<![CDATA[Grist Feed: John Dingell]]> http://www.grist.org/ Articles about John Dingell from your friends at Grist en-us webmaster@grist.org (Grist) Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:26:45 PDT Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:26:45 PDT 2009, Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss <![CDATA[Henry Waxman’s decade-long fight to improve the Clean Air Act]]> http://www.grist.org/article/2009-07-29-henry-waxmans-decade-long-fight-to-improve-the-clean-air-act/ Wed, 29 Jul 2009 09:46:07 -0700 David Roberts http://www.grist.org/article/2009-07-29-henry-waxmans-decade-long-fight-to-improve-the-clean-air-act/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) is the chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee and coauthor of the ACES bill passed by the House in June. Naturally, political observers are curious about his thoughts on the fight to pass climate/energy legislation this year, but in media interviews he tends to be careful, measured, and fairly abstract. He doesn't do his work in public.

It turns out, however, that Waxman has offered a fairly clear guide to his thinking, and even told us where to find it: it's in chapter five of his new book, The Waxman Report: How Congress Really Works. (The book is coauthored with writer Josh Green, who wrote a stellar piece on clean energy last month for The Atlantic.)

A brief aside about the book: it's fantastic, less the primer promised by the title than a series of first-person yarns containing startling measures of suspense, drama, and pathos. It sounds strange to say about a book mostly composed of congressional investigations and hearings, but it's a real page-turner. And there are victories. No matter your skepticism about government, you will be inspired.

The point of this post isn't to review the book, though. For that see the The Washington Post and the L.A. Times. This is about chapter five, the battle(s) over the Clean Air Act.

Defense

The CAA was originally passed in 1970 and strengthened in 1977, but when Reagan rolled into D.C. in 1980, killing it was one of his top priorities. He had enormous popularity among the public, universal backing from industry, broad support in Congress, and a willing co-conspirator in Energy and Commerce chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.), who then as now represented the auto industry. It was grim.

Waxman, who chaired the environment subcommittee, launched what was effectively a guerilla campaign. To begin with, he used every procedural trick and delay in the book, trying to slow the juggernaut. When the bill went before the full committee, Waxman offered amendment after amendment seeking fissures in the opposing coalition. As Waxman says, "our strategy was to muster all our strength to deny one industry its favors, and in doing so, set off a chain reaction -- if one industry pulled out, others might waver, too, eventually turning the coalition members against one another." And that's what happened. The crucial turning point was a toxic air amendment that effectively soured the deal for the chemical industry. It passed by one, shaky, uncertain vote. With that, Reagan's overwhelmingly favored effort to gut the CAA died.

(Suffice to say, this chapter is illuminating on the subject of why Dingell and Waxman can't stand each other, and why Waxman felt the need to effectively pull a coup on the committee last year.)

Offense

For the rest of the decade, Waxman methodically built a coalition to strengthen the CAA and address, among other problems, acid rain. Many behind-closed-doors meetings with Midwest Democrats ensued, along with field hearings highlighting the economic benefits of the policy. His effort was defeated in 1983, and again in 1984. Later in 1984 came the devastating explosion at the Bhopal pesticide plant in India, which captured public attention; Waxman jumped on the opportunity to hold a field hearing at a similar plant making similar chemicals (and with similarly few safeguards) in the U.S.

In 1985, yet another ambitious attempt ended up stripped almost bare, leaving only the Toxic Release Inventory, which merely required polluters to disclose their emissions. As it happens, TRI galvanized the debate in a way no one expected. When members of the public found out exactly how much pollution they were breathing, and where it came from, and how their cities compared to other cities, their appetite for pollution control increased markedly.

What Waxman calls the "turning point" was a somewhat obscure amendment fight in 1987, over compliance deadlines. The day before the vote, Dingell and Rep. John Murtha (D-Penn.) publicly predicted an easy defeat of the Waxman/Conte amendment. The following day it passed with a 95 vote margin, an unexpected, resounding win for the growing coalition behind clean air.

By 1989, with Bush I (the self-styled "environmental president") in office and Sen. George Mitchell (D-Maine) replacing Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) as Senate majority leader, new regulations seemed inevitable; industry was divided and infighting, scrabbling for deals. Waxman and his allies went straight after Dingell, pushing tougher tailpipe standards, figuring if they got that Dingell would roll on other industries. The two key votes turned out to be Republican Tom Tauke (Iowa), who got some protection for tractors, and conservative Dem Ralph Hall (Texas), who got sheer, cussed persuasion.

Victory

Dingell cracked and made a deal. The unexpected alliance of Waxman and Dingell led to more deals, momentum, some marathon negotiations over acid rain, and ultimately a bill through the House.

What happened next is interesting indeed:

The Bush administration made a key strategic miscalculation that wound up strengthening the law considerably in the final stages of negotiation. Bush officials played an active role in negotiating the Senate bill, but not its House counterpart. Assuming that a weaker bill would emerge from the House, White House negotiators had insisted that the Senate agreement bind the subsequent House-Senate conference, as Dingell and I had agreed to do. By freeing senators to vote as they wished, the administration expected that they would combine the weakest elements of both bills in to the final legislation. Instead, with an election looming, they supported the strongest provisions in both bills, producing a law that was much better than either the House or Senate drafts had been.

Thus: the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990. Here's what happened next:

Five years after its passage, more than half the U.S. cities that exceeded urban smog standards had come into compliance. Production of ozone-depleting chemicals had dropped by more than 90 percent. Power plant emissions that cause acid rain fell to half their 1980 levels, and at a fraction of the cost industry had predicted. ... When fully implemented, the law will prevent tens of thousands of premature deaths, tens of thousands of hospital admissions for respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses, and millions of lost workdays each year.

That strikes me as well worth a decade of fighting.

What can we learn from this tale that's germane to the fight over climate legislation? I'll address that in a future post, but please, share your own interpretations in comments.




Related Links:

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

John McCain’s troubles are the world’s troubles

George Voinovich (R-Ohio) [UPDATED]

]]> <![CDATA[Caption needed! UPDATE: Caption found]]> http://www.grist.org/article/2009-05-22-caption-contest-waxman/ Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:14:36 -0700 Grist http://www.grist.org/article/2009-05-22-caption-contest-waxman/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.

Photo: AP
We couldn’t let this photo of U.S. Reps Henry Waxman, John Dingell, and Ed Markey go unremarked (unreMarkeyed?)—so, caption ideas needed!  Submit them below in comments. Funniest idea gets a priceless Virtual High Five.

UPDATE:  The winner of the Virtual High Five is ... hapa!

(With apologies to Eminem.)

Y’all act like you never seen a white person before
Jaws all on the floor like Lee Raymond just broke in the door
And started whoopin’ your ass worse than before
“This is just for the gas, pay me later for the war” (Ahh!)
It’s the revenge of the… “Ah, wait, no way, you’re kidding,
He didn’t just say what I think he did, did he?”
And Al Gore said… nothing you idiots!
Al Gore’s dead, he’s locked in my basement! (Ha-ha!)
Green young women love green young men
(chigga chigga chigga) “Hank Waxman, I’m sick of him
Look at him, walkin’ around grabbin’ his climate package
Oglin’ congressional pages, “Yeah, but he’s astute though!”
Yeah, I probably got a couple of screws up in my head loose
But no worse, than what’s goin’ on in your bankers’ HQ
Sometimes I wanna get on TV and just let loose, but can’t
But it’s cool for lumps of coal to sing Christmas carols
Our bill is on ya lap, our names is on ya lips
And if we be lucky, you might just tell it like it is
In between the eye-scratching and flinging cups of piss
No big mystery people don’t know what “cap-and-trade” is
But they do know about the warming and the oil biz
By the time they hit fourth grade
They got the Discovery Channel don’t they?
“Humans are the meanest mammals…” Well, some of us cannibals
Who cut other people open like cantaloupes {*SLURP*}
But if all we do is cry over endangered antelopes
We’ll be just another paragraph in the history of dead dopes
But if you feel like I feel, I got the antidote
Women wave ya pantyhose, sing the chorus and it goes

I’m Hank Waxman, and he’s Ed Markey
All you other wax Markeys are just imitating
So won’t the real green MC please stand up,
Please stand up, please stand up?




































Related Links:

WWLD: What Would Lincoln Do?

Obama energy speech contained few policy specifics, but shaped forward-looking narrative

More anti-climate-bill letters forged under names of senior-citizen groups

]]> <![CDATA[Dingell joins Republicans in calling cap-and-trade an ‘energy tax’]]> http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-28-dingell-cap-and-trade-tax/ Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:32:21 -0700 Kate Sheppard http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-28-dingell-cap-and-trade-tax/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.

It's not just Republicans who are calling a cap-and-trade program a tax. "Nobody in this country realizes that cap-and-trade is a tax, and a great big one," Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) said at last Friday's hearing with Al Gore on the House climate bill.

Dingell, who until last November chaired the Energy and Commerce Committee, asked Gore whether a cap-and-trade plan or an energy tax would be preferable as a means of addressing climate change. "Every economist says that a carbon tax is a better, more efficient, fairer way of doing it," Dingell said, noting that Europeans have failed in efforts to successfully implement a cap-and-trade program. Gore answered that he favors using both systems.

Dingell has in the past put forward draft legislation calling for both a carbon tax and a cap-and-trade program.

Here's video of his remarks last week, via Wonk Room:




Related Links:

What to make of the new climate poll

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

John McCain’s troubles are the world’s troubles

]]> <![CDATA[House Dems say they’re coming together around climate and energy legislation]]> http://www.grist.org/article/2009-03-30-house-dems-say-theyre-coming/ Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:09:24 -0700 Kate Sheppard http://www.grist.org/article/2009-03-30-house-dems-say-theyre-coming/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.

A group of key House Democratic leaders sent a letter to President Obama on Friday signaling that they intend to work together on climate and energy legislation despite the different views and constituencies they represent.

Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and John Dingell (D-Mich.), the former chair whom Waxman unseated last November, both signed the letter, as did Reps. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Rick Boucher (D-Va.), who chair two of the panel's subcommittees. Dingell and Boucher have long been allied in seeking to protect manufacturing and coal interests, while Waxman and Markey have favored more aggressive environmental measures.

"We represent different regions of the country and approach energy issues from different perspectives, but we are united in the view that now is the time for Congress to pass comprehensive energy and climate legislation," the four lawmakers wrote. "And we are working together to meet that goal."

Waxman and Markey are expected to unveil their climate and energy bill on Tuesday.

Here's the full letter to Obama:

Dear Mr. President:

We represent different regions of the country and approach energy issues from different perspectives, but we are united in the view that now is the time for Congress to pass comprehensive energy and climate legislation. And we are working together to meet that goal.

Three imperatives -- our energy, environment, and economic needs -- drive our commitment to action. The energy imperative we face is to diversify the nation's energy supplies and reduce our foreign dependence, especially on oil from the Middle East, which imperils our national security. The environmental imperative is to protect the planet from global warming. As scientists learn about the dangers of "tipping points" in the global ecosystem and their potentially disastrous consequences, the need for decisive efforts grows increasingly urgent.

And the economic imperative is to provide an engine to drive the nation out of the recession. The economic recovery package is an important step because it invests billions of dollars in clean energy technologies. But government can't force a transition to a clean economy by itself. At most, it can serve as a catalyst for investment by the private sector.

Unfortunately, the private sector is frozen because of uncertainty. Our power companies are caught in a dilemma: they are reluctant to invest in old polluting technologies because they know that tougher regulations are inevitable, but they can't invest in new, cleaner technologies until they know what Congress is going to require. Automobile manufacturers and oil companies are delivering the same message: tell us what the ground rules will be so we can plan sensible investments.

While there are many details to be resolved, the contours for building a political consensus are evident. In January, a coalition of electric utilities, manufacturers, energy companies, and car makers joined with environmental groups in the U.S. Climate Action Partnership to recommend a market-based solution that builds on the approach used successfully in the Clean Air Act to reduce acid rain. Their proposal establishes a ceiling on global warming pollution that declines gradually over time, providing environmental and economic certainty while giving industry flexibility to implement the lowest-cost pollution control measures.

An essential part of the legislation will be building a bridge to our clean energy future. We will need to make investments in new clean energy technologies, find ways to spur the development of carbon capture and sequestration, prevent the dislocation of industrial sectors including those vulnerable to trade, mitigate the effects on consumers, and assure that the costs of the program are economically sustainable. These objectives can be achieved if we are smart about overall program design and the allocation of tradable emission allowances.

Energy and environment issues have a unique regional component. Solutions that make sense in Southern California can impose large costs in Southwest Virginia. We can overcome these geographic differences, but using the budget reconciliation process, which curtails Senate filibuster rights, could arouse regional distrust and make reaching agreement harder. Hearings, markups, and regular order are the best way to forge the compromises that will unite members from all parts of the country. As we work to achieve this consensus, we hope Republican members of our committee and of the full House will join the process too, so that truly bipartisan answers can be developed.

We believe comprehensive energy legislation is both economically and politically achievable. The costs of significant reductions in carbon emissions have been estimated to be in the range of $40 to $80 billion per year over the next ten years. Twenty years ago, when we were debating the Clean Air Act, compliance costs were projected by industry to be over $100 billion per year. Yet Congress succeeded in crafting strong clean air legislation that passed the House 401 to 25.

The Clean Air Act experience shows that Congress, through the committee process and regular order, can successfully resolve seemingly intractable environmental problems. When Congress debated capping the sulphur dioxide emissions from power plants that cause acid rain, we were told achieving reductions in these emissions would cost up to $1,500 per ton. In fact, the market-based mechanisms we enacted cut emissions in half at a cost of less than $250 per ton. We are determined to find similar solutions to our energy and climate challenges and enact an economically responsible emissions reduction law.

Our districts could hardly be more different: one is rural, coal producing with a predominance of basic industry; one is urban, affluent, and a growing market for solar and wind energy; one is suburban, with a mix of working families and high tech energy innovators; and one is suburban, middle-class with a large manufacturing workforce and many union members. But our districts -- and the entire nation -- urgently need comprehensive energy legislation that provides a pathway to private sector energy investments, energy independence, and a safe climate.

As we proceed, we look forward to working closely with you, senior Administration officials, and our colleagues in the House and the Senate to build broad support for this effort. We thank you for your leadership in addressing these challenges.

Sincerely,

Henry A. Waxman
Chairman

John Dingell
Chairman Emeritus

Edward J. Markey
Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Environment

Rick Boucher
Chairman, Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet






































Related Links:

Climate Denial Crock of the Week: The big mist take

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

]]> <![CDATA[Waxman talks to NYT Magazine about unseating Dingell]]> http://www.grist.org/article/Mustache-of-Justice/ Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:57:58 -0800 Kate Sheppard http://www.grist.org/article/Mustache-of-Justice/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Climate Denial Crock of the Week: The big mist take

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Clean energy opportunities

]]> <![CDATA[Who’s to blame for the crisis in the auto industry?]]> http://www.grist.org/article/car-crash/ Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:50:01 -0800 Grist http://www.grist.org/article/car-crash/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Capturing the massive social benefits of fuel efficiency requires regulation

General Motors to start repaying government loans

Maryland county draws a “car-free blueprint for growth”

]]> <![CDATA[Dingell’s fatal blunder—refusal to compromise]]> http://www.grist.org/article/pride-goeth/ Mon, 24 Nov 2008 03:41:07 -0800 Joseph Romm http://www.grist.org/article/pride-goeth/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

The Clean Air Act story: back to the beginning

Do the Clean Air Act battles contain lessons for the fight over climate legislation?

Henry Waxman’s decade-long fight to improve the Clean Air Act

]]> <![CDATA[Waxman’s win signals shift in Congress on climate and energy policy]]> http://www.grist.org/article/dingell-buried/ Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:00:24 -0800 Kate Sheppard http://www.grist.org/article/dingell-buried/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

]]> <![CDATA[Waxman to lead House panel that will shape any climate legislation]]> http://www.grist.org/article/dingell-waxed/ Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:26:12 -0800 Grist http://www.grist.org/article/dingell-waxed/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

]]> <![CDATA[Panel recommends Waxman over Dingell for energy committee]]> http://www.grist.org/article/a-bad-sign-for-dingell/ Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:57:12 -0800 Kate Sheppard http://www.grist.org/article/a-bad-sign-for-dingell/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Inhofe to Boxer: “We Won, You Lost, Now Get a Life!”

Merkley wants Senate jobs bill to help finance building efficiency retrofits

Reflecting on the lameness of my profession

]]> <![CDATA[More Dingell-Waxman drama]]> http://www.grist.org/article/more-dingell-waxman-drama/ Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:23:30 -0800 Kate Sheppard http://www.grist.org/article/more-dingell-waxman-drama/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

]]> <![CDATA[Dingell implores colleagues to side with him on climate bill]]> http://www.grist.org/article/the-whole-ball-of-waxman/ Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:54:08 -0800 Kate Sheppard http://www.grist.org/article/the-whole-ball-of-waxman/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

]]> <![CDATA[Q: Does Dingell-Boucher have meaningful auctioning of CO2 permits before 2026?]]> http://www.grist.org/article/dingell-boucher-qa/ Mon, 17 Nov 2008 01:50:57 -0800 Joseph Romm http://www.grist.org/article/dingell-boucher-qa/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Ask Umbra on buying carbon offsets

If REDD can’t save this….

Climate-news poem: Tck, tck, tck edition

]]> <![CDATA[Rep. Dingell’s supporters upset House Speaker]]> http://www.grist.org/article/more-energy-and-commerce-drama/ Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:36:41 -0800 Kate Sheppard http://www.grist.org/article/more-energy-and-commerce-drama/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

]]> <![CDATA[More on the battle with Henry Waxman over the House Energy and Commerce committee]]> http://www.grist.org/article/dingell-damage-control/ Fri, 14 Nov 2008 10:55:31 -0800 Frank O'Donnell http://www.grist.org/article/dingell-damage-control/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

George Voinovich (R-Ohio) [UPDATED]

Al Franken (D-Minn.)

]]> <![CDATA[Is defending an industry against modernity really good for it?]]> http://www.grist.org/article/notable-quotable72/ Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:00:28 -0800 David Roberts http://www.grist.org/article/notable-quotable72/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Cash-for-Clunkers returns from the dead ... until Labor Day

Henry Waxman’s decade-long fight to improve the Clean Air Act

Screwing up environment not so great for economy, studies find

]]> <![CDATA[House Dems taking sides in Dingell/Waxman battle over]]> http://www.grist.org/article/dingell-jangle/ Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:36:18 -0800 Kate Sheppard http://www.grist.org/article/dingell-jangle/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Henry Waxman’s decade-long fight to improve the Clean Air Act

The new Senate global warming deniers

Are the South and the Midwest splitting on energy?

]]> <![CDATA[Why polluter lobbyists are rallying to protect ‘Tailpipe Johnny’]]> http://www.grist.org/article/waxman-v-dingell/ Mon, 10 Nov 2008 14:14:22 -0800 Frank O'Donnell http://www.grist.org/article/waxman-v-dingell/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

The U.S.-India climate ‘partnership’

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

]]> <![CDATA[House Dems already talking about major leadership changes]]> http://www.grist.org/article/waxman-targets-dingell/ Wed, 05 Nov 2008 10:23:02 -0800 Kate Sheppard http://www.grist.org/article/waxman-targets-dingell/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.




Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

]]> <![CDATA[EPA overstates pollution enforcement, says GAO]]> http://www.grist.org/article/pollution11/ Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:11:00 -0700 Grist http://www.grist.org/article/pollution11/ Reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news, humor, and inspiration, visit www.grist.org.

It's no secret that the Bush administration has slashed fines for polluters: The U.S. EPA issued $137.7 million in penalties in 2007, down from $240.6 million in 1998. But even that level of enforcement is overstated, says a new report from the Government Accountability Office. The EPA publicly reports the penalties it slaps on egregious earth-effers, but doesn't report which fines actually get paid up -- which really calls the effectiveness of the whole process into question, says the GAO. House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair John Dingell (D-Mich.), who requested the investigation, would like to take a moment to state the obvious: "The bottom line is that environmental enforcement has significantly declined since the Bush administration took office."




Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

]]>