Should Congress Stop EPA? - Energy & Environment Experts http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2010/01/should-congress-stop-epa.php Free Trial | Submit site feedback nationaljournal.com > Energy & Environment > Energy & Environment Experts HOME THE MAGAZINE THE HOTLINE CONGRESSDAILY THE ALMANAC 3121 Friday, January 29, 2010 + Earlybird updated Friday, January 29, 2010 MONDAY, JANUARY 25, 2010 Advertisement By Amy Harder NationalJournal.com Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, last week introduced a disapproval resolution -- essentially a congressional veto -- that would stop the EPA from controlling greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. Murkowski, the top Republican on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, argued that Congress, not EPA, should determine federal climate change policy. Should EPA regulate carbon dioxide emissions? Is the Obama administration using the agency to force Congress to pass legislation? Could EPA regulation help industry plan for a low-carbon future? Should the agency's power be temporarily suspended to give Congress more time to hash out a bill? Or should EPA be barred from controlling greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act? How could this STAY CONNECTED resolution affect the overall debate on climate legislation? Subscribe to this blog Subscribe to comments for this post Leave a response 16 Responses What is RSS? ARCHIVES Expand all comments January 2010 Can Obama Re-energize Climate? JANUARY 28, 2010 5:07 PM Should Congress Stop EPA? Cap-And-Trade: Time For Plan B? A Resolution Destined to Fail Should Taxpayers Back New Nuclear? By Richard Revesz What's Next In The Senate? Dean, New York University School of Law December 2009 November 2009 Almost everyone agrees that legislative climate action is preferred over regulation—it October 2009 Do you is the simpler, more democratic and longer lasting way to bring down our carbon September 2009 August 2009 agree? emissions. But the congressional process has stalled out and Senator Murkowski’s July 2009 Submit attempt to shut down EPA’s ability to regulate is not helping. Procedurally, a June 2009 disapproval resolution is destined to fail—at best it is a waste of time, but more likely May 2009 a political move designed to slow down progress on climate legislation. April 2009 March 2009 First, it should be noted that the form of legislative action Senator Murkowski is February 2009 suggesting has only been used successfully one time—to strike down a Clinton-era January 2009 regulation requiring more ergonomic workplaces. It is so rare, in part, because it December 2008 asks a President to sign a bill that reverses the actions of an administrative agency November 2008 —something this is unlikely to happen absent a change in administrations. If the October 2008 effort is vetoed, the House and Senate would each require a two-thirds supermajority vote to override it. SPECIAL GUEST MODERATORS Even before these hurdles, this ... T. Boone Pickens, Week of May 18 Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, Week of Oct. 5 Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., Week of Nov. 9 1 of 8 1/29/2010 5:22 PM Should Congress Stop EPA? - Energy & Environment Experts http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2010/01/should-congress-stop-epa.php JANUARY 27, CONTRIBUTORS Read More 2010 3:28 PM Jonathan H. Adler Jon A. Anda Link to this response: http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2010/01 Print | Share | E-mail Jay Apt Anna Aurilio Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas Bill Becker Frances Beinecke Bob Bendick Kenneth Berlin agree Mark Bernstein Submit Denise Bode Skip Bowman Postpone EPA Reg of Stationary Sources Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M. By Cal Dooley Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio CEO, American Chemistry Council Peter Bradford Michael Bradley EPA can promote both environmental improvement and economic recovery by Jeffrey Breneman postponing regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources. With Carol Browner Congress and the Administration hard at work on job creation and a national climate Kateri Callahan and energy policy, premature stationary source regulation could throw both efforts Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md. off course. Guy Caruso Red Cavaney The economic recovery package and new Administration proposals contain Terry Chapin important investments in clean energy development that can reduce greenhouse gas Graciela Chichilnisky emissions and speed job creation. Yet these investments would be delayed, scaled Paul N. Cicio back or cancelled if EPA moves ahead with stationary source regulation early this Eileen Claussen year as planned. Facilities that want to implement energy efficiency and other clean Josephine Cooper Mark Cooper energy technologies would be among the millions of sources required to get permits. Keith Crane They will be stymied by the confusion surrounding the absence of permitting Kyle Danish requirements and the flood of applications to EPA and state agencies. Even if EPA’s Lee DeHihns “tailoring rule” (raising the threshold for GHG emission from 250 to 25,000 tons per Paul Dickerson year) ... Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich. Bob Dinneen Read More Cal Dooley Charles Drevna Link to this response: http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2010/01 Print | Share | E-mail Rep. Eliot Engel, D-NY Dan Esty Stephen Eule JANUARY 27, 2010 2:10 PM Gary Fazzino Marvin Fertel Resolution Would Protect Economy Richard A. Foltman, CCM Michael C. Formica By Amy Harder Dirk Forrister NationalJournal.com Maggie L. Fox Jack Gerard The following comments are from Marlo Lewis, a senior fellow at the Competitive Thomas Gibson Enterprise Institute: Chuck Gray agree D.J. Gribbin Sen. Murkowski’s resolution of disapproval is a gutsy action intended to safeguard Submit Donna Harman the U.S. economy, government’s accountability to the people, and the separation of Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash. powers under the Constitution. Jeff Holmstead David Holt Critics claim that the resolution attempts, in King Canute fashion, to repeal physics. Marian Hopkins They say it is equivalent to Congress voting to overturn the Surgeon General’s 1964 Skip Horvath finding that cigarette smoking causes cancer. Rubbish! David E. Hunter Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla. A strong case can be made that the endangerment finding is scientifically-challenged. Bill Johnson But that’s not what the Murkowski resolution is about. Gene Karpinski Joseph T. Kelliher As the Senator made clear in her floor statement, and as anyone can see from the Jim Kerr text, the resolu... Kevin Knobloch Bill Kovacs Read More David Kreutzer Fred Krupp Link to this response: http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2010/01 Print | Share | E-mail Tom Kuhn Janet Larsen John Larsen JANUARY 27, 2010 12:43 PM Jeannette Lee Michael Levi Mindy Lubber 2 of 8 1/29/2010 5:22 PM Should Congress Stop EPA? - Energy & Environment Experts http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2010/01/should-congress-stop-epa.php Congress: Fashion a Step Forward Arjun Makhijani Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass. By Margaret Kriz Hobson Roger Martella NationalJournal.com Dave McCurdy Bill Meadows The following comments are from Frank M. Stewart, President and COO, American Rep. John L. Mica, R-Fla. Association of Blacks in Energy Elizabeth Moler Scott Moore agree The answer to questions regarding any EPA greenhouse gas regulation hinges on the Jennifer Morgan Submit answer to a broader question regarding national policy: are US legislators (and the Jan Mueller voters who elected them) right to be skeptical of proposals that are not the product of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska a very broad, participatory process? The answer, in most cases, is “yes.” Mark Muro Rep. James L. Oberstar, D-Minn. One can understand that members of the United States Senate are more than a bit Frank O'Brien-Bernini frustrated by the difficulty and the complexity of crafting a policy to guide this William O'Keefe nation’s efforts in addressing climate change. After all, the Congress has been Marvin Odum working at this for only a little over 300 days and nights. Alan Oxley David Parker However, the issue -- not so much with EPA specifically, as with any process that Jonathan Pershing would purport to move to action without the guidance of the people’s representatives T. Boone Pickens Rep. Joe Pitts, R-Pa. -- is of concern. Senator Murkowski is correct to be wary of any proposal that hasn’t Carl Pope had to withstand a broad, pa... Paul Portney Tim Profeta Read More Thomas J. Pyle Link to this response: http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2010/01 Print | Share | E-mail Hal Quinn JANUARY 27, 2010 7:43 AM Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.Va. Rhone Resch Natural Gas More Costly With Regulation Richard Revesz Jim Rogers By Amy Harder Barry Russell NationalJournal.com David Sandalow Don Santa Kathleen Sgamma, Director of Government Affairs for the Independent Petroleum Rodger Schlickeisen Association of Mountain States (IPAMS), submitted the following response: Liz Schrayer Larry Schweiger agree No, the EPA should not regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis. Submit (CAA). Regulation under CAA would be be intrusive, inefficient, and excessively Robert J. Shapiro costly. The CAA was meant to control traditional air pollution, not greenhouse gases Phil Sharp that come from every home and commercial facility in America. Congressional action Robert C. Sisson utilizing a market system that does not disadvantage natural gas is preferrable to an Jeffrey Smidt all-encompassing command-and-control approach. Bill Snape Robert Socolow Natural gas is a clean energy source that offers significant greenhouse gas reductions Henry D. Sokolski compared to other conventional fuels. By increasing utilization of natural gas for base Gus Speth load power generation to 50%, the US could experience a 40% reduction in Rob Stavins Jeff Sterba emissions from the electricity sector. Natural gas enables renewable energy such as Frank M. Stewart wind and solar by providing a back up.