Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

Industry Lobbyists Suiting Up for Climate Change Battle

The Center for Public Integrity released a report last week finding that the number of lobbyists seeking to influence federal policy on climate change has expanded more than 300 percent in five years. The report also finds that special interest industry lobbyists outnumber public interest environmental advocates 8-to-1.

 

That’s right. The most important environmental legislation in our lifetime is likely to come before Congress this year, and the overwhelming majority of meetings that Members of Congress have with advocates will be with folks interested in either watering it down or gumming it up.

 

Significantly, the report identifies the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) as the “leading voices against climate action.” While most climate change junkies would not be surprised that these groups oppose any action on climate change, there’s more to the story. Industry folks are suiting up to fight a series of lobbying battles, on several fronts. One of these fronts is an effort to make sure that any federal climate change law includes a provision that preempts current or future state laws or policies on climate change.

 

Indeed, NAM is clear about its position that state laws must go, stating that the “successful U.S. greenhouse gas emission policies” will “preempt all state climate change/global warming laws.”  Be clear that it’s not just cap-and-trade programs they’re talking about. It’s everything, from state building codes designed to promote efficiency to renewable portfolio standards. This would be a radical departure from how environmental laws have traditionally worked in the United States, where federal law has left states free to exceed federal standards to protect their environment and their citizens. (See CPR’s report, Cooperative Federalism and Climate Change, for more on how “cooperative federalism” should work in the climate change context..)

 

Climate change is a global problem, and solving it will require action from all levels of government – a cooperative and not a preemptive approach. Scott Segal of Bracewell & Giuliani LLP is one of the top industry lobbyists mentioned in the Center for Public Integrity’s report, and he argues for preemption by suggesting that state or local legislation won’t make much difference. “The notion that any one state or group of states could make a material contribution to solving the problem of global climate change is farcical,” he says. Scott Segal: meet California. As Newsweek reported this past week,

California, with its 37 million people, emits 20 percent less CO2 per dollar of GDP than Germany. It generates 24 percent of its electrical power from renewable fuels like wind and solar, compared with only 15 percent in Germany and 11 percent in Japan. It also has the world's largest solar-power plant (550 megawatts in the Mojave Desert), the largest wind farm (7,000 turbines at Altamont Pass) and the most powerful geothermal installation (750 megawatts at The Geysers north of San Francisco). Although California isn't immune to the economic crisis—its finances are on the brink of collapse, which could translate into growing support for those who argue that green measures cost jobs—its green accomplishments put it at the head of the pack. If California were a country, its economy would rank as the world's 10th largest and could lay claim to be one of the world's greenest.

Farcical? Only if you think progress made by 37 million people is ridiculous.

 

California is not the only state to have taken aggressive action. Ten Northeastern states participate in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a cap-and-trade program that began operating last year. The Western Climate Initiative, which involves seven states and four Canadian provinces, is set to launch in 2012. These states are leading the way, and other states – such as Florida – want to follow. Preempting them would severely undercut their current efforts as well as dampen future innovations.

 

Of course, there’s more at work in the climate change battle now taking shape. Industry isn’t just interested in preempting state and local laws, they’d also like to make sure that the federal law is relatively toothless. What a one-two punch that would be – a weak federal law that preempts stronger state and local laws! And, of course, it’s not just the number of lobbyists swarming Capitol Hill that matters, it’s also the PAC money that their organizations bring to the table. The upshot is that on this most important of environmental issues, public interest advocates are outnumbered and outgunned by industry lobbyists. One thing the environmental advocates have going for them – and a big thing it is – is that preemption’s a lousy idea, and it doesn’t take much examination to figure that out. Let’s hope Members of Congress and their staff can see beyond the dust cloud that the stampede of industry lobbyists is working to kick up.

 

 

Showing 2,821 results

Shana Campbell Jones | March 2, 2009

Industry Lobbyists Suiting Up for Climate Change Battle

The Center for Public Integrity released a report last week finding that the number of lobbyists seeking to influence federal policy on climate change has expanded more than 300 percent in five years. The report also finds that special interest industry lobbyists outnumber public interest environmental advocates 8-to-1.   That’s right. The most important environmental legislation […]

Rena Steinzor | February 27, 2009

OMB Seeks Public Input on New Executive Order on Regulatory Review

Late last week, I sent a letter to Peter Orszag, Director of the White House Office of Management and Budget that, among other things, called on OMB to allow for public participation in the design of its new Executive Order governing federal regulatory review. I’m happy to see that OMB has decided to do just […]

James Goodwin | February 26, 2009

Another Twist in the Mercury Air Pollution Saga

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it would not be accepting an appeal of a case involving the Bush Administration’s regulatory plan for reducing air mercury emissions from power plants.  For the last two decades, the regulation of mercury air pollution has been caught up in a long and winding journey reminiscent of Homer’s […]

Christopher Schroeder | February 25, 2009

Midnight Regulations: Congress Lends a Hand

The following is cross-posted by permission from Executive Watch, a blog maintained by the Duke Law School Public Law Program.   Every time the presidency has changed parties in recent years, the outgoing president has issued regulations in the final months of his presidency implementing policies at odds with the policies of the incoming president.  […]

Yee Huang | February 24, 2009

Water Footprints – Silently Splashing Along

Walk into any grocery store and you’ll find a barrage of labels on every product that proudly and loudly proclaims its ecofriendly pedigree: Organic!  Fair trade and shade-grown!  Local!  An article last week in the Wall Street Journal posits two of the latest entries into the fray: virtual water and water footprint.      Relatively new […]

Matthew Freeman | February 24, 2009

Time Magazine on Cass Sunstein/Cost-Benefit

Time Magazine has a piece this week on Cass Sunstein’s likely nomination to be the Obama Administration’s “regulatory czar” (director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs) and the debate over the use of cost-benefit analysis it has touched off. Despite Professor Sunstein's progressive views on most issues, progressives are concerned that his methods […]

Matthew Freeman | February 23, 2009

Milwaukee Reporters Earn Journalism Award for BPA Reporting

Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reporters Susanne Rust and Meg Kissinger are about to pick up some well deserved hardware for their series on bisphenol A (BPA) – a plastic hardener that leaches from plastic when microwaved. The substance causes neurological and developmental hazards, but it is ubiquitous in food storage containers, including water bottles and baby bottles. […]

James Goodwin | February 20, 2009

The Backdoor Discrimination of Cost-Benefit Analysis

In recent weeks, an unusual convergence of events has served to elevate somewhat the public profile of cost-benefit analysis (CBA).  Before then, CBA was an obscure and highly complex tool of policy analysis—the kind of thing that hardcore policy wonks would wonk about when the subjects of their usual policy wonkery weren’t wonkish enough.  Foreseeable […]

Holly Doremus | February 19, 2009

CO2 and the Clean Air Act

This item is cross-posted by permission from Legal Planet, “the Environment, Law and Policy Blog.”    New EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has granted the Sierra Club’s petition to reconsider a memorandum issued by outgoing Administrator Stephen Johnson in December.   Almost two years after the Supreme Court declared, in Massachusetts v. EPA, that CO2 is […]