Considered Forthwith: Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee

Welcome to the 19th installment of "Considered Forthwith."

This weekly series looks at the various committees in the House and the Senate. Committees are the workshops of our democracy. This is where bills are considered, revised, and occasionally advance for consideration by the House and Senate. Most committees also have the authority to exercise oversight of related executive branch agencies.

Even though Congress is out of session and the members are back home getting shouted down and physically assaulted by lobbyist-funded mobs of teabaggers, there are still a few things going on in the committees. This week, I will look at the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which has two field meetings (in Alaska and Colorado) scheduled this month.

Here are the members of the committee:

Democrats: Jeff Bingaman (NM), Chair; Byron L. Dorgan (ND); Ron Wyden (OR); Tim Johnson (SD); Mary L. Landrieu (LA); Maria Cantwell (WA); Robert Menendez (NJ); Blanche Lincoln (AR); Bernard Sanders (I) (VT); Evan Bayh (IN); Debbie Stabenow (MI); Mark Udall (CO); Jeanne Shaheen (NH)

Republicans: Lisa Murkowski (AK), Ranking member; Richard Burr (NC); John Barrasso (WY); Sam Brownback (KS); James E. Risch (ID); John McCain (AZ); Robert Bennett (UT); Jim Bunning (KY); Jeff Sessions (AL); Bob Corker (TN)

Jurisdiction

As suggested by the committee's name, the Energy and Natural Resources Committee generally oversees American energy policy and policies related to most non-military public lands (mainly those lands held by the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management and National Forest Service). Some other issues under the purview of the committee include Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, Native Hawaiian matters, nuclear waste disposal, territorial claims including matters related to Antarctica, preservation of prehistoric sites, and irrigation. A full rundown of the jurisdiction of the full and subcommittees is available here.

This committee assignment is particularly attractive to Western Senators since most of the American public lands are in the West. Here is a map showing the BLM land holdings. This .pdf file shows the total public and private ownership of U.S. forests. Note that this also includes state-owned forest lands. This map shows percentages of land owned by the Forest Service by state. Finally, this one shows the percent of each state's area that is owned by the federal government.

As a result, the committee tends to be rather non-partisan and more interested in regional interests rather than party ones at least on land and resource extraction issues.

A Sustainable "Cash for Clunkers" Program

After seeing the success of the Cash for Clunkers program, Committee Chair Bingaman and Senator Olympia Snowe have crafted a bill to revise the program and make it a long term policy. S. 1620 would revise the tax code to offer tax credits or instant rebates to anyone purchasing a car or truck that exceeds CAFE standards for that automobile's class. The bill was referred to the Senate Finance Committee since it primarily deals with revisions to the tax code.

Sure, it is essentially a middle and upper income tax cut since those people will be the ones most likely to buy a spiffy new fuel efficient car. It's also a market incentive to the car companies to turn out more fuel efficient automobiles. This is one of those bills we should track, analyze and push forward if it seems viable. .

Upcoming Hearings

Energy and Natural Resources only has two hearings scheduled during the August recess. On Aug. 22, they are meeting in Alaska to discuss the impact of renewable energy production on rural areas. Murkowski is hosting this hearing at Chena Hot Springs Resort in Fairbanks which opened the state's first geothermal power plant in 2006.

The other hearing will be a meeting of the National Parks Subcommittee on Aug. 24. They will learn about the impact of global warming on Colorado's national parks. The meeting will be held in Board Room of Town Hall, 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park at 1:30 p.m. if anyone is interested. And yes, Mark Udall of Colorado is the subcommittee chair.

Cap and Trade

Also known as the American Clean Energy Leadership Act, the bill was reported out of committee in July. However, I cannot find a mention of the actual Cap and Trade program in the Senate version. The program is specifically discussed in the House version. On the other hand, there is a lot of other interesting stuff in the Senate bill including carbon sequestration, incentives for green buildings and alternative energy production, and nuclear waste disposal and recycling. Here is some information from the committee on the bill. The good news for Cap and Trade proponents is that adding Cap and Trade by amendment is easier in the House than the Senate.

Committee History

This is a very abbreviated history. Use this link for a more complete committee history.

Americans have always held land ownership in a regard approaching religious conviction. Land ownership is part of the American dream. Indeed many European colonists and later immigrants (notably the Irish immigrants) saw the New World as the key to escaping feudalistic systems in which peasants worked land owned by wealthy landlords. Indeed, purchasing a house and a small piece of land is among the first priorities of American newlyweds.

At this point, it seems appropriate to point out that much of the land on the North American continent was stolen from the Native Americans who already lived here. Even land that Europeans "purchased" like Manhattan Island was bought for a pittance. To dispel a few myths, the original purchase was for some useful trade goods worth 60 Dutch Gilders, equivalent to about $1000 today. There is also some evidence that Peter Minuit negotiated the purchase with a tribe that did not even live on the island.

The first major land annex in American history was the Louisiana Purchase from France for $15 million, equal to about $213 million today. Contemporary opposition to the deal aside, the federal government had done a major land deal and doubled the size of the country. Almost immediately, the federal government felt the pressure to open the land to settlement. It should go without saying that the settlement was by White people at the expense of Native Americans who had called the land "home" for millennia.

The Executive Branch General Land Office was created in 1812 to oversee the distribution of Western land. This was also the era of the rise of the committee system and the Senate Committee on Public Land was created in 1816 to take the lead on federal land policy. Depending on the policy of the day and the land, settlers brave enough to leave the relative safety of the Eastern Seaboard could own homesteads cheap or free. For one thing, the nation had an interest in populating the land. For another thing the Louisiana Purchase and subsequent land "acquisitions" (Mexico probably has a different perspective on the issue) were done with public resources (i.e. taxes), so American citizens were certainly entitled to a piece of the land.

The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw the beginnings of land preservation as the federal government started to set aside lands that would not be distributed to individuals. Instead that land was set aside for public use and included forests, open spaces, and managed parks (including historic sites). Around the same time, some states established their own forest systems. This raised still unresolved questions over how much access to public lands should be afforded to individuals and ranchers as well as business interests like loggers, miners, and natural gas and oil drillers. It should come as no surprise that the Libertarian Cato Institute would like to see much of the public land privatized.

In 1921, the committee was renamed the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys after gaining jurisdiction over geological surveys. Following World War II, the committee gained jurisdiction over trust territories awarded to the United States following the defeat of the Japanese Empire. In 1948, the committee was again renamed the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs with jurisdiction over both public lands and the mineral rights to those lands. In addition, the committee had jurisdiction over the process of awarding statehood to Alaska and Hawai'i.

By the 1970s, the link between mineral extraction and environmental degradation became clear. Meanwhile, the oil embargoes exposed the country's (still unresolved) strategic vulnerability of reliance on foreign energy sources. In 1977 the committee became the modern Energy and Natural Resources Committee. The realignment confirmed the committee's role in American energy policy, but took away most of its responsibility for policies related to Native American affairs.

Subcommittees

The jurisdictions of the subcommittees are listed under the main jurisdiction link above. However, here are the four current subcommittees and leaderships. As with many other committees, the chair and ranking members are ex-officio members of the subcommittees.

Energy: Maria Cantwell is the chair and James E. Risch is the ranking member.
National Parks: Mark Udall is the chair and Richard Burr is the ranking member.
Public Lands and Forests: Ron Wyden is the chair John Barrasso is the ranking member.
Water and Power: Debbie Stabenow is the chair and Sam Brownback is the ranking member.

That's it for this week. I will be at Netroots Nation next week, so the chances of posting Considered Forthwith next week is minimal.


For more about other committees, check out my previous work:
Senate and House Armed Services Committees
Small Business Committees
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming
The Committee Primer
House Education and Labor Committee
Senate Finance Committee
Senate HELP Committee
Senate Judiciary Committee
House Energy and Commerce Committee
House Ways and Means Committee
House and Senate Appropriations Committees
House Intelligence Committee
House Judiciary Committee
House and Senate Ethics Committees
House Science and Technology Committee
House Financial Services Committee
House Rules Committee
The Role of Committees

Crossposted on Daily Kos, Docudharma, and my own blog.

Considered Forthwith: Senate Environment and Public Works Committee

Welcome to the 16th installment of "Considered Forthwith."

This weekly series looks at the various committees in the House and the Senate. Committees are the workshops of our democracy. This is where bills are considered, revised, and occasionally advance for consideration by the House and Senate. Most committees also have the authority to exercise oversight of related executive branch agencies.

Well, DK Greenworks week has come and gone, but the group lives on. Click the link and join us. In keeping with the green theme, this week I examine the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Here are the members of the committee:

Democrats: Barbara Boxer, California, Chair; Max Baucus, Montana; Thomas R. Carper, Delaware; Frank R. Lautenberg, New Jersey; Benjamin L. Cardin, Maryland; Bernard Sanders, Vermont; Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota; Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island; Tom Udall, New Mexico; Jeff Merkley, Oregon; Kirsten Gillibrand, New York; Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania.

Republicans: James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma, Ranking Member; George V. Voinovich, Ohio; David Vitter, Louisiana; John Barrasso, Wyoming; Mike Crapo, Idaho; Christopher S. Bond, Missouri; Lamar Alexander, Tennessee.

Jurisdiction

There is a connection between public works projects and the environment since the construction of things like highways, bridges, dams, and levees invariably affect the environment. In addition, this committee handles some economic development issues as there is often a connection among creating jobs, undertaking public works projects, and protecting the environment.

According to the committee's history, a Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds was formed in 1837 to oversee the development of federal buildings Washington, DC. During the committee reorganization of 1947, the committee came to be known as the Committee on Public Works.

As the federal government began to take on more and more public works projects, like the interstate highway system, the committee's power and relevance grew.

During the environmental movements of the 1960s and 1970s, Congress took a greater role in environmental protection. The Public Works Committee took the lead in passing the 1970 Clean Air Act and the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The Committee got its present name and even greater authority over more policy areas, notably endangered species and civilian nuclear power, in 1977.

Somewhere along the way, the committee also picked up jurisdiction over regional economic development since this also involves public works. More on this below.

Note that there is also a Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources with some overlapping jurisdiction.

The Committee's formal jurisdiction is as follows:

1. The following standing committees shall be appointed at the commencement of each to act until their successors are appointed, with leave to report by bill or otherwise on matters within their respective jurisdictions:

1. Air pollution.
2. Construction and maintenance of highways.
3. Environmental aspects of Outer Continental Shelf lands.
4. Environmental effects of toxic substances, other than pesticides.
5. Environmental policy.
6. Environmental research and development.
7. Fisheries and wildlife.
8. Flood control and improvements of rivers and harbors, including environmental aspects of deepwater ports.
9. Noise pollution.
10. Nonmilitary environmental regulation and control of nuclear energy.
11. Ocean dumping.
12. Public buildings and improved grounds of the United States generally,including Federal buildings in the District of Columbia.
13. Public works, bridges, and dams.
14. Regional economic development.
15. Solid waste disposal and recycling.
16. Water pollution.
17. Water resources.

(2) Such committee shall also study and review, on a comprehensive basis, matters relating to environmental protection and resource utilization and conservation, and report thereon from time to time.

Environmental protection

I won't get into a full discussion of all of the environmental protection statutes since that could take up multiple posts, but a few laws deserve mention. The big one is the Cap and Trade Bill. Initially, there was talk that the Senate would take up the bill soon, but Chairwoman Boxer has decided to hold off consideration until after the summer break.

Other than that, a handful of major laws form the basis of U.S. environmental policy and all of them fall under this committee's jurisdiction and most are enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency. These laws include the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Nuclear Waste Policy Act, and the Endangered Species Act. For a full list of EPA enforced laws, click here. The Fish and Wildlife Service has information about endangered species.

Two technical notes. First, most new environmental policy takes the form of amendments to existing statues rather than new laws. A major exception is the current cap and trade bill, which represents a major new program rather than tweaks to the clear air act.

Second, the regulations that polluting industries are always griping about are usually rules issued by EPA and other executive branch agencies. Rules are technical policy while the act is a more of a broad framework. Congress can pass all kinds of laws saying that we need clean water, but it is up to the EPA to write the regulations that will make that happen.

This system is problematic on one level since these rules are indeed written by Washington DC bureaucrats -- rather than elected officials -- and influenced by both industry and environmental protection lobbyists. Take a really wild guess which one has more money. This is your motivation to join and donate to groups like The Sierra Club, which recently stopped its 100th coal plant from opening, from and The World Wildlife Federation. On the other hand, members of Congress do not have the expertise to write rules/regulations, so they defer to the experts while also conducting oversight to ensure that the rules are fair and effective.

Public works

I have to giggle a little bit and then get really depressed when I hear the small government advocates complain about public works projects like highways, bridges, levee and dams. The problem, of course, is that the private sector has no particular incentive to build these things. Even if they did, the final product would serve the interests of those who built them, and those interests are not necessarily the same as the public interest.

The Environment and Public Works Committee will eventually have to take up the authorization of a new highway bill, which is currently in the House. The proposed six-year $450 billion authorization is being held up over a discussion about how to pay for it. President Obama and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood would like to hold off on a new bill for 18 months to give him time to develop a comprehensive highway construction plan. The current authorization expires at the end of September. Typically when there is a hold up on a major spending authorization, Congress keeps the money flowing by doing three month reauthorizations of current funding levels. LaHood would like Congress to just accept that he needs a year and a half and just do the reauthorization all at once.

There is also the question of how to pay for the new highway bill. There has been talk of raising the 18.4 cent per gallon gasoline tax by another ten cents or more, but this might not be the best idea in a recession. Additionally, Americans are sensitive to gasoline price increases. Once again, the country and our politicians have to make the difficult decision to pay for the infrastructure we desperately need.

Economic Development

The committee has jurisdiction over regional economic development commissions. One example I will offer -- mostly because I am familiar with it -- is the Appalachian Regional Commission. ARC was created in 1965 to help this historically impoverished region to improve its economy. The region stretches from northeastern Mississippi to New York's Southern Tier. Each year, ARC awards grants to projects intended to create jobs. A major component of economic development is highway construction. Few major employers will set up shop in an area that is inaccessible to reasonable highway systems.

I am most familiar with ARC's work in converting U.S. Route 15 between Williamsport, Pa. and Corning, N.Y. This is a major north-south corridor in the region. In 1962, a group of three businessmen from Mansfield, Pa. (my last home) started a local effort to improve what was essentially a two-lane mountain road. They rallied local support and lobbied Congress to get the highway project underway. Work to expand the road to a four -lane highway did not actually begin until the 1990s and there is still a six mile section in New York that needs to be finished. Regardless, there has been a marked reduction in fatal accidents and an increase in economic activity in the region and it will eventually become part of Interstate 99.

Here is a map showing the ARC region and some of the highway projects they have helped to fund over the years:



Naming buildings

Thousands of bills are introduced each Congress. Only a couple hundred actually pass. Of these, a large number are bills to name public buildings. This committee has the responsibility for reviewing such requests. Thus, this committee sees a relatively large percentage of its bills pass.

Do you want to see your name engraved on a federal building? Don't get your hopes up. Here are the guidelines for naming buildings:

The committee may not name a building, structure or facility for any living person, except former Presidents or former Vice Presidents of the United States, former Members of Congress over 70 years of age, former Justices of the United States Supreme Court over 70 years of age, or Federal judges who are fully retired and over 75 years of age or have taken senior status and are over 75 years of age.

In other words, very few people are even eligible until they die. Sorry about that.

Current legislation and hearings

This week's three hearings will focus on the impact of global warming legislation on agriculture/forestry, transportation, and the economy respectively. The website does not indicate if live webcasts will be available, but you can watch past hearings.

In addition, the committee has quite a few pending bills. The committee's website is very useful because they actually list all of the bills that have been referred to the committee. Here are a few examples of the bills currently in committee:

A bill to prohibit the use of stimulus funds for signage indicating that a project is being carried out using those funds. -- Judd Gregg

Writer's note: errrr... Okay.

A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of Transportation to require that broadband conduit be installed as part of certain highway construction projects, and for other purposes. -- Amy Klobuchar

A bill to permit commercial vehicles at weights up to 129,000 pounds to use certain highways of the Interstate System in the State of Idaho which would provide significant savings in the transportation of goods throughout the Unites States, and for other purposes. -- Mike Crapo

A bill to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to temporarily prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from considering global climate change as a natural or manmade factor in determining whether a species is a threatened or endangered species, and for other purposes. -- John Barrasso

A resolution recognizing the need for the Environmental Protection Agency to end decades of delay and utilize existing authority under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act to comprehensively regulate coal combustion waste and the need for the Tennessee Valley Authority to be a national leader in technological innovation, low-cost power, and environmental stewardship. -- Barbara Boxer

Global Warming and Polar Bears

There is a debate about whether or not to list animals as endangered due to global warming. This was the genesis of Joe Scarborough hates polar bears. Global Warming is destroying the polar bears' habitat. Of course, if the government lists the polar bear as an endangered species due to global warming, then we are explicitly stating that global warming is caused by humans. Thus, despite the objections of the global warming deniers, we might actually have to address the problem.

The majority side of the committee has created an excellent page about the plight of the polar bear. Of course, there are some people who don't think global warming is real or that if is real that human activity has nothing to do with it. That calls for a polar bear face palm:



And for more facepalm worthy material, we now turn to...

Minority home page

The official voice of the committee in Internet land is controlled by the majority party, but the minority gets their own page. There is a lot of lunacy here, but I want to highlight Ranking Member Inhofe's decision to post this: More Than 700 (Previously 650) International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims. There is even a prominent link on the welcome page.

To find evidence that this "report" is disingenuous, see links here, here, and here.

This quote from the first source is telling:

the list was padded with TV weathermen, economists and so on and contained very few actual climate scientists.

I won't go any further into this, but we should be aware that such misinformation is being actively promoted by the Republican Party.

Subcommittees

The subcommittee structure changed slightly in the 111th Congress. Most notably, children's health was given its own subcommittee. Here are the committees and their jurisdictions.

Children's Health: Amy Klobuchar is the chair and Lamar Alexander is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Responsibility for policy issues in connection with protection of pregnant women, infants and children from environmental hazards

Clean Air and Nuclear Safety: Thomas R. Carper is the chair and David Vitter is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Clean Air Act, Indoor Air, Tennessee Valley Authority, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Nuclear Plant Safety

Green Jobs and the New Economy: Bernie Sanders is the chair and Christopher "Kit" Bond is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Responsibility for issues related to job creation through the development and deployment of “green” technologies and practices. Issues also include federal investment in technologies and practices that reduce the government’s carbon footprint or the emission of other pollutants, including technologies and practices that enhance energy efficiency, conservation, or renewable power sources.

Oversight: Sheldon Whitehouse is the chair and John Barrasso is the ranking member. Here is the jurisdiction:

Responsibility for oversight of agencies, departments, and programs within the jurisdiction of the full committee, and for conducting investigations within such jurisdiction

Those agencies include:

The committee's oversight extends to programs in five cabinet level departments and seven independent agencies, including the Department of the Interior's Fish and Wildlife Service, the Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration and the Coast Guard, the Department of Commerce's Economic Development Administration and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, the GSA's Public Buildings Service, the Council on Environmental Quality, the civil works program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Mississippi River Commission, and the nonperforming functions of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health: Frank Lautenberg is the chair and James Inhofe is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Superfund and Brownfields, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), including recycling, Federal Facilities and interstate waste, Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA), Chemical Safety Board, Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), Environmental Justice and Risk Assessment

Transportation and Infrastructure: Max Baucus is the chair and George Voinovich is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Public Buildings, Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), Economic Development Administration, Historic Preservation, National Dam Safety Program, Stafford Act and federal disaster relief programs, Mississippi River Commission, Green Buildings

Water and Wildlife: Ben Cardin is the chair and Mike Crapo is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Clean Water Act, including wetlands; Safe Drinking Water Act; Coastal Zone Management Act; Invasive Species; Fisheries and Wildlife, Endangered Species Act (ESA), National Wildlife Refuges; Outer Continental Shelf Lands

That's it for this week. Next week will probably be the armed services committees and any movement on DADT unless something else comes up or I get a suggestion for something else.

For more about other committees, check out my previous work:
House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming
The Committee Primer
House Education and Labor Committee
Senate Finance Committee
Senate HELP Committee
Senate Judiciary Committee
House Energy and Commerce Committee
House Ways and Means Committee
House and Senate Appropriations Committees
House Intelligence Committee
House Judiciary Committee
House and Senate Ethics Committees
House Science and Technology Committee
House Financial Services Committee
House Rules Committee
The Role of Committees

Crossposted on Daily Kos, Congress Matters, Docudharma, and my own blog.

Considered Forthwith: House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming

Welcome to the 15th installment of "Considered Forthwith."

This weekly series looks at the various committees in the House and the Senate. Committees are the workshops of our democracy. This is where bills are considered, revised, and occasionally advance for consideration by the House and Senate. Most committees also have the authority to exercise oversight of related executive branch agencies.

This series usually runs on Sunday evening, but this is a special edition in honor of the DK Greenroots project. This evening, I will look at the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. This select committee was formed in March, 2007 after the Democrats took control of Congress to study policies intended to reduce America's dependence on fossil fuels, especially oil from overseas, and reduce greenhouse gasses.

If you are interested in environmental issues, please join DK GreenRoots, a new environmental advocacy group created by Meteor Blades and Patriot Daily. DK GreenRoots comprises bloggers at Daily Kos and eco-advocates from other sites. We focus on a broad range of issues and are always open to new ones. Over the coming weeks and months, DK Greenroots will initiate a variety of environmental projects, some political and some having nothing directly to do with politics at all. Some projects may involve the creation of eco working groups that can be used for a variety of actions, including implementing political action or drafting proposed legislation. We are in exciting times now because for the first time in decades, significant environmental legislation will be passed by Congress. It is far easier to achieve real change if our proposal is on the table rather than fighting rearguard actions. We alert each other to important eco-stories in the mainstream media and on the Internet, promote bloggers at one site to readers at other sites, connect bloggers of similar interests to each other and discuss crucial eco-issues. Come help us put these projects together. Bring ideas of your own. There is no limit on what we can accomplish together.

Here are the committee members:

Democrats: Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Chairman; Earl Blumenauer of Oregon; Jay Inslee of Washington; John Larson of Connecticut; Stephanie Herseth Sandlin of South Dakota; Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri; John Hall of New York; John Salazar of Colorado; Jackie Speier of California

Republicans: James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, Ranking Member; John Shadegg of Arizona; Candice Miller of Michigan; John Sullivan of Oklahoma; Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee; Shelley Capito of West Virginia

My humble take on Global Warming

I sincerely believe that human activity is a direct cause of the observed warming of the Earth in the last century. No, I don't think it has anything to do with the decline in the number of pirates in the world. If it did, I would be sailing the Seven Seas in search of booty and plunder right now.

If I am wrong, no matter. Even if spewing pollutants into the air is not actively altering earth's climate, it is still doing no favors for the environment, particularly in terms of air quality. Furthermore, I was raised to clean up my own mess, so we have a collective responsibility to minimize air pollution, even if global warming is a natural phenomenon unrelated to greenhouse gasses.

Select vs. Standing Committee

On Sunday, I wrote a brief overview of how Congressional Committees operate. However, this is a good time to note the difference between a standing and select committee. Select committees are temporary panels that are created by the chamber leadership to investigate certain issues. Select committees may hold hearings, but not mark up legislation. Standing committees are the permanent panels that do mark up bills and advance them to the full Chamber.

Jurisdiction

For those unfamiliar with the process, a committee's jurisdiction is the formal statement specifying the areas that a committee may address. This committee's jurisdiction is:

Jurisdiction: The select committee shall not have legislative jurisdiction and shall have no authority to take legislative action on any bill or resolution. Its sole authority shall be to investigate, study, make findings, and develop recommendations on policies, strategies, technologies and other innovations, intended to reduce the dependence of the United States on foreign sources of energy and achieve substantial and permanent reductions in emissions and other activities that contribute to climate change and global warming.

Admittedly, most citizens don't think to check with the House of Representatives' committee system system to get information about global warming and energy independence. This is more a resource for members and the reporters who cover them. For example, the committee recently promoted this story: National Climate Science Report Makes Strong Case for Immediate Action on Global Warming that should have turned some heads in Congress.

Furthermore, this is the official position of the majority party on global warming and energy independence, so we can rest assured that the House Democrats are generally on board with combating global warming, even if some voted against the American Clean Energy and Security Act also known as the Cap and Trade bill for their own reasons. If we can convert from fossil fuels -- particularly from overseas -- to non-polluting sources, then we can both protect the earth and unshackle ourselves from whims and politics of the members of OPEC.

In any event, this would be a good panel for Green Kossacks to track.

The importance of the committee

Energy and the environment are two problems that are inseparably linked. In the absence of efficient power sources (solar, wind, and geothermal) the production of energy pollutes since much of our electricity in generated through burning coal. Nuclear power does not directly pollute, but the toxic waste is a huge problem. Furthermore, the use of energy for transportation pollutes the air. Therefore, it is only reasonable to consider both issues together and the fact that this panel is addressing the two issues holistically rather than piecemeal is almost an innovation in governing.

Another important note is that this select committee was formed when the Democrats took office. We can all agree that the Republican record on the environment in general and global warming in particular is non-existent at best and a tragedy of epic proportions at worst. Just the establishment of the committee showed that the Democrats intend to take Global Warming seriously.

One indirect power of the committee is its members. Each one sits on at least one other committee that deals with climate change and energy independence issues. While this select committee has no direct power to alter legislation, members can take the ideas offered in hearings of the select committee and offer them as amendments to bills considered in standing committees.

In addition, the select committee is actively tracking legislation on topics they have investigated. Obviously, the major legislation right now is Cap and Trade, but there are plenty of other resources posted on the website. This committee's website is like a one stop shop for the latest on climate change legislation.

Debunking the deniers

The most frustrating part about addressing global warming is the fact that the deniers (sorry, they prefer to be called "doubters") are not only vocal, but very well funded.

From Newsweek:

But (Senator Barbara) Boxer figured that with "the overwhelming science out there, the deniers' days were numbered." As she left a meeting with the head of the international climate panel, however, a staffer had some news for her. A conservative think tank long funded by ExxonMobil, she told Boxer, had offered scientists $10,000 to write articles undercutting the new report and the computer-based climate models it is based on. "I realized," says Boxer, "there was a movement behind this that just wasn't giving up."

And the deniers may be winning on the public opinion front. From the same article:

Just last year, polls found that 64 percent of Americans thought there was "a lot" of scientific disagreement on climate change; only one third thought planetary warming was "mainly caused by things people do." In contrast, majorities in Europe and Japan recognize a broad consensus among climate experts that greenhouse gases—mostly from the burning of coal, oil and natural gas to power the world's economies—are altering climate.

On this page, the committee thoroughly debunks a denial piece that the Washington Post felt compelled to run in 2007. Sadly, while we are wasting time and paper arguing a point that is not really up for debate, we are also wasting time that could be better spent developing solutions.

In keeping with the theme of pushing back, let's check out the minority website. All of the committees have a minority website. Regardless of which party is in power, the official site is controlled by the majority, but the minority does get their own little corner of that slice of cyberspace. Here's what the Republicans have to say:

In the United States and around the globe, there's a debate about what affect emissions from cars, factories and power plants are having on the temperature of the Earth. This debate has inspired passion in some, fear in others, and a host of solutions, both good and bad.

snip

While searching for solutions, Republicans will urge Congress to be guided by these principles:

* First, any solution must produce real improvement to the environment. Some proposals would damage the economy without making any significant reductions in greenhouse gases.
* Second, any solution must focus on technologies from across the energy spectrum, from nuclear to clean coal to renewable energy to improved energy efficiencies.
* Third, any climate change policy must protect U.S. jobs and the economy.
* Finally, it must require global participation, including China and India, whose industrial growth is resulting in a tremendous rise in greenhouse gas emissions from these nations. This year, it is expected that China will surpass the U.S. in greenhouse gas emissions.

So far, so good. Nice platitudes. Now take a look at their latest press release and tell me if the GOP are concerned about playing the fear card:

Cap-and-Tax Bill Will Raise Energy Prices, Ship Jobs and Funds Overseas

So much for that.

And for what it's worth, Nate Silver figured out that a majority of Americans support Cap and Trade until their monthly energy bill increases by $18.75 per month. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the increase to be an average $14.58 per month.

Remember, too, that these global warming doubters deniers have managed to get themselves elected to congress. To name names, two of them are Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California. Even Select Committee Ranking Member James Sensenbrenner groused about the costs of halting global warming.

Some other committee studies

Beyond the ever present and ever unpleasant task of mythbusting global warming denials, the select committee has been busy with other studies. Some are positive ideas like tips for living more green at home, school and work. Others are dedicated to debunking other right wing myths.

Remember Drill, baby, drill? Here's what the committee has to say about that: "The facts are clear. America can not drill our way to energy independence."

They even included this pretty graphic:



Maybe they should have included this projection reported on Alternet which warns of up to 90 minor oil spills per day from increased offshore drilling.

Most recently, the select committee held a hearing on the impact of global warming on agriculture and forestry. Chairman Markey had this to say:

The findings of the report that rising temperatures, precipitation changes and increasing weeds, disease and pests will impact the productivity of farms and forests should make us all apprehensive.

source (.pdf link)

I have not read through all of the testimony. The important point to keep in mind, though, is that Congressional hearings typically get noticed by the traditional media and other members. Often, they will generate stories for the 24 hour news cycle. I could not find a specific story about this hearing, therefore I encourage the Progressive bloggers to take notice, too, and generate our own stories. To make it easier, many committees do live webcasts of hearings, so there is no reason why someone in California cannot watch hearings and write up a blog post on a story that the rest of the media ignore.

Here's a story that did grow legs, so to speak. Remember the debate about global warming's impact on the polar bear -- namely that Joe Scarborough doesn't care about polar bears. In January 2008 the committee held a hearing to ask Bush administration officials why they had not listed the species as endangered due to ice melts in the Arctic.

Markey even introduced a bill, that never got out of committee, to:

To prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from selling any oil and gas lease for any tract in the Lease Sale 193 Area of the Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Region until the Secretary determines whether to list the polar bear as a threatened species or an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, and for other purposes.

Source (.pdf link)

The polar bear has since been listed as "threatened," which does not have quite the same policy impact as "endangered," but it is a start.

If nothing else, this hearing generated interest in the media and the public. It also inspired this LOL:



Finally, the committee even has links to various carbon footprint calculators so that you can see exactly how much your lifestyle contributes to global warming and environmental degradation.

The whole point in writing this diary was to let everyone know that this committee exists and that they are doing something. Just the existence of the committee demonstrates the commitment of the House leadership to studying the causes of global warming, the effects of proposed policy, and ways to wean the country off of energy sources that pollute the environment and place us in strategically untenable political associations.

For more about other committees, check out my previous work:
The Committee Primer
House Education and Labor Committee
Senate Finance Committee
Senate HELP Committee
Senate Judiciary Committee
House Energy and Commerce Committee
House Ways and Means Committee
House and Senate Appropriations Committees
House Intelligence Committee
House Judiciary Committee
House and Senate Ethics Committees
House Science and Technology Committee
House Financial Services Committee
House Rules Committee
The Role of Committees

Crossposted at Congress Matters and Daily Kos.

Considered Forthwith: House Energy and Commerce Committee

Welcome to the ninth installment of "Considered Forthwith."

This weekly series looks at the various committees in the House and the Senate. Committees are the workshops of our democracy. This is where bills are considered, revised, and occasionally advance for consideration by the House and Senate. Most committees also have the authority to exercise oversight of related executive branch agencies. If you want to read previous dairies in the series, search using the "forthwith" tag. I welcome criticisms and corrections in the comments.

This week, I will examine the House Energy and Commerce Committee. There is a lot going on in this committee, including speed reading to neutralize a GOP stalling tactic.

First, here are the committee members:

Democrats: Henry Waxman, Chairman, California; John Dingell, Chair Emeritus, Michigan; Ed Markey, Massachusetts; Rick Boucher, Virginia; Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey; Bart Gordon, Tennessee; Bobby Rush, Illinois; Anna Eshoo, California; Bart Stupak, Michigan; Eliot Engel, New York; Gene Green, Texas; Diana DeGette, Colorado; Lois Capps, California; Michael F. Doyle, Pennsylvania; Jane Harman, California; Jan Schakowsky, Illinois; Charlie Gonzalez, Texas; Jay Inslee, Washington Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin; Mike Ross, Arkansas; Anthony Weiner, New York; Jim Matheson, Utah; G. K. Butterfield, North Carolina; Charlie Melancon, Louisiana; John Barrow, Georgia; Baron Hill, Indiana; Doris Matsui, California; Donna Christensen, Virgin Islands; Kathy Castor, Florida; John Sarbanes, Maryland; Chris Murphy, Connecticut; Zack Space, Ohio; Jerry McNerney, California; Betty Sutton, Ohio; Bruce Braley, Iowa; Peter Welch, Vermont.

Republicans: Joe Barton, Ranking Member, Texas; Ralph Hall, Texas; Fred Upton, Michigan; Cliff Stearns, Florida; Nathan Deal, Georgia; Ed Whitfield, Kentucky; John Shimkus, Illinois; John Shadegg, Arizona; Roy Blunt, Missouri; Steve Buyer, Indiana; George Radanovich, California; Joseph R. Pitts, Pennsylvania; Mary Bono Mack, California; Greg Walden, Oregon; Lee Terry, Nebraska; Mike J. Rogers, Michigan; Sue Myrick, North Carolina; John Sullivan, Oklahoma; Tim Murphy, Pennsylvania; Michael C. Burgess, Texas; Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee; Phil Gingrey, Georgia; Steve Scalise, Louisiana.

The chairman
Waxman is brand new to the chairmanship. In November he managed to take control of the committee from Dingell, who had served as chair for 28 years. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her allies quietly supported Waxman's bid under the assumption that the California Representative would be a more effective supporter of President Barack Obama's priorities, including a Cap and Trade bill, than the long-serving Representative from Michigan with ties to the automobile industry. Waxman won the chairmanship by a vote of 137-122 in the Democratic Caucus. Dingell now holds the title of chairman emeritus. According to the committee rules, that entitles him to be a non-voting ex-officio member of any subcommittee that he does not sit on.

Additionally, Dingell is the second most senior Democrat on the committee, meaning he will usually be third in line to ask questions of witnesses (after Waxman and Barton). This is important because the "five minute rule" means members may only take five minutes to question a witness. Going first means a member has a chance to make headlines by asking the tough questions before anyone else. Whereas Dingell might have a chance to ask a relevant and probing question, Peter Welch might be stuck with asking a witness his or her favorite color.

Jurisdiction
The Energy and Commerce Committee is one of the oldest standing committees (along with the Rules and the Ways and Means Committees). It also has one of the more expansive jurisdictions of the authorizing committees.

Authorizing committees handle non-appropriations bills. They have the power to set spending limits for government programs and purchases. It is then up the the appropriations committees to actually fund programs. For example, the committee recently passed a one-year program called "Cash for Clunkers" what would give Americans vouchers of up to $4,500 for trading in high polluting vehicles. If the program is approved, the appropriations committee would need to actually make money available for the program. This is part of an intra-branch system of checks and balances. Appropriators can only fund existing programs, but cannot create new ones. Authorizing committees, on the other hand can create all kinds of programs, but are at the mercy of the appropriators to get those programs funded.

As expected, the Energy and Commerce Committee has jurisdiction over most aspects of the nation's energy policy (including nuclear power) as well as interstate and foreign commerce. The commerce aspect includes several health care responsibilities including all health facilities not covered by payroll deductions (i.e. Medicare), biomedical research and development, public health, quarantine, Medicaid, SCHIP, and mental health research. The commerce aspect also covers consumer safety, the Internet, travel and tourism, sports, vehicle safety, and noise pollution.

Believe it or not, that is only scratching the surface of the jurisdiction. The full rundown is here.

The cap and trade speed reader
Also referred to as "Cap and Trade" the Waxman-Markey Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 was the focus of Thursday's hearing (actually a mark up) that featured that speed reader you may have heard about. The merits and flaws of cap and trade are a topic for another diary, though I generally support it as a first step toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Instead, here's the deal with the speed reader. Barton tried a cheap procedural stunt to kill a bill that has overwhelming support in the House and the committee. In order to make a bill a part of the official proceedings, the clerk must read the bill into the record. That was fine in the early days of Congress when bills might be three pages long. The cap and trade bill was 946 pages, including the major amendments the minority was planning to introduce. These days, presiding officers routinely make a motion that the "reading of the bill be dispensed with" which normally passes with unanimous consent to save time.

Barton decided he wanted the 900+ pages read in the hopes that the supporters would just leave, (resulting in a lack of quorum) and/or Waxman would just give up and adjourn the meeting. Basically, he was angling for a House version of a filibuster.

Since one cheap political stunt deserves another, the committee hired Douglas Wilder to act as the committee's clerk and read the bill as quickly as possible. In fairness, Barton did say at the hearing that he was planning to agree to dispense with the reading, but he seemed interested in hearing the young man actually do it. Wilder went on for about half a minute and got applause before Barton relented.

Via Talking Points Memo, here is the video:



What was much more troubling was the 400+ amendments that the Republicans dreamed up to throw at the bill. Most of them failed, but they did cause the meeting to last 16 hours. The bill was reported from committee (i.e. it passed) by a vote of 33-25 with four Democrats voting against and one Republican (Bono-Mack) voting in favor. The bill will probably pass the House, but will face a committee markup and cloture vote in the Senate.

Other recent issues
One of the other more significant bills that the committee handled recently was the federal expansion of SCHIP by $33 billion. This program, run by states with federal assistance, helps to cover health care for children of low income families. The increase is funded by a new tax on cigarettes (so keep smoking for the good of the kids). This was the same bill that George W. Bush vetoed (one of only ten vetoes he exercised), which allowed us to mock him for hating children. On a related note, anyone with kids should look into this program as some states are fairly generous with guidelines for defining "low income."

On May 1, the committee met to discuss the state of college football's Bowl Championship Series and calls for a playoff system. This is a huge debate with fans; most other people could care less. To wit: three members of the committee showed up for it. Read all about it at espn.com, if you care.

Other recent issues have included U.S.-Cuba trade relations, the federal response to Swine Flu, secrecy surrounding a fatal explosion at a Bayer chemical plant, Cybersecurity, and several hearings about health care. Unfortunately, there are no future hearings listed on the committee's calendar and I hope that is due to the holiday break.

Reconciliation
As I pointed out last week, if health care reform happens via the reconciliation process, several committees in both chambers will have a say in the process. Furthermore, even if health care reform is handled without reconciliation, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, and Rules will all be key players in the House. Energy and Commerce's role, of course, will be in coverage for children and any revisions to Medicaid.

When (if) the health care reform debate gains traction in Congress, it is very likely that members of the committees involved will be asked to sit on a select committee, similar to the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. Most select committee may only make recommendations on legislation and may not actually report a bill to the floor. On the other hand, the work of a select committee can become the basis for future law. Stay tuned on this one.

Taking it a step further, when (if) health care reform actually passes, there will be an inter-committee turf war/power struggle between the Ways and Means Committee and the Energy and Commerce Committee over which one gets jurisdiction over a nationwide health insurance program. We might get extremely lucky and one committee will concede the jurisdiction to the other, but that is highly unlikely since that is the same as surrendering power. It's hardly the most pressing issue of the debate, but one that could hijack the whole damned thing.

Subcommittees
There are five subcommittees under the full committee. The chair and ranking member are ex-officio members with voting privileges of all subcommittees to which they are not assigned. The chair emeritus is a non-voting ex-officio member of the subcommittees on which he is not a member. This means Dingell can question witnesses and join the debate, but not vote on amendments and final reporting.

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection: Bobby L. Rush of Illinois is the chair and George Radanovich of California is the ranking member. Here is the full membership list. The jurisdiction is as follows:

1. Interstate and foreign commerce, including all trade matters within the jurisdiction of the full committee;
2. Regulation of commercial practices (the Federal Trade Commission), including sports-related matters;
3. Consumer affairs and consumer protection, including privacy matters generally; consumer product safety (the Consumer Product Safety Commission); and product liability; and motor vehicle safety;
4. Regulation of travel, tourism, and time; and,
5. Toxic substances and noise pollution.

That's pretty self explanatory, but I am wondering which member has the ability to regulate time. Maybe Bobby Rush is a Time Lord from Gallifrey. (In fairness, this provision probably has to do with Daylight Savings Time, but the second someone goes and develops time travel, this committee is going to be very busy.)

Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet: The subcommittee is chaired by Rick Boucher of Virginia and Cliff Stearns of Florida is the ranking member. The full membership list is here.

The jurisdiction is simple, but inclusive:

Interstate and foreign telecommunications including, but not limited to all telecommunication and information transmission by broadcast, radio, wire, microwave, satellite, or other mode.

In other words, these are the people you can complain to the next time someone flashes a breast for half a second during the Super Bowl or a troll starts mucking about in your blog post.

Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment: Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts is the chair and Fred Upton of Michigan is the ranking member. The full membership list is here. Markey is also chair of the select committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.

The subcommittee's jurisdiction is as follows:

1. National energy policy generally;
2. Fossil energy, renewable energy resources and synthetic fuels; energy conservation; energy information; energy regulation and utilization;
3. Utility issues and regulation of nuclear facilities;
4. Interstate energy compacts;
5. Nuclear energy and waste;
6. Superfund, RCRA, and the Safe Drinking Water Act;
7. The Clean Air Act; and,
8. All laws, programs, and government activities affecting such matters.

The committee recognizes that energy and environmental protection are necessarily intertwined. Energy production (i.e. coal power plants, nuclear reactors, oil and natural gas exploration) and consumption (i.e. driving, heating and air conditioning) have direct effects on the environment. Therefore, energy and environmental policy should be considered in tandem rather than in separate vacuums. Yes, sometimes government is efficient and intelligent.

Subcommittee on Health: Frank Pallone, Jr. of New Jersey is the chair and Nathan Deal of Georgia is the ranking member. Here is the full membership list.

Again, the jurisdiction is straight forward, but encompassing:

1. Public health and quarantine; hospital construction; mental health and research; biomedical programs and health protection in general, including Medicaid and national health insurance;
2. Food and drugs; and,
3. Drug abuse.

Highlighting is mine. Hint: here are some members to track and contact when health care reform hearings start. Considering the pretty specific mention of "national health insurance" in the jurisdiction, this subcommittee will likely end up with authority over any future programs and policies.

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations: Bart Stupak of Michigan is the chair and Greg Walden of Oregon is the ranking member. Here is the full membership list. The subcommittee's jurisdiction is:

Responsibility for oversight of agencies, departments, and programs within the jurisdiction of the full committee, and for conducting investigations within such jurisdiction.

I could not locate a full list of the Executive Branch agencies that fall under the oversight provision. However, some of the obvious ones include Department of Energy, Commerce Department, Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Communications Commission, Food and Drug Administration, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and Consumer Product Safety Commission. Any additions would be welcome.

That's it for this week. Next week will likely be the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources since they will deal with Cap and Trade soon enough.

Crossposted at Daily Kos, Congress Matters, and Docudharma.

A few weeks off

Sorry about the delay in posting anything new.

I am in the middle of a major move to Washington D.C. this week. Once I get settled, I will resume writing. Here's a few quick thoughts, though.

For now, I am hearing that Obama will announce his running mate soon. How's this for new style campaigning. If you have signed on to www.barackobama.com or have added him as a friend on a social networking site, you can get an alert the second the decision is made.

Here's hoping that Russia and Georgia settle their differences before this war expands to a wider conflict.

You know your presidential campaign is in trouble when you get pwned by Paris Hilton.



"I'll see you at the debate, bitches."

Finally, buy energy saver light bulbs and tire gauges.



Chris

The world's largest dump

Well, the good news today is that we may have located that basketball that you lost six years ago. The bad news is that it has been floating in the Pacific Ocean all this time…that is if a shark hasn’t eaten it yet.

From the “not exactly news” department, we bring you the story of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch in the North Pacific Ocean. Measuring in at about twice the size of Texas, this part of the ocean has become a collection point for all sorts of trash from around the Pacific Rim. There is probably 3.5 million tons of trash, 80 percent plastics, jest kinda floatin’ ‘round in da sea.

We’re not talking about a solid mass of garbage, resembling the eighth continent. Instead, imagine sailing out to one of the most remote sections of the Pacific Ocean and finding soda bottles, cigarette lighters, grocery bags from both California and Japan, medical waste and hockey gloves every few feet. Garbage Island has been around since the 1950s, coinciding with the beginning of the widespread commercial use of plastics.

Most of this garbage is produced on land and is carried to this point in the ocean and trapped there by ocean currents. This spot is called the North Pacific Gyre. Here is a graphic showing the relevant ocean currents:

Obviously, this is nothing new and trash has probably been accumulating in this section of the ocean for as long as humans have been dumping trash. The problem is that, unlike at the beginning of the 20^th century, human garbage consists more and more of plastics. Carbon-based trash like wood, rotten food, and even sewage degrades easily and subsequently acts as nutrients for aquatic life. Plastics take longer to degrade and then degrade into smaller bits of plastic, which fish and birds can easily eat. That’s not good for the aquatic life.

This is suddenly news again because the filmmakers at VBS.TV took a trip out to the garbage island and are posting on their website 12 episodes of their documentary Garbage Island. (Just a word of caution: there is some strong language in the video.) AS of today, they are up to episode five. The Traditional Media have taken notice. Here is a link to ABC News’ report on the documentary.

h/t to POAC for posting the story originally.

So what can be done? Considering the costs of a clean up, there is probably nothing that can be done right now other than to limit the amount of plastic that we use. One person in the documentary pointed out that Subway Restaurants put every sub in a plastic bag. You use that bag for a grand total of a few minutes before eating the sub and tossing the bag. San Francisco passed a ban on plastic grocery bags last year, according to the previously linked story in the Chronicle.

Of course, when the rest of the state tried to follow suit, our good friends in the plastics lobbying business managed to kill the idea. Thanks, guys. We appreciate it. Now we can all be secure in the knowledge that we will never have to buy a few reusable canvas bags, nor will we ever have to make the decision between “paper or plastic.”

I guess I’ll have to go out and buy some of these:

Chris