Climate Politics

Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso delays confirmation of EPA chief

Senate confirmation of President Barack Obama's pick to head the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa Jackson, has been delayed, and it's not clear when we might see movement.

No senators are publicly questioning Jackson's qualifications, but Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wy.) has raised concerns that Obama's climate and energy adviser, Carol Browner, might exert too much control over the EPA. Browner's position is a new one that doesn't require Senate confirmation.

Barrasso's spokesperson tells the Washington Wire blog that the senator asked for Jackson's name to be taken off a list of cabinet nominees slated for expedited consideration. Barrasso wants more time to review confirmation-hearing transcripts and Jackson's written answers to questions the senator posed.

Democrats had wanted to wrap up this confirmation swiftly, so they skipped a vote in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and tried to get a full Senate vote. On Thursday afternoon, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) moved on the Senate floor to unanimously confirm both Jackson and Nancy Sutley, the nominee to head the White House Council on Environmental Quality, but Senate Republicans objected.

Last week, at Jackson's confirmation hearing before the Environment and Public Works Committee, Barrasso asked, "Who will ultimately make final EPA decisions?"

Gore to bring climate message to Senate next Wednesday

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) promised last week that his first hearing as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee would be on climate change. Today he announced that the key witness at that hearing, to be held on Jan. 28, will be the environmental policy lobby's mega-star -- the one and only Al Gore:

"My friend and former Senate colleague Al Gore is one of this nation's leading authorities on the subject of climate change, and we are honored that he has agreed to appear before the Committee," Kerry said in a statement.

"Al Gore has been sounding the alarm on climate change for over three decades, and he understands the urgent need for American engagement and leadership on this issue. America must act decisively in order for the nations of the world to reach agreement on a climate change treaty at the December 2009 meeting of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Copenhagen, Denmark. The timeline is short for us to respond to the threat of climate change, and this hearing will examine what America must do to lead the world in crafting a truly global solution."

Transportation Secretary appointee LaHood appears before Senate panel

Former Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.), Obama's pick for Secretary of Transportation, on Wednesday didn't reveal much about how he will handle his new job when he appeared before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, but he did make the explicit connection between transportation issues and climate change and sustainability.

"We must acknowledge the new reality of climate change. This has implications in all areas," LaHood told the senators. "The inner-city, rail and mass-transit funding in the economic recovery plan are a part of the equation, but only a part."

LaHood said there will be four focus areas for his work: safety, the economy, sustainability and livability. Transportation programs should be designed to create jobs and improve the lives and safety of citizens he said, and there must be an eye toward the long-term needs of the country.

"Sustainability must permeate all we do, from highways and transit to aviation and ports. President Obama is committed to this principle, and so am I," he said.

LaHood said that raising automobile fuel efficiency standards will be "one way for us to really overcome some of the pollution that exists around the country." Tighter standards, he said, should "be a part of the overall plan here to eliminate pollution, the greening of America, and getting the American car manufacturers in the game here with the reality that they need to be producing American cars that get much better standards."

Asked about his support for Amtrak, LaHood pledged to work with Congress to implement the funding bill that approved last year. "I think it's the way forward to get us as comprehensive as we can an Amtrak system in this country," said LaHood. "During my 14 years in Congress, in the House, I had been a strong supporter of Amtrak. It's the lifeblood for many, many communities around the country, and I will work with all of you to implement the Amtrak bill. I think it's a good bill."

He was also asked for his ideas on how to replenish the Highway Trust Fund, which was has been nearly depleted as a spike in gas prices through much of 2008 prompted Americans to drive less. He mentioned putting tolls on new highways and new lanes, and on bridges, as possible solutions, and said that relying on a gas tax will not be enough.

"We need to think about these things differently than just the gasoline tax," said LaHood. "We know that Amtrak ridership is still way up even though gasoline prices have come down. We know, in places like Chicago, that people are still using a lot of mass transit even though gasoline prices have come down."

"People are still going to drive, but the resources to pay for it, through the Trust Fund, is a dinosaur, if you'll excuse the expression," continued LaHood. "It was developed when Eisenhower and the Congress came up with the idea of developing an interstate system. We've come far afield of that now."

What the Obama presidency means

For several days I've been pondering how to write something interesting or insightful about Obama and What It All Means -- something that hasn't been written a hundred other places. (The internets are choked with Obama-related profundity right now.)

In the end, though, profundity is not what's needed. Obama did plenty of that on the trail, and the very fact of his ascension to office speaks for itself.

Instead, what's called for is some bluntness. The Obama presidency is in a political vise grip, squeezed between two facts:

1. The dire situation described by the fourth IPCC report is, by all indications, an underestimate. We are careening toward catastrophe, and to avoid it we'll likely have to virtually eliminate U.S. carbon emissions by 2050, while also engineering a whole range of difficult international agreements. If we don't, it's not exaggerating to say that unprecedented human misery will result, potentially putting at risk the very preconditions of human civilization.


2. There is nothing close to the public or political support necessary to pass the kind of sweeping policies necessary to eliminate America's emissions. The U.S. political class, to say nothing of the public, is nowhere near understanding or internalizing the implications of fact No. 1. By and large climate change is still viewed as a nagging, marginal, far-off problem to be addressed to the extent (and only to the extent) that it doesn't cause any economic dislocation.

This is just another way of rephrasing Gore's famous warning that the politically possible falls well short of what's necessary. The politically possible has moved forward considerably with Obama taking office, Pelosi running the House, Waxman running the Energy Committee, Markey running the Energy Subcommittee, and competent professionals in charge of executive branch agencies. But it is still far, far short. Even many people in the green world don't really get the existential urgency involved.

Over the next four/eight years, Obama (with help from many others) will bridge that gap, and we'll have a shot at a prosperous green future. Or he won't, and our children and grandchildren will inherit a world filled with unthinkable suffering.

That's it.

Obama halts Bush's final rules

In one of his first acts, President Barack Obama, through his Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, "ordered a halt to all pending federal regulations until the new White House team conducts a legal and policy review of the last-minute Bush administration rules," E&E Daily reports ($ub. req'd).

It also turns out that Congress, with simply majorities, can toss any rule within 60 legislative days -- and that goes as far back as "May or June 2008."

Regulation junkies -- you know who you are -- can read Emanuel's memo here [PDF].

Reports E&E Daily:

Rahm Emanuel's memo could lead to the reversal of dozens of energy and environmental measures advanced in Bush's waning days, including standards addressing mountaintop mining, air pollution permits, logging in the West, an exemption for factory farms from Superfund reporting requirements and endangered species.

The story concludes with background and more details:

State leaders urge Obama administration to act quickly on emissions waiver

Top California officials are already lobbying the Obama administration to approve the state's aggressive emissions program, a lobbying effort that began even as the president's pick to run the Environmental Protection Agency has yet to receive Senate confirmation.

California Air Resources Board Chair Mary Nichols today sent a letter to EPA Administrator-designate Lisa Jackson pleading the state's case to move forward with its tailpipe emissions rules. The Bush administration in December 2007 turned down the request, and ever since then California's leaders (and officials from 13 other states that also want to pursue standards tougher than the federal rules) have been pleading their case. The plan is aimed at achieving a 30 percent reduction in vehicle greenhouse-gas emissions by 2016.

"We feel strongly that under its new leadership, EPA will recognize that the decision made by the former administrator to deny California the waiver to enforce our clean car law was flawed, factually and legally, in fundamental ways," said Nichols in her letter [PDF].

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) also sent a letter today on the subject, addressing his to President Obama.

"Your administration has a unique opportunity to both support the pioneering leadership of these states and move America toward global leadership on addressing climate change," wrote Schwarzenegger. "I ask that you direct the U.S. EPA to act promptly and favorably on California's reconsideration request so that we may continue the critical work of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions and their impact on global climate change."

In her confirmation hearing last week, Jackson said she would reconsider their request. Obama promised on the campaign trail to urge approval of the waiver.

Obama's early actions bode well for the environment

Within a few hours of inauguration on Tuesday, President Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel issued a memo [PDF] telling agency and department heads to freeze movement on 11th-hour regulations from the Bush administration. He wrote:

... no proposed or final regulation should be sent to the Office of Federal Register for publication unless and until it has been reviewed and approved by a department or agency head appointed or designated by the President after noon on January 20, 2009

Exceptions can be made for regulations pertaining to "health, safety, environmental, financial, or national security matters" -- but of course it will now be the Obama administration determining what qualifies for those exceptions.

The memo also asks department heads to consider pushing back for 60 days the effective date for new regulations that have been published but have not yet gone into effect.

Among the rulings put on hold was the Bush administration's revision to endangered species rules, which would have blocked the Endangered Species Act from being used to curb global-warming emissions and given scientists in the federal government less input on listing species. More to come on other environment-related regulations now on hold.

UPDATE: The freeze on publishing new regulations also means that the Bush administration's controversial decision to take gray wolves off the endangered species list won't go into effect.

Critter fans are applauding: "The past eight years have been a nightmare for wildlife. Fortunately, within hours of assuming office, President Obama has put the brakes on the Bush Administration's 11th hour attacks on wolves and the environment. President Obama is a breath of fresh air," said Brian Vincent, communications director for the group Big Wildlife.

Bills for highways, no change for transit

Think all news is bad news during this epic recession of ours? Think again -- over the past three months, real wages have increased 23 percent, an enormous gain. At a crucial period for many working families, paychecks are going a lot farther than they did back in the summer.

The explanation is simple: wages are flat, prices are down. The labor market operates on a bit of a lag, so while the recession affected oil demand and prices very quickly, layoffs and falling wages are emerging more slowly. Eventually, the weak economy will catch up to workers (those who still have jobs), and spending power will decline.

But this is important to remember given the trends of the past decade. When economies are growing, oil prices rise. This means that even while wages are growing, it's difficult for consumer spending power to keep up, unless we reduce the intensity of oil in our economy. How can we do this? Easy -- cut commuting times, reduce driving, reduce congestion, green intercity travel and green freight shipping (so that rising oil prices don't feed through to prices for other goods, including food).

This, of course, is the logic behind a push for greener infrastructure. Better transit and rail systems boost productivity -- by improving movement of goods and people -- which increases wages. They also reduce the petroleum intensity of the economy. In a boom period, you then have rising wages that aren't much eroded by rising energy costs. And that means a richer and greener society.

Barack Obama understands this; at least, that's what we've been led to believe by his speeches. Many Congressional leaders understand it too. And it is therefore very disappointing to see the contents of the new American Recovery and Reinvestment Act -- also known as the stimulus bill. As has been widely reported, roughly $30 billion of the proposed infrastructure spending will go to highways, while only $10 billion is allocated toward transit and rail.

Grist special series on George W. Bush's environmental legacy

After eight years, the whole world is ready to be rid of him. But the damage George W. Bush did to the environment will be around long after he goes back to clearing brush in Crawford. What exactly did he accomplish? We take a look at the good (yes, there was some), the bad, and the ugly.

• David Roberts sets the scene
• An interactive time line of Bush's environmental actions
• The WTF moments that surprised even us
• Bush's environmental team as Simpson characters
• Bill McKibben on the worst of the Bush years
• Jim DiPeso on the best of the Bush years

Gore’s inaugural ball was star-studded (even without Obama)

On Monday night, I got to check out this week’s premier environmental event, Al Gore’s Green Inaugural Ball, held at the National Portrait Gallery. The food and décor were eco-friendly, though one couldn’t tell by looking, as recycled-fiber carpet looks exactly like regular carpet. What really stood out were the star power and festive air. […]