Weekly Political Roundup–What Does the Future Hold?
Posted June 26, 2009 at 9:43 am 
Filed in: As we enter Congress’ July 4 recess week, we can look back at a busy first half of the year when it comes to energy issues-and a potentially even busier and more contentious second half.
The House and Senate continue to move on very different tracks. Last week, of course, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee reported out their comprehensive energy bill, the American Clean Energy Leadership Act. Almost immediately afterwards, some Senators-most prominently Bill Nelson (D-FL)-led a public charge against the domestic supply provisions in that bill, arguing that increased production in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico would hamper military training. Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, of which Sen. Nelson is a member, prepared to thwart an effort by the senator to insert a provision in this week’s markup of the Defense Authorization bill to block the new supply, and several prominent military experts (including many former generals and admirals) questioned the premise of his argument. In the end, Sen. Nelson took no action in this week’s committee meetings. That does not mean that the bill does not face many hurdles. Vigorous debate should be expected on supply, nuclear energy, transmission cost allocation and numerous other issues. But at least it is safely headed for floor debate.
At the time of this writing, the House is preparing for an expected late afternoon or evening vote on its bill, which focuses strongly on climate change mitigation. At the moment, sources indicate that the Democratic leadership is within striking distance of reaching the magic number of 218 to pass the bill. If they are close enough, they will likely hold the vote even if they are uncertain of a majority; as we have seen in the past, holding a floor vote open adds pressure to members to vote with their party. At the moment, though it is far from certain, it seems more likely than not that they will find the votes they need to pass the bill.
So, presuming that is in fact the case, what happens next? There are several possible possibilities.
First, Senator Barbara Boxer, chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee (which holds primary jurisdiction over climate change in the Senate), has announced that she will have a climate change bill ready for the Committee to start working on as soon as the House passes theirs. The actual passage of a climate bill in the Senate before it adjourns in December for the holidays, however, appears doubtful at the moment.
It also remains possible that the Senate may still decide to combine energy and climate change legislation. Presumably the course for that would be to add climate change language to the American Clean Energy Leadership Act. This is not an ideal path from an energy security standpoint-the controversial aspects of climate change could end up dooming both parts of a combined bill to failure. That said, if it does occur, at least energy security will still be addressed in floor debate, and advocates for that aspect of the legislation will have the opportunity to impress on their colleagues the importance of ending our dependence on oil, with or without climate change. And if it appears the climate change segments of a combined bill are holding it up, the Senate could still re-split the legislation and bring the energy security package to the floor as a standalone bill.
Finally, each body could simply ignore the other and continue on their current course, with the House passing a climate bill and the Senate passing an energy security bill. That would lead to an inevitable confrontation in conference. Each body could insist on the other passing its own legislation, or they could attempt to combine the two in conference (which would lead us right back to the potential problems mentioned above).
Either way, as busy as this year has been on the energy front, it is clear that things are only going to get busier.
Previous Post
February 6, 2012
February 3, 2012
January 29, 2012
