Climate, Politics/Capitol Light©, is a service of The JBS Group and Civil Notion
                                                                              January 8, 2020        
                                                                    
Feeding off of a failed UN Summit late in 2019, the almost daily release of reports updating and confirming climate science studies, student strikes, a continent on fire, and the already prominent place of climate in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, 2020 looms as a watershed political year for national climate policy.

To state the obvious, the re-election of Trump would be a devastating setback for the environ-mental well-being of the nation and the world. Almost as costly in terms of climate defense would be a divided Congress. Notwithstanding the rising number of Republicans in both the House and Senate who are now at least willing to admit there is a problem, Republicans and Democrats remain very far apart in terms of a willingness to do anything even close to what the scientists say is needed within the time they say it needs to be done.

Below is a thumbnail about the new million dollar ad campaign the American Petroleum Institute (API) is launching this year on behalf of oil and gas companies. The tack the Institute is taking is to pitch themselves as part of the solution, without altering their position on most policy matters. API, for example, remains opposed to a carbon tax, the regulation of methane and other greenhouse gases. The campaign is intended to support a heavy lobbying effort by the companies to keep fracking alive.

Climate, Politics/Capitol Light©, is a service of The JBS Group and Civil Notion
 
Volume 1                                                     September 16, 2019                                                                    Issue 27

Show us the money. Congress will move spending legislation on multiple fronts this week, possibly including the Energy and Water Development bill in the Senate and a stopgap measure in the House.

Lawmakers are pressing to pass fiscal 2020 spending bills before the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1 amid partisan splits over funding levels and policy riders.

Leaders in both chambers say they want to avert a shutdown in the fiscal new year by moving a temporary funding measure. The House is set to act on one this week.

The Senate is tentatively set for a procedural vote that would allow it to consider its first fiscal 2020 bills — the Energy-Water and Defense measures — in one package. Sixty votes would be needed to advance the bill, meaning Democrats could filibuster it.

Senate appropriators approved both measures last week, but only the Energy-Water bill had bipartisan support. Democrats opposed the Defense measure because it would help fund President Trump's $5 billion border wall.

If the Senate passes Energy-Water, it would be one of the most significant measures related to climate change to pass the chamber this Congress. The bill includes substantial increases in the budgets of DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and ARPA-E. The Senate version includes more funds than the House version. (E&E News)

• It’s likely at this point that the Democrats will try to add riders to the appropriations bills in violation of the non-binding agreement made as a part of the budget deal Congressional leaders made with the White House before the August recess.
• It’s agreed that a continuing resolution will be needed as there are only two weeks left before the end of the current fiscal year. The agreement is likely to extend the deadline for a deal to around Thanksgiving.
• Although there’s no appetite for a government shutdown, there is growing enmity between the Democrats, Senate Republicans, and the White House so another game of “chicken” may yet be played.
  

                    Climate, Politics/Capitol Light©, is a service of The JBS Group and Civil Notion
 
 
Volume 1                                                    August 12, 2019                                                                           Issue 22
 
This week’s civil notion-- “V” is for Vitriol, When It Should Be for Victory

Dan Levitan argues in the New Republic that Republican deniers of climate change, who are now on the side of the “angels,” don’t deserve redemption by Democrats unless they own-up to the harms they’ve caused by their earlier denials. Prompting Levitan to write his article was the testimony of Republican pollster Frank Luntz before the Senate Democrats’ Special Committee on the Climate Crisis.

Luntz’s invitation was issued by the chair of the Committee, Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI). Unlike the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, the group is not a Senate sanctioned organization. It is a group of Democratic senators wanting to examine how climate change is affecting the country and the planet and to mobilize action and support for bold climate solutions. The Committee will convene a series of hearings through 2019 and 2020 to gather expert testimony from a wide variety of witnesses.

The July 25th hearing was entitled “The Right Thing to Do: Conservatives for Climate Action.” Joining Luntz as witnesses were Kera O’Brien Vice President, Students for Carbon Dividends and Nick Huey, founder of the Climate Campaign and a member of the Utah Chapter of the Citizens’ Climate Lobby. Both O’Brien and Huey are young conservative Republicans who believe that carbon needs to be priced.

                     Climate, Politics/Capitol Light©, is a service of The JBS Group and Civil Notion
 
 
Volume 1                                                                    July 25, 2019                                                                 Issue 19

This Week’s Notion: There auto be a law.

From the Washington Post:

Four automakers from three continents have struck a deal with California to produce more fuel-efficient cars for their U.S. fleets in coming years, undercutting one of the Trump administration’s most aggressive climate policy rollbacks.
The compromise between the California Air Resources Board and Ford, Honda, Volkswagen and BMW of North America came after weeks of secret negotiations and could shape future U.S. vehicle production, even as White House officials aim to relax gas mileage standards for the nation’s cars, pickup trucks, and SUVs.

The deal reached between California and the four auto companies is truly extraordinary both in terms of why the deal came about and the position in which it puts the Trump administration. Since Day 1 of the Trump presidency, the auto industry had been hoping to re-negotiate the deal it struck with the Obama administration on auto and light truck fuel efficiency standards (CAFE) for the period 2021 through 2026.

Over the past two and a half years of the Trump administration, the auto industry has learned the meaning of the phrase be careful what you wish for; as it just might come true. The bad news came to industry representatives in late February on a conference call with the White House. They were told that the administration had cut-off any further conversations with California officials and was going ahead with its proposed Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule freezing the standards at 2020 levels.

The freeze has been called the Trump administration’s most environmentally significant regulatory rollback yet" by the Rhodium Group following its penetrating analysis of the rule’s impact on the environment. The call is not surprising. The transportation sector has surpassed electricity as the major contributor of greenhouse gases (GHGs) to the atmosphere; and, Trump’s efficiency 36.9 mpg is standard is 14.5 mpg more lenient than Obama’s 51.4 mpg.