The New Congress is in Session with the GOP in Charge of the House - And Industry is Worried

Yes, you heard right.  With Republicans taking over control of the House of Representatives and gaining seats to increase their minority position in the Senate, it seems industry is more than a little worried about the outcome.  In short, industry likes regulatory certainty, even if it means more regulation.  Industry can plan and invest and make business decisions when they know what requirements they need to meet.  Uncertainty (ironically) is a big old wet blanket on innovation and investment.


So while industry isn't going to be out there begging for stronger regulations, they do see a quagmire of uncertainty as Republicans follow through on their promises to put their legislative efforts into oversight investigations rather than regulatory predictability. Areas of environmental regulation that could be in a state of unrest include climate change and TSCA reform.  With last year's attempt to pass cap-and-trade legislation effectively dead for at least the next two years, new House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton has said he will fight EPA rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions.  Fellow Republican John Shimkus, who lost his bid to chair the committee to Upton, has been assigned a key subcommittee chairmanship, from whence he has promised also to hold hearings on EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gases.  On the TSCA reform side, what seemed like a clear path forward in the last Congress appears now to be in a state of confusion as to how, or if, legislation to reform the now 35 year old law can be accomplished.

All of this has industry very very worried.  There is a general feeling among industry leaders that attacking the EPA, which was started by a Republican President by executive order, could be going too far and would not only create a potential for backlash but effectively stymie industry attempts to rebuild their way out of the deep recession.  Many in industry actually very much want to see government incentives for innovative new technologies, including green technologies.  And that could be severely debilitating to the utility and other energy-intensive industries.

What industry most wants now is not some partisan gamesmanship from the GOP but rather some regulatory certainty, and for climate change and EPA's greenhouse gas emissions rules, industry acknowledges that some control of CO2 emissions is both an environmental necessity and offers a regulatory certainty that will allow them to innovate.  Without some sort of certainty, industry will continue to sit out the recovery while China and other countries continue to pass by us in development of new renewable technologies.

Industry Reaction to the Senate Hearing on TSCA Chemical Reform

During the Senate hearing last week on reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), Senator Vitter noted that while they were not present for in-person testimony, some industry groups had provided written testimony for inclusion in the record. Because of all the snow in Washington DC (up to 3 feet and counting, including more today) the federal government has been closed since last Friday afternoon and the testimony has yet to be posted on the EPW web site. So I thought I would highlight some of the reaction from industry as posted on their web sites.

The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has been in the forefront of negotiations on chemical issues, and was the lead industry organization to agree to the voluntary High Production Volume Challenge with EPA in 1998. They represent 140 member chemical companies, including all of the largest manufacturers of chemicals in the US. In their letter they agreed that biomonitoring data "have an important role along with other hazard, use and exposure factors" in prioritization of chemicals. But they also remind the panel of a statement from the 2006 National Academy of Sciences report "[O]ur technical ability to generate new biomonitoring data has essentially exceeded our ability to interpret them." In other words, we now can measure chemicals at very low concentrations in the body, but that doesn't necessarily mean there will be any effects.

The Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates (SOCMA) also agrees that TSCA needs to be modernized. SOCMA represents over 300 member companies, but unlike ACC most of their members are small and medium-sized businesses that don't have as many resources as the big companies. SOCMA "believes that the degree of public concern about the health risks of chemical exposures is not justified by what we currently know." They too note that evidence of exposure (from biomonitoring studies) is not the same as evidence of effect.

Another trade association, the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association (NPRA) also submitted written testimony according to Senator Vitter but apparently haven't posted it on their web site yet. NPRA represents "nearly 500 members, including virtually all U.S. refiners and petrochemical manufacturers." It's really not surprising that it hasn't been posted yet given all these associations are located in Washington DC, or as it has come to be known this past week, Arctic South.

The saga continues tomorrow.