resources Board decides whether to grant an extension.
  • Spotlight on Public Finance

    Spotlight on Public Finance

    Spotlight on Public Finance Fall 2016 Newslett er Featured Arti cle 1 Events 5 Practi ce Focus 3 Att orney Spotlight 6 Att orneys in Acti on 4 Did You Know? 7 FEATURED ARTICLE LEVERAGING PRIVATE SECTOR KNOW-HOW FOR SUCCESSFUL PUBLIC PROJECTS By Blakely Fernandez and Jane Macon Governmental enti ti es constantly struggle to address the competi ng demands of growing infrastructure needs, providing quality services and creati ng more economic growth opportuniti es, all while dealing with the reality of increased budget constraints. In the past decade, public-private partnerships (P-3s) have become a popular tool, at least in concept, to help governments balance these tensions. P-3s have been touted as the answer for infrastructure and services that governments don’t have the resources to address. But, any budget offi cer or other public offi cial who has looked closely at the private sector soluti ons knows that you never get something for nothing. The private sector might be willing to carry risk the public sector doesn’t want, or provide capital sooner than the public sector capacity allows, but these benefi ts come at a cost; and, someti mes, that cost is hard to measure. At the same ti me, there can be a real benefi t for early delivery of a project the public wants to see complete, and creati ng synergies with private development can build economic momentum, encouraging growth and investment beyond an initi al P-3. How then, does a public enti ty know when a P-3 is good deal? The fi rst and most important rule of thumb is that you can’t measure what you don’t understand.
  • President Trump's Campaign to Erase the Social Cost of Carbon

    President Trump's Campaign to Erase the Social Cost of Carbon

    Hidden Costs: President Trump’s Campaign to Erase the Social Cost of Carbon By Alison Cassady April 19, 2017 On March 28, 2017, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that attempts to upend critical components of President Barack Obama’s Climate Action Plan.1 The sweeping executive order directs his Cabinet officials to review and potentially rescind several climate-related rules, including the Clean Power Plan, or CPP—which set the first-ever carbon pollution standards for power plants—and two rules establishing methane pollution limits for oil and gas drilling facilities. The order also ends a morato- rium on coal leasing on public lands, among other policy changes.2 Media coverage focused primarily on these significant rule reversals. But the executive order also rescinds what the chief economist of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisors called the “the most important figure you’ve never heard of”—the social cost of carbon, or SCC.3 The SCC reflects the marginal economic cost of adding one ton of carbon pollution to the atmosphere or, conversely, the economic benefit of removing one ton. President Obama established an interagency working group to develop the SCC so that federal agencies had a sound basis from which to quantify the benefits of policies to cut carbon pollution and justify those policies relative to their costs. The SCC is currently set at $39 per metric ton in 2007 dollars. Because the SCC plays a key role in validating federal climate policies, fossil fuel interests and their allies in conservative think tanks—many of whom served on the Trump admin- istration’s transition team—have been pushing to eliminate or lower the SCC value.4 The executive order rescinds the current SCC and provides agencies with direction that could result in a SCC value that approaches zero.
  • Election 2016: Looking Ahead to a Trump Administration

    Election 2016: Looking Ahead to a Trump Administration

    Election 2016: Looking Ahead to a Trump Administration November 17, 2016 2016 Election Results • Trump carried swing states (FL, IA, OH) as well as states that have traditionally voted blue in presidential races (PA, WI) • Michigan has 16 electoral votes, which will most likely go to Trump for 306 total • Popular Vote (as of 11/16/16): Clinton 47.6% / Trump 46.7%* *Source: USElectionAtlas.org Source: New York Times 2 “A Country Divided by Counties” • County results show Trump’s decisive gains were in rural areas in the rust belt/greater Appalachia 3 2016 Senate Results • Republican-Majority Senate • 48 Democrats / 51 Republicans • 1 seat yet to be called • Pence can vote on ties • Democrats gained 2 seats Source: New York Times, updated Nov. 14, 2016 4 2018 Senate Map • 33 Senate seats are up • 25 Democratically-held seats are up • Competitive seats: • North Dakota (Heidi Heitkamp) • Ohio (Sherrod Brown) • Wisconsin (Tammy Baldwin) • Indiana (Joe Donnelly) • Florida (Bill Nelson) • Missouri (Claire McCaskill) • Montana (Jon Tester) • New Jersey (Bob Menendez) • West Virginia (Joe Manchin) • Filibuster? Nuclear Option? 5 2016 House Results • Republican-Majority House • The Republican Party currently controls the House, with 246 seats, 28 more than the 218 needed for control • Final Results pending (4 seats yet to be called) • Democrats pick up ~7-8 seats Source: New York Times, updated Nov. 14, 2016 6 Trump’s Likely Cabinet Choices • White House Chief of Staff: Reince Priebus, the Chairman of the Republican National Committee • Strategic
  • Energy Environment

    Energy Environment

    Energy and Environment FREE to PROSPER A Pro-Growth Agenda for the 117th Congress Energy and Environment REJECT THE GREEN NEW DEAL AND SIMILAR CENTRAL PLANNING SCHEMES The Green New Deal (GND), a nonbinding resolution introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) in February 2019, calls for “a new national, social, industrial, and economic mobilization on a scale not seen since World War II and the New Deal era.” The GND envisions a massive expansion of federal spending and regulation to decarbonize the economy while guaranteeing health care, affordable housing, higher education, job training, family-sustaining wages, and retirement security for all. The costs required to achieve that end point are unsustainably large, vastly exceed benefits, and are not scientifically justified. Congress should: ◆ Reject the Green New Deal and similar central-planning schemes. The GND would impose unsustainable costs on the U.S. energy sector, inflate energy prices, depress gross domestic product (GDP) growth, and impoverish American households. A March 2019 study by American Enterprise Institute economist Benjamin Zycher estimates that “meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources” would cost $490.5 84 Free to Prosper: A Pro-Growth Agenda for the 117th Congress billion per year, or $3,845 per household. Factoring in the budget cost of the social spending programs required to sustain the pro-GND coalition in Congress and the deadweight loss of the associated tax hikes, Zycher estimates the total annual cost of the GND would be nearly $9 trillion.
  • Kaplan V. S.A.C. Capital Advisors, L.P. 12-CV-09350-U.S. District Court

    Kaplan V. S.A.C. Capital Advisors, L.P. 12-CV-09350-U.S. District Court

    US District Court Civil Docket as of April 9, 2019 Retrieved from the court on April 9, 2019 U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:12-cv-09350-NRB-KNF Kaplan v. S.A.C. Capital Advisors, L.P. Date Filed: 12/21/2012 Assigned to: Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald Date Terminated: 05/12/2017 Referred to: Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox Jury Demand: Plaintiff Related Cases: 1:12-cv-08466-VM Nature of Suit: 850 1:13-cv-05181-VM Securities/Commodities Jurisdiction: Federal Question 1:13-cv-00149-VM Cause: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act Lead Plaintiff David E. Kaplan represented by Deborah Clark-Weintraub Individually and on Behalf of All Others ScottScott LLP Similarly Situated 500 Fisfth Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10110 (212) 223-6444 Fax: (212) 223-6334 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED James Craig McCarroll Reed Smith LLP (NYC) 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 (212)-549-0209 Fax: (212)-521-5450 Email: [email protected] LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jordan W. Siev Reed Smith LLP (NYC) 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 (212) 521-5400 Fax: (212) 521-5450 Email: [email protected] TERMINATED: 12/13/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY Christopher Chad Johnson Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan (NYC) 51 Madison Avenue 22nd Floor New York, NY 10010 212-849-7000 Fax: 212-849-7100 Email: [email protected] TERMINATED: 09/22/2016 Emma Gilmore Pomerantz LLP 600 Third Ave, 20th Floor New York, NY 10016 (212) 661-1100 Fax: (212) 661-8665 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Ethan David Wohl Wohl & Fruchter LLP 570 Lexington Avenue, 16th Floor New York, NY 10022 (212) 758-4000 Fax: (212) 758-4004 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Evan K.
  • Lawyer Demographics Bracewell

    Lawyer Demographics Bracewell

    Bracewell LLP (www.bracewell.com) Basic Information Compensation & Benefits 1445 Ross Avenue, Ste. 3800 Recruiting Contact: 2016 compensation for entry-level lawyers ($/year) 160,000 Dallas, TX 75202-2711 Ms. Leigh Burns Summer Compensation Coordinator, Professional Resources Organization Size: 360 2016 compensation for Post-3Ls ($/week) 3,077 Office Size: 33 1445 Ross Avenue 2016 compensation for 2Ls ($/week) 3,077 Hiring Attorney: Suite 3800 2016 compensation for 1Ls($/week) 3,077 Mr. Jonathan Leatherberry Dallas, Texas (TX) 75202-2711 United States Phone: (214) 758-1027 Partnership & Advancement [email protected] Does the firm have two or more tiers of partner? Yes How many years is the non-equity track? How many years is the equity track? Lawyer Demographics Partner/Member Associates Counsel Non-traditional Track/Staff Summer Associates Attorneys Men 12 9 3 0 1 Women 1 4 2 0 1 Total 13 13 5 0 2 Latinx Men 0 1 1 0 0 Women 0 0 0 0 0 White Men 12 6 2 0 1 Women 1 4 2 0 1 Black or African American Men 0 2 0 0 0 Women 0 0 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Men 0 0 0 0 0 Islander Women 0 0 0 0 0 Asian Men 0 0 0 0 0 Women 0 0 0 0 0 Native American or Alaska Native Men 0 0 0 0 0 Women 0 0 0 0 0 2 or More Races Men 0 0 0 0 0 Women 0 0 0 0 0 Persons with Disabilities Men 0 0 0 0 0 Women 0 0 0 0 0 LGBTQ Men 0 0 0 0 0 Women 0 0 0 0 0 For more details, visit www.nalpdirectory.com NALP Copyright 2021 Bracewell LLP (www.bracewell.com) Pro Bono/Public Interest Is the pro bono information indicated here firm-wide or specific to one office?
  • (EPA) in Its Entire 47-Year History

    (EPA) in Its Entire 47-Year History

    THE EPA UNDER SIEGE Trump’s Assault in History and Testimony Christopher Sellers Lindsey Dillon Jennifer Liss Ohayon Nick Shapiro Marianne Sullivan Chris Amoss Stephen Bocking Phil Brown Vanessa De la Rosa Jill Harrison Sara Johns Katherine Kulik Rebecca Lave Michelle Murphy Liza Piper Lauren Richter Sara Wylie EDGI June 2017 The Environmental Data & Governance Initiative (EDGI) is an organization comprised of academics and non-prot employees that promotes open and accessible government data and information along with evidence-based policy making. The EPA Under Siege is the rst part of a multipart series o n the early days of the Trump administration. In this series, EDGI authors systematically investigate historical precedents for Trump’s attack on the EPA, consequences for toxic regulation and environmental justice, the inuence of the fossil fuel industry on the new administration, changes to the public presentation of climate change, and the new administration’s hostility to scientic research and evidence. For the rest of the series see: h ttps://100days.envirodatagov.org. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary 3 II. Introduction 6 III. Precedent #1: The Early-Reagan Attack on the Environmental State 9 IV. What Ended the Gorsuch Era 18 V. Precedent #2: The Harper Administration in Canada 26 VI. Just Before Trump: An Agency Already in Decline? 33 VII. The Trump Administration Compared 38 VIII. Can the EPA Survive? 56 IX. Appendix: Interview Compendium 59 The EPA Under Siege 2 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Trump administration currently poses the greatest threat to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in its entire 47-year history.
  • Annual Report 2016

    Annual Report 2016

    1 Building better cities. ANNUAL REPORT 2016 Annual Report 2016 2 Kinder Institute Founders Nancy & Rich Kinder KINDER INSTITUTE FOUNDERS NANCY & RICH KINDER n reviewing the accomplishments of the Kinder many parties involved as the primary source to under- Institute for Urban Research over the past year, it stand the issues and challenges facing our city as a result Iis clear the Institute has emerged as an important of the pension situation. force—and an honest broker—objectively capturing and We are grateful to Rice University for housing the analyzing urban issues in Houston. Kinder Institute and to Houston Endowment Inc. for The Kinder Institute released almost 20 reports last providing substantial support that has allowed the year. More important than the quantity, however, is the Kinder Institute to expand its scope and footprint in breadth and impact of the Institute’s work. Houston. We look forward to even greater accomplish- ments in 2017. In 2016, the Kinder Institute took on issues as diverse as urban education, housing and development, health in our neighborhoods, income disparity, building stronger Rich Kinder suburbs—and perhaps most significantly, the City of Advisory Board Chairman Houston’s pension crisis. Kinder Institute for Urban Research The Kinder Institute’s pension report, for example, Nancy Kinder framed the complex pension issue—articulately and im- Advisory Board President partially—and was used by the Houston Chronicle and the Kinder Institute for Urban Research Kinder Institute for Urban Research Kinder Institute Advisory Board 3 Advisory Board Members CHAIRMAN: John Mingé Rich Kinder, Kinder Morgan BP America, Inc. PRESIDENT: Nancy Kinder, Kinder Foundation Eric O.
  • Tax Day Appendix.Pdf

    Tax Day Appendix.Pdf

    Climate change ...................................................................................................................... 11 Apparel Sector ................................................................................................................................ 11 GAP ..................................................................................................................................................... 11 Hanesbrands ...................................................................................................................................... 14 L Brands .............................................................................................................................................. 15 Nike .................................................................................................................................................... 16 PVH ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 VH ....................................................................................................................................................... 19 Banking & Finance Sector ............................................................................................................... 22 AIG ...................................................................................................................................................... 22 Bank of America ................................................................................................................................
  • Bracewell LLP

    Bracewell LLP

    Bracewell LLP 2020 VAULT/MCCA LAW FIRM DIVERSITY SURVEY 711 Louisiana Street Suite 2300 Houston, TX 77002 Phone: 1-713-223-2300 Fax: 1-800-404-3970 www.bracewell.com LOCATIONS Houston (Headquarters), Austin, Connecticut, Dallas, Dubai, London, New York, San Antonio, Seattle, Washington, DC DIVERSITY LEADERSHIP Head(s) of Firm: Gregory M. Bopp, Managing Partner Diversity team leader(s): Yvonne Ho, Partner and Chair, Diversity & Inclusion Committee NUMBER OF ATTORNEYS TOTAL NUMBER OF ATTORNEYS Currently As of December 31, 2019 Worldwide 346 352 U.S. offices only 313 322 Response to Spring 2020 Vault/MCCA Law Firm Diversity Survey. Complete survey results available in Law Firm Diversity Database (http://mcca.vault.com). Copyright © 2020 Vault.com Inc. and Minority Corporate Counsel Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Bracewell LLP 2020 VAULT/MCCA LAW FIRM DIVERSITY SURVEY Law Firm Demographic Profile Does your firm have more than one tier of partnership? Yes ASSOCIATES (2019) SUMMER ASSOCIATES (2019) Men Women Men Women White/Caucasian 43 43 White/Caucasian 13 18 African-American/Black 3 2 African-American/Black 3 2 Hispanic/Latinx 2 6 Hispanic/Latinx 3 2 Alaska Native/American Indian 0 1 Alaska Native/American Indian 0 0 Asian 5 2 Asian 1 0 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0 0 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0 0 Multiracial 2 2 Multiracial 0 0 Openly LGBTQ 2 2 Openly LGBTQ 1 0 Individuals with Disabilities n/a n/a Individuals with Disabilities n/a n/a Total 55 56 Total 20 22 Note: Firm does not formally track data for individuals with disabilities.
  • Politics of Climate Change Belief

    Politics of Climate Change Belief

    editorial Politics of climate change belief Donald Trump’s actions during the election and his first weeks as US president-elect send a strong message about his belief in climate change, or lack thereof. However, these actions may reflect polarization of climate change beliefs, not climate mitigation behaviour. Earlier this year, Donald Trump appointed Trump’s strategy. However, it seems more Myron Ebell, a known climate science likely that Clinton’s explicit references to denier, to oversee the US Environmental climate change were designed to reach Protection Agency transition (he later young voters2 who are already concerned chose another sceptic, Scott Pruitt, to run about the environmental impacts of climate the agency), and said that he would ‘cancel’ change, rather than those who need to be the Paris climate agreement. By the end persuaded by economic arguments. One of his second week as president-elect, it could even speculate that merely saying was announced that under Trump funds “climate change” highlighted the political from NASA’s Earth Science Division would divide between these latter voters and be redirected to deep space exploration Clinton, something that this issue has come projects, effectively eliminating a world- to symbolize. renowned centre for climate change There is no doubt value in determining research (see ref. 1 for a complete overview how to better educate the public about of Trump’s actions). This is notable given climate science. However, interventions that, as discussed in our November News based on the assumption that informing the Feature2, climate change was not central to public about environmental consequences the US presidential campaigns, and is not will inspire pro-environmental behaviour an issue that motivates electoral decisions.