Judd Gregg

Sen. Judd Gregg has a record of backing action on climate change, even though his overall environmental record gets low scores from enviros.

He voted in support of the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act in 2003 and 2005. He wasn't present for the Senate vote on the Lieberman-Warner climate bill last year, but suggested he thought it was too costly and would not have supported it.

Gregg was nominated to serve as the secretary of commerce earlier this year, but then changed his mind about taking the post, citing irreconcilable differences with the Obama administration.

He might be more willing to play ball with the Obama team on climate change. But thus far, he's been quiet on the issue.

UPDATE, 7/30/09: This post originally stated that Gregg is up for reeelection in 2010, but in fact he said in February 2009 that he will "probably not" run again. 

Track the debate and take action >>>

Do you know more about this senator's stance on climate legislation? Tell us.

Find out about other senators by clicking on their names in the right column.

Related Links:

Never-give-up fighting spirit: lessons from a grandchild

Approaching Copenhagen with a Portfolio of Domestic Commitments

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

Approaching Copenhagen with a Portfolio of Domestic Commitments

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Related Links:

Washington Times: “Obama digs in on global warming”

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

The U.S.-India climate ‘partnership’

A coalition of large green groups has pledged to support Mark Udall, Tom Udall, and Jeanne Shaheen in their campaigns to become senators in 2008. Colorado Representative Mark Udall and his cousin, New Mexico Representative Tom Udall, will run for Senate seats in their respective states; Shaheen is the former governor of New Hampshire, and will run there. All three are Democrats. The green groups, including the Sierra Club, League of Conservation Voters, and Defenders of Wildlife, feel confident about the effect that their support will have, pointing to the 2006 defeat of Sen. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) as evidence of previous decisive victory.

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

Approaching Copenhagen with a Portfolio of Domestic Commitments

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Unseasonably warm weather brought out a record number of voters in New Hampshire's primary on Tuesday -- and is it mere coincidence that the majority of them voted for candidates with real plans to tackle climate change? Well, OK, probably yes. Hillary Clinton was the victor on the Democratic side; she's got a strong platform on climate and clean energy (though her main Democratic opponents, Barack Obama and John Edwards, do too). In the GOP primary, John McCain was the winner; he's the only Republican candidate who's actually spelled out a strategy for coping with climate change, and he cosponsored a landmark bill in the Senate to address the problem (though he hasn't signed on to stronger bills that have emerged since). McCain made a deliberate appeal to New Hampshire voters who care about the environment: "I will clean up the planet," he told a crowd on Monday, deviating from his usual campaign spiel. "I will make global warming a priority." Find eco-focused candidate interviews and oodles more info about candidates' green platforms in our special election series: "How Green Is Your Candidate?"

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

Related Links:

For McCain, it’s really all about the fake snow

John McCain’s troubles are the world’s troubles

U.S. pushes for compromise in Copenhagen climate talks

Related Links:

Health care, climate, and the progressive movement

Judd Gregg (R-N.H.)

Franken win means another likely Senate vote for climate action

Related Links:

Health care, climate, and the progressive movement

Judd Gregg (R-N.H.)

Franken win means another likely Senate vote for climate action

Related Links:

BPA Babies and Cash Registers

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Toward a medically defensible energy policy

Related Links:

Republicans for Enviromental Protection push back for Graham

Calling all radicals: Unite for Kerry-Boxer

Dispassion as the world ends: The absent heart of the great climate affair

New Hampshire towns send climate-change message to feds

The votes are in, and the message is clear: New Hampshire is peeved about global warming. Nearly 90 towns approved a nonbinding resolution at their annual meetings this week telling the feds to act on climate change and harrumphing that presidential candidates should make it a priority in their campaigns. About 90 more will debate the resolution -- which also endorses the idea of a national sustainable-energy research initiative -- at upcoming town meetings this spring. Given its traditional first-in-the-nation primary status, the tiny state's fist-shaking is nothing to sneeze at. "There's no doubt that urgent action is needed to curb the pollution that's causing our climate to change," said New Hampshire Sierra Club Chair Jerry Curran. "And New Hampshire citizens are showing America the way -- just as we did in the fight against acid rain a generation ago." Of course, they also "showed America the way" by voting for Al Gore and John McCain in the 2000 primaries. We're just saying.

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

New Hampshire climate activists take advantage of election spotlight

The wee state of New Hampshire hopes to take advantage of its front-running primary election to make climate change a priority at the federal level. In March or thereabouts, at least 180 communities, constituting more than 75 percent of the state, will vote on a resolution that calls for the feds to get off their arses and support a national greenhouse-gas reduction program and sustainable-energy research. The (hopefully favorable) results will be compiled by the nonpartisan Carbon Coalition -- composed of greens, business groups, scientists, and others -- and presented to the prez, Congress, and 2008 presidential wannabes. "Given that New Hampshire is such an important primary state, candidates will take this seriously and make it part of their campaign," says optimistic signature-gathering volunteer Caroline Robinson. In 1983, a similar petition on the issue of acid rain had significant impact on the 1984 election and national acid-rain policy. Here's to (some of) history repeating itself.

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

New Hampshire latest state to reduce mercury emissions

New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch is joining the ranks of state leaders taking mercury matters into their own hands. Yesterday, Lynch signed into law a bill that will cut mercury emissions from its power plant by at least 80 percent by 2013. One power plant! New Hampshire is so cute. Most of the lakes and rivers in the state are polluted by mercury, at levels among the highest in the nation. Disgruntled enviros (is there any other kind?) pushed for legislation to reduce emissions 90 percent by 2011, pointing out that Massachusetts is mandating an 85 percent reduction, and Connecticut 90 percent, both by 2009. They're also not happy that the New Hampshire plant can bank mercury reductions over 80 percent as credits to offset sulfur dioxide emissions. Mercury, if you didn't grok the last 405,283 times we wrote about it, causes brain damage and is especially dangerous to pregnant women and children.

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

BPA Babies and Cash Registers

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

New Hampshire Senate approves stricter mercury rules than feds

At risk of getting stuck with a number of toxic mercury hotspots under the Bush administration's new mercury cap-and-trade rule, New Hampshire's Senate approved a bill yesterday to adopt rules more stringent than the feds' and to ban the state's two coal-fired power plants from trading pollution allowances with cleaner facilities. If the bill, which now goes to the state House, becomes law, power plants in the state would be required to cut mercury emissions to 50 pounds annually by 2009 and 24 pounds by 2013, down from current annual emissions of about 130 pounds. "It's a win for all of New Hampshire because it puts New Hampshire as the leader in reducing pollution from our coal-fired power plants," said Sierra Clubber Catherine Corkery. As the much-derided federal mercury rule allows states to set stricter limits and opt out of the cap-and-trade program, New Hampshire may be just the first of many to clamp down harder on the neurotoxin.

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

BPA Babies and Cash Registers

Prologue to Copenhagen

Folks who paid close attention to the speeches of New Hampshire primary victor John Kerry in recent weeks would have noticed an emphasis on MTBE -- a gasoline additive that makes fuel burn more efficiently and cleanly, but is suspected to be carcinogenic* and widely known to contaminate groundwater. To outsiders, this may have seemed like a strange environmental issue to spotlight -- why not focus on global warming, say, or species extinction?

New Hampshire wants its rivers to flow MTBE-free.

Photo: U.S. DOT.

But MTBE is an issue with considerable political resonance -- not only inside the Beltway, where it was the major sticking point that stymied passage of Bush's energy bill last year, but also in New Hampshire, a state that has been disproportionately hit with MTBE contamination in its drinking water, lakes, and rivers.

New Hampshire considers its contamination problem so bad, in fact, that in October, the state sued 22 MTBE producers, claiming that the fuel they sold was a "defective product" that has spoiled state waters. The state demanded that the companies reimburse it for the millions of dollars shelled out to investigate and crack down on MTBE pollution.

Kerry has encouraged the state's efforts: During a recent stop in Salem, N.H., a town struggling with MTBE contamination, Kerry elicited hearty applause when he declared, "As president, I will stand up for the principle of polluter pays and I will stand with states like New Hampshire who are seeking reimbursement for the environmental damage caused by powerful corporations. And in a Kerry administration, we will ban MTBE -- for good -- and for the good of America's families!"

But Kerry wasn't the only one who jumped on the issue. Last week, in the lead-up to the New Hampshire presidential primaries, Bush's EPA lobbed a cherry bomb into the MTBE debate, promising to accept a preliminary version of New Hampshire's request to be exempted from a federal program under the Clean Air Act that requires gasoline to contain fuel additives that make it burn more cleanly. MTBE is the primary or sole additive used in New Hampshire and a number of other states.

Bush critics viewed the move as an effort to neutralize one of the Democrats' issues in the primary campaign, and sensed other motives as well. "This is one of the most blatantly political decisions I have ever seen from the EPA for a number of reasons," said Frank O'Donnell, executive director of Clean Air Trust, "not the least of which is that the EPA rejected a similar request made in 1999 by then-Gov. Gray Davis [D] in the state of California for a waiver from the [fuel-additive] requirement."

The EPA says that California failed to come up with a viable alternative plan to offset the air pollution that MTBE prevents. But the pollution-offset program proposed by New Hampshire seems half-baked at best, according to O'Donnell. "Their plan seems to be very vague ... a bizarre solution" that calls for emission reductions from consumer products such as paint and hair spray to make up for increased emissions from autos, he said.

Enviros also argued that the EPA decision would do little to alleviate New Hampshire's MTBE-related problems. Very few gasoline suppliers are making non-MTBE fuel blends that could be easily piped to New Hampshire, according to Kent Finemore of the air resources division of New Hampshire's Department of Environmental Services. And there aren't likely to be many suppliers willing to make a special gasoline blend exclusively for New Hampshire's small market. "Frankly, this EPA decision is probably not going to improve our [MTBE] predicament that much because it won't change what we get in terms of gasoline," said Finemore.

Nor is the decision going to convince New Hampshire to drop its lawsuits and let MTBE-producing companies off the hook. New Hampshire Gov. Craig Benson's (R) office issued a statement saying that he was pleased with the EPA's decision, but the state is still expected to aggressively pursue its lawsuits against MTBE-makers.

So what will the EPA's move achieve if not cleaner waters in New Hampshire or indemnity for the oil companies? It may give just the needed boost to Bush's notorious energy bill, which stalled out in Congress late last year but which the administration will again be aggressively pushing in the coming weeks. Here's why: New Hampshire Sens. Judd Gregg and John Sununu, both Republicans, have been staunch opponents of the energy bill -- largely because of vehement concerns about MTBE in their home state. The rumor on Capitol Hill is that Gregg and Sununu made a deal with Republican leaders that they would not filibuster the energy bill if the EPA granted the state's request for a fuel-additive exemption.

Three weeks ago, more than a dozen top-level Bush appointees and Republican members of Congress convened in Phoenix, Ariz., with energy, mining, and manufacturing executives for a "Mulligans and Margaritas" political fundraiser, immediately followed by a conference where paying attendees were invited to help the politicians pin down their policy priorities for 2004. The canoodling was organized by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Western Business Roundtable, both powerful industry groups. Honored guests included Deputy Interior Secretary Steven Griles, EPA Assistant Administrator for Air Jeffrey Holmstead, and Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.), chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

For Pete's sake.

Photo: U.S. Senate.

The invitation to the event opened with the question, "Want to help Congress write its 'To-Do' list for next year??" and went on to advertise a gathering "at the historic and luxurious Arizona Biltmore Resort ... [where] you'll get to participate in a work session with members of Congress in developing a 'Top Ten To-Do List' for Congress." The Western Business Roundtable also sent out a survey to its constituents to get a more authoritative picture of their top 10 political concerns; in the end, more than 300 business leaders participated.

On Tuesday this week, the results were released: While a mere 9 percent of top business leaders from across the West judged the fight against international terrorism to be the No. 1 concern, more than twice that number -- 20 percent -- said that Congress's top priority for 2004 should be passing Bush's energy bill. Coming in at a close second was reforming the Endangered Species Act. Other top picks included reforming the National Environmental Policy Act, expanding access to public lands, and reforming the Clean Air Act.

"These results should come as no surprise to anyone who lives and works in the West, as these are crucial issues that touch virtually every citizen on a daily basis," said Jim Sims, executive director of the Western Business Roundtable. "Clearly, some of these represent very significant challenges for the Congress and will take several years to complete. But the West is increasingly getting organized to press its case in the Congress. I am optimistic that the Congress will make progress this year on a number of these fronts."

Sims was particularly vehement about the need to alter the Endangered Species Act, which he said "is flat-out broken -- it doesn't work. ... Environmentalists are not interested in using this legislation to recover the species [already listed as endangered] -- they just want to add more to the list to throw more and more obstacles in the way of economic progress. Why can't they just focus on the species already on the list?" Sims had similar thoughts on NEPA, which he characterized as another environmental "hammer to smash progress -- any kind of progress!" Progress, in his mind, correlates pretty closely to increased oil, gas, and coal extraction: "People in the West realize that this region is in [economic] trouble without more aggressive plans for energy development -- that's a no-brainer."

Sims adamantly denied that the Jan. 7 political fundraiser in Phoenix was in any way related to the subsequent conference where business chieftains drew up marching orders for Congress -- even though both events were sponsored by the same groups and hosted at the same resort.

"But I make no apologies for helping our members influence political candidates on Western issues!" he said. "That is the definition of the democratic system in the first place -- people need to stand up for their own interests. In fact, more people need to engage in this kind of political process." That is, if they've got a seersucker suit for the golf course and a spare $1,500 for Republicans' congressional campaigns.

U.S. EPA chief Mike Leavitt tried to put a happy face on the Bush administration's environmental agenda this week when he joined auto-industry kingpins at a glitzy media event in D.C. on Monday to celebrate a new generation of cleaner cars and fuels.

But, true to form, this past week has also seen the administration push out a steady stream of what environmentalists like to call "rollbacks" -- and Bush acolytes like to call "common-sense reforms":

*[Correction, 30 Jan 2004: This article originally referred to MTBE as a carcinogen. It is more accurate to say that it is suspected of having cancer-causing properties.]

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Capturing the massive social benefits of fuel efficiency requires regulation

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

League of Conservation Voters Endorses Kerry

The League of Conservation Voters has officially endorsed John Kerry for president, marking the first time in the organization's history that it has backed a candidate prior to the first primaries. Kerry, four-term Democratic senator from Massachusetts, has the best environmental voting record of the Democratic candidates, with an LCV score of 96 percent (Lieberman, whose supporters are reportedly frustrated with the decision, comes in second at 93 percent). LCV's board of directors has made unseating Bush a priority, and expressed hope that their early endorsement would raise the profile of environmental issues in the coming race. Kerry seems amenable to their plans: "I intend to put the environment front and center in this race because it is squarely in the center of our lives," he said at an LCV event in New Hampshire.

Related Links:

WWLD: What Would Lincoln Do?

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

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, champion of the environment and clean energy, dies at 77

Kerry Proposes Commission to Protect Integrity of Environmental Regulation

John Kerry, the Massachusetts senator who has slipped substantially in the ranks of Democratic presidential contenders, sought to reinvigorate his campaign yesterday by returning to one of his keystone issues: environmental protection. Speaking in New Hampshire, Kerry proposed creating a new federal commission to prevent political and corporate interests from influencing environmental regulation. Kerry's speech came shortly after the U.S. EPA dropped investigations into polluting power plants around the nation, a move that was widely seen as yet another giveaway to industry. It also came just after a major turning point in Kerry's bid for the Democratic nomination: On Sunday, he fired his campaign manager, causing two other senior advisors to quit in protest.

Related Links:

Capturing the massive social benefits of fuel efficiency requires regulation

Time to Speak Out Against the Biggest Polluters

Why won’t Lisa Jackson/Nancy Sutley visit a mountaintop removal site?

New Hampshire Sues 22 Oil Companies Over MTBE Pollution

In a first-of-its-kind move by a state, New Hampshire filed suit against 22 oil companies yesterday, blaming them for contaminating drinking water with the fuel additive MTBE. The companies added the chemical to their gasoline to make it burn more cleanly, but it has leached into more than 15 percent of public water supplies and an estimated 40,000 private wells in the state. Other communities around the country have also uncovered MTBE contamination in their drinking water. "These companies knew of the dangers that adding MTBE to gasoline posed to the water resources," said New Hampshire Attorney General Peter Heed. "They, and not the state or its citizens, should pay the bill to fully address this unprecedented environmental problem." But if Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and other powerful Republicans have their way, the big energy bill now being hammered out in Congress will include a provision that protects oil companies from MTBE-contamination lawsuits.

Related Links:

BPA Babies and Cash Registers

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Toward a medically defensible energy policy

Communities across New Hampshire are invoking the state's Land and Community Heritage Investment Act to preserve open spaces, even though state funding for land conservation and historic preservation faces extreme pressure from a ballooning budget crisis. Under the terms of the act, New Hampshire matches local conservation funding efforts with state money -- an offer more than 100 communities have whole-heartedly supported at town meetings during this month alone. This surge of support for local conservation measures has given rise to hopes that the state will maintain its current funding level of $6 million per year for land-protection efforts. "We're hoping that the voice of New Hampshire citizens expressed at town meeting will be heard by the governor and the legislature as they work on what is admittedly a very tough budget," said Chris Wells of the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests.

Related Links:

Judd Gregg (R-N.H.)

Grist talks to New Hampshire Senate candidate Jeanne Shaheen

Talking with voters in Nashua about the environment and the election

The head of the U.S. EPA's New England office has accused New Hampshire of failing to prepare for the environmental impact of the rapid population boom that is expected to follow the widening of Interstate 93, the main commuter highway connecting the state to Boston, Mass. New Hampshire plans to spend $18 million to ease the environmental impacts of the highway project, but Robert Varney said that's far too little to address a likely population boom in more than 20 New Hampshire communities that would tax existing services and threaten open spaces, drinking water supplies, and wildlife. Varney called for a total of $52 million to be allocated to environmental protections and he threatened delays in the highway project if the environmental concerns weren't adequately addressed. The state is counting on federal highway dollars to cover some 80 percent of the cost of the $350 million project -- meaning the EPA has significant say in the highway's future.

Related Links:

Capturing the massive social benefits of fuel efficiency requires regulation

Water, conflict, and security on the banks of the Hudson

Tackling population rise would fight climate change