Reid Might Be Forced to Deal With His EPA Problem

Amy Harder, National Journal Monday, March 28, 2011 Link to Inhofe EPW Press Blog Link to Article Link to Inhofe-Upton Energy Tax Prevention Page The Rockefeller Amendment delays jobs and economic recovery Baucus Amendment: No protection for farmers, consumers, small business It wasn't supposed to go this way if you're a Democrat. The 111th Congress was supposed to enact comprehensive climate-change legislation as President Obama prodded action with looming carbon rules.

---

Instead, efforts to price greenhouse-gas emissions collapsed in the Senate last year and left Obama with his hands tied around his climate-change regulations. Obama continues to publicly support the regulations and has punted the debate down Pennsylvania Avenue to Congress. Enter Senate Majority Harry Reid, D-Nev., who finds himself at the center of one of the most politically charged debates this Congress-which comes when he would prefer to focus on other pressing issues. "Reid has got to find a way to defuse the issue because the conversation around what EPA ought to be doing isn't very rational," said Dirk Forrister, who was chairman of the White House Climate Change Task Force in the Clinton administration. Congress could vote on as many as three amendments as soon as Wednesday that would, to varying degrees, hamstring EPA's regulatory power over carbon emissions. They will all likely fail, but it won't be a good day for Democrats, regardless. Reid is "going to wind up advertising to the world that 70 to 75 senators want to stop or significantly slow down the EPA," said GOP energy strategist Mike McKenna. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has offered an amendment that would pre-empt the rules entirely (it was originally stand-alone legislation sponsored by Environment and Public Works ranking member James Inhofe, R-Okla.). The other two amendments are Democratic proposals: one by Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., that would limit the regulations to just the biggest polluters and exempt agricultural producers, and one by Commerce Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., that would delay the regulations for two years. The entire exercise should amount to little more than a messaging battle for vulnerable Democrats up for reelection in 2012 like Sens. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, and Jon Tester of Montana. "Reid is going to have to run a process that lets each side have its day," Forrister said. "It may well be that all three fail, which highlights the basic lesson that we need some kind of an effort to form a bipartisan consensus that can stand." With the two Democratic proposals pitted against each other, Reid faces the likely circumstance that his party splinters on the three amendments. That won't be good for Reid or Obama. Neither Reid's office nor the White House responded to requests for comment. "When you add up the number of senators who will cross over and say they don't like the current course the administration is following, that is not a ringing endorsement of administration policy," said Dan Kish, a former GOP senior staffer for House and Senate energy committees. This won't be the first time the Senate votes on EPA's regulatory authority over greenhouse gases. In June, the chamber narrowly voted down, 47-53, a disapproval resolution sponsored by Energy and Natural Resources ranking member Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, which would have pre-empted EPA's authority. At that time, Reid promised several moderate Democrats, including McCaskill and Kent Conrad of North Dakota, a vote on Rockefeller's bill if they would vote no on Murkowski's resolution. Nearly 10 months later, Reid has not offered a vote on Rockefeller's bill. Obama, meanwhile, continues to keep the debate at bay.

---