Posted by Brad Johnson on 07/30/2007 at 06:23PM
From CQ.com: Broader Policy Overhaul May Be in Store as Senate Takes Up
Farm Bill.
Summary:
- Senate will take up bill after August recess; making the September 30
deadline unlikely
- Sen. Harkin, Ag Committee chair, plans much higher land-conservation
program funding than in House bill (HR 2419)
- Harkin and Grassley (R-Iowa) plan to cap annual payments to $250,000
from current cap of $360,000; HR 2419 has no
cap
- Sen. Lugar (R-Ind.) supports FARM21, Ron
Kind’s proposal (H.AMDT 700)
- Sens. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Brown (D-Ohio) introduced the Farm Safety
Net Improvement Act last week, which ties “counter-cyclical” payments
(aka crop subsidy payments) to revenue (price times yield) instead of
the target price (see the American Farmland Trust
page)
- Nutrition advocates are looking for better than the $4 billion
increase in the House bill
- Tax provisions to pay for the Senate bill will generate Republican
resistance
Full text below the fold.
Posted by Brad Johnson on 07/30/2007 at 01:14PM
Last week, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) presented the Containing and
Managing Climate Change Costs Efficiently Act (S.
1874), a piece of
legislation authored by Joe Lieberman’s former environmental advisor,
Timothy Profeta, who now heads the Nicholas Institute for Environmental
Policy Solutions at Duke
University.
The proposal would establish the Carbon Market Efficiency
Board which would
oversee the emissions trading market established by cap-and-trade
legislation. The board would operate much like the Federal Reserve
Board, providing information on price and low-emission technology
investment trends to Congress and the public, and it would adjust the
price of emissions permits when a “market correction” is needed. The
first measure is to expand companies’ ability to “bank” permits, or
borrow permits against future year reductions. The second measure, to be
used if high prices are not relieved by the first measure, is to add a
slightly larger number of permits to the market. This temporary increase
would be compensated for by reducing available permits in a later year,
when more options have been developed.
Profeta testified about the proposal in last week’s hearing. His
white
paper
goes into further detail.
The bill is intended to be folded into the Lieberman-Warner package to
be presented as a discussion draft at the end of the week.
John Warner (R-Va.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and Blanche Lincoln
(D-Ark.) are cosponsoring the bill, in a bipartisan show of strength by
pro-business Senators. [The League of Conservation
Voters/Chamber
of
Commerce
scores for the senators are: Warner 14%/100%, Graham 29%/92%, Landrieu
43%/75%, Lincoln 43%/67%. By way of comparison, Lieberman is 71%/44%.]
Posted by Brad Johnson on 07/27/2007 at 04:56PM
By 231-191, the House
passed the farm bill (HR 2419) today. Highlights:
- The bill funds the energy title, which funds biofuels research and
development, energy efficiency programs and renewable-energy projects,
by reversing $6.1 billion over ten years of the offshore drilling
royalty payments mistakenly granted to oil and gas companies
- The bill found additional funding for food stamps by by ending a
practice known as “earnings stripping,” which lets foreign-owned
companies shift income to a country with lower tax rates, delivering
$7.8 billion over 10 years
- The Senate is expected to start debating its version of the
legislation after the August recess. Current programs expire Sept. 30
and it is unlikely Congress will be able to complete action on a new
five-year bill by then. Instead, a short-term extension of the law is
likely to be necessary.
- The $5 million per year Community Food Projects program to fight food
insecurity by funding projects that promote the self-sufficiency of
low-income communities was zeroed
out.
Posted by Brad Johnson on 07/26/2007 at 12:43PM
At today’s hearing on the California
waiver,
EPA administrator Stephen Johnson refused to
condemn or even comment on the Department of Transportation’s lobbying
against the waiver. He also refused to state whether or not the
administration is opposed to the request.
In his testimony, he admitted speaking to the Secretary of the
Department of Transportation, Mary E. Peters, at the beginning of the
comment period, and obfuscated over what they discussed. He admitted
that they discussed reaching out to her “constituency”, which when
pressed by Sen. Boxer, he understood to mean governors and members
“particularly interested” in transportation. He avoided saying what the
Secretary’s intentions or views were and whether he recommended the
“constituency” should send in comments.
His new excuse for not making a decision on the waiver request is the
“voluminous” amount of comments. He was understandably accused of
footdragging by the Democrats on the panel.
Posted by Brad Johnson on 07/23/2007 at 10:05PM
Tomorrow’s global warming
hearing,
led by Joe Lieberman, will be a prelude to the cap-and-trade legislation
now being written by his and John Warner’s staffers. This bill will be
the default Senate cap-and-trade bill unless matters dramatically
change. See CQ Green
Sheets
for more.
Posted by Brad Johnson on 07/23/2007 at 09:28PM
From The Hill: Lobbyists face energy bill
dilemma.
In short, oil and gas lobbyists, long in the
GOP camp, are struggling to kill Titles 1 and
2 of Nick Rahall’s bill (H.R. 2337), which repeal the massive tax breaks
for oil companies in the Republican Energy Policy Act of 2005. Their
best friends on the Democratic side are Blue Dogs Charles Melancon of
Louisiana and Jim Matheson of Utah. Also in question is whether there
will end up being time for a vote on the legislation, with the farm bill
(with which agribusiness is happy enough), commerce, justice and science
(CJS) appropriations, transportation appropriations, and children’s
health insurance also on the docket before the August recess.
By Jim Snyder July 24, 2007 One of the toughest decisions a lobbyist
makes is when exactly to lobby against something. Do you try to stop a
bill in committee, marshal opposition on the floor, or wait for the
relative secrecy of a congressional conference committee to let loose
the arrows in your quiver?
It may be easier to stop an offending provision before the Government
Printing Office ink is dry. But sometimes it’s better to allow an
opponent an early win, especially if one of your opponents is the
Speaker of the House, before a final defeat.
Oil and gas lobbyists, playing defense all session, are weighing how
hard to push their backers on Capitol Hill to draw a line in the sand
on energy legislation.
On the floor, House members this week take up two major spending
bills— transportation and commerce, justice, and science (CJS)— as
well as a farm bill that, in contrast to the energy bill, has broad
support among industry lobbyists. The Senate takes up a higher
education reauthorization bill.
Pelosi’s Leadership
But behind the scenes, lobbyists describe a furious effort under way
to shape energy legislation in the final stretch before August recess.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) last week met with “oil patch”
members, often the most conservative elements of her diverse caucus,
to try to smooth over intra-party differences that are delaying one of
the party’s biggest priorities.
Pelosi urged the members to try to work with Rep. Nick Rahall
(D-W.Va.), chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, to find
compromise on his energy bill, one of several measures likely to be
linked together on the floor.
Posted by Brad Johnson on 07/23/2007 at 03:31PM
With a vote on CAFE legislation in the House
expected to come next week, the Pew Campaign for Fuel
Efficiency
today released new bipartisan polling in Ohio, Tennessee, Kentucky,
Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Florida and Michigan that pulled from more
than 30 congressional districts. The surveys found overwhelming voter
support for the U.S. House of Representatives to pass
CAFE legislation at least as strong as those
passed by the U.S. Senate in June. One particular district surveyed was
John Dingell’s, Michigan-15.
The polls compared the elements of the Markey-Platts bill (HR 1506) with
those of the industry-supported Hill-Terry bill (HR 2927), and found
overwhelming, across-the-board support for Markey-Platts across all
demographic groups (partisanship, income, type of car, age, etc.).
Voters just don’t buy the industry arguments against
CAFE standards, believing that cars will
continue to be safe and affordable and that the American auto industry
and auto workers will be better off as they will be forced to innovate.
As Bill McInturff, the GOP pollster said in
the
briefing,
“There’s really strong Republican support for higher standards, do it
quicker, make it binding.” Voters see this as an economic,
environmental, national security issue, and would feel better about
Congress and their own representative if strong legislation is passed.
Voters in Dingell’s
district
look like the voters elsewhere.
The pollsters deliberately avoided global warming because they see it as
a partisan issue.
Posted by Brad Johnson on 07/20/2007 at 07:02AM
Following up on Wednesday’s global warming committee hearing on carbon
offsets,
the Washington
Post
covers the company of one of the witnesses, Planktos
CEO Russ George.
A small California company is planning to mix up to 80 tons of iron
particles into the Pacific Ocean 350 miles west of the Galapagos
islands to see whether it can make a splash in the markets where
people seek to offset their greenhouse gas emissions.
Planktos – with 24 employees, a Web site and virtually no revenue –
has raised money to send a 115-foot boat called the Weatherbird II on
a voyage to stimulate the growth of plankton that could boost the
ocean’s ability to absorb carbon dioxide from the air. The company
plans to estimate the amount of carbon dioxide captured and sell it on
the nascent carbon-trading markets. . . . Environmental groups say the
Planktos project could have unforeseen side effects, and the
Environmental Protection Agency has warned that the action may be
subject to regulation under the Ocean Dumping Act. . . . The Surface
Ocean Lower Atmosphere Study, an international research group, said
last month that “ocean fertilization will be ineffective and
potentially deleterious, and should not be used as a strategy for
offsetting CO2 emissions.” The International
Maritime Organization scientific group, the Friends of the Earth and
the World Wildlife Fund have condemned it. And a group called the Sea
Shepherd Conservation Society said its own ship would monitor the
Planktos vessel and possibly “intercept” it.
On Wednesday, George appeared before the House Select Committee on
Energy Independence and Global Warming and lashed back at his critics.
The EPA was working with “radical
environmental groups,” he said. In written submissions, he said his
firm’s work had been “falsely portrayed” to “generate public alarm.” .
. . . George said “it’s the clearest ocean on Earth because it’s
lifeless, and it’s not supposed to be that way.”
George asserts that the potential is enormous. He said that the annual
drop in ocean plant life was like losing all the rain forests every
year. “If we succeed, we’ll have created an industry,” he told the
House committee. “If we don’t succeed, we’ll have created a lot of
great science.”
Quotes from a few experts on the Planktos plan are below the break.
Posted by Brad Johnson on 07/19/2007 at 11:53AM
Coverage of the farm bill (HR 2419) markup sessions (day
one,
two,
and
three)
from around the Web: AP: Some Farmers Would Lose Subsidies Under Farm
Bill:
The House Agriculture Committee voted Wednesday to ban federal
subsidies to farmers with incomes averaging more than $1 million a
year and stop farmers from collecting payments for multiple farm
businesses.
Only farmers whose incomes exceed $2.5 million a year are now
disqualified from such aid.
CQ: Pelosi Eyes Pre-Recess Vote on Farm
Bill
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has been taking a hard look at moving
the farm bill through the House in a make-or-break week just before
August recess. But given the competing priorities, there are no
guarantees.
CQ: Labeling Fight Put Off As Farm Bill Markup Proceeds
Food labeling advocates and meat packers have been given a week to
strike a deal on mandatory country-of-origin labeling, temporarily
averting what was expected to be a heated debate over the hot-button
issue.
More coverage at the individual hearing pages
(Tuesday,
Wednesday,
and
Thursday).