All right, now that we know we're working with on Capitol Hill more or less, what does that mean for environmental policy over the next two years and what does that mean for the rest of this year? On this episode, we talk about Congress, Energy, the environment, and of course Joe Mansion. Hello, and welcome back once again to Parts per Billion, the environmental podcast from Bloomberg Law. I'm your host, David Schultz. So today's episode is brought to you by
the number one eighteen. As in, the Congress is about to begin at the beginning of next year, and after this month's midterm elections, we now have a pretty good idea of who's going to be serving in it. Democrats will retain control of the Senate with either the same majority they have now or maybe one extra seat to make a Republicans Meanwhile, we'll take over control of the House, but with a razor thin majority that maybe in the
single digits. To go over what all this will mean for energy environmental policy, we'll be hearing from Kelly Lunney, Bloomberg Government energy reporter who prowsed the halls of the House and Senate for us. In a bit you'll get into why the Democratic senator from West Virginia will be as powerful as ever in Congress. But first I asked her to tell me how the waning hours of the
v will go. Yes, we've got the National Defense Authorization Act, which is a very very important piece of legislation that typically is bipartisan. Get it's one of the few things that Congress can agree on needs to get done every year. Um and it often carries a lot of other things in it, but it sets defense policy and it also authorizes defense appropriations, which is obviously very important for funding
the military, pay raises for military members, etcetera. Yeah, there aren't a lot of lawmakers who want to be seen as you know, blocking a military funding bill, correct, And they do try to keep you know, like a lot of must pass legislation. Things get included in it that you know, aren't necessarily what everybody would like. But it's a little bit different from the Omnibus in this sense that they really do try to keep it focused on
defense related UM and defense for adjacent issues UM. And it doesn't typically become the Christmas tree type of vehicle that that the Omnibus, the year end spending bill does. Well, let's get into that Christmas Tree, and you're talking about the you know, the annual or it's supposed to be
annual funding bill that pays for the rest of the government. Um, it sounds like there could be some significant environmental or energy writers that get attached to that or will there be well, you know, I think you know, Congress always waits till the last minute to do this bill for many reasons. I think, um partly because the closer we get to the holidays, the more incentive people have to actually get something done so they can all leave and
go home. As far as this year, you know, they'll they'll certainly looked to to try to fund all of the appropriations bills, including Interior Environment and the Energy and Water Bill, which is to the two bills that have the bulk of funding for energy and environment programs. So those will be in there at the levels that they've
agreed to. They'll probably end up really going with the House versions just because of the Senate has not gotten as far um with their spending bills as the House has, and that's kind of been the case for the last couple of years. I want to specifically get into one item that did not get swept up into the Inflation Reduction Act from earlier this year, and that was permitting reform, which was a pet project of Senator Joe Manchin. You know, he wasn't able to get that across the finish line.
Do you think he will be able to get that in the lame duck session. I think it's going to be a very, very difficult for him to do that because he has often said he wants to perform the federal permitting process. The permitting process by which energy projects are done, it is fairly bureaucratic, it can take a really long time. Sometimes things are you know, in litigation forever, and it can affect reasonable projects. And that's fossil fuel projects,
that's renewable energy projects, that's infrastructure projects. It can be it can be difficult, But there's also a reason why we have these things in place so that um environmental reviews are done and people are able to have input into what these projects look like and ensure that they don't harm you know, communities, particularly communities of color, who are already overburdened with pollution, that they don't negatively affect habitat,
wildlife things like that. So there's a reason why we have this, but I think both you know, Democrats and Republicans to some degree agree that there needs to be some overhauling of how it works currently. Centator Mansion was interested in doing it because there is a big project in his state called the Mountain Valley Pipeline that has been on the books for almost ten years now. It's
been delayed numerous times because of this permitting process. There's been environmental reviews, there's been litigation, and he really wants to get it done because he believes that it will help lower energy prices. Um it's a natural gas pipeline that was really his his impetus for trying to do this now, and he has leverage because he's Joe Manchon,
he's the crucial fiftie vote in the Senate. Well, you know, it's it's actually interesting because I would have thought that he would have lost his leverage because the Inflation Reduction Actor already passed. Democrats and the Biden administration got most of what they wanted, But actually your story recently on this show, No, he still has a ton of leverage because, as we now know, Democrats retained the Senate, which means Joe Manchon is still going to be the chairman of
the Energy Committee, which is a very powerful position. Yeah, he still has a lot of leverage, He still has a lot of influence because of that position. He also, you know, extracted commitments from Senator Schumer, who has indicated every time he's been asked about it that he intends to honor that and to try to get federal permitting reform um that Mansion supports across the board. The White House has indicated support for it too. So there, there's
he still got that to count on. The other thing that could help him, maybe not this year, but perhaps next year, is that with you know, Republicans taking charge of the House, you know he could work with them
on federal permitting. Now, it's going to look a lot different than what he than what he proposed originally, and he's still going to have a hard time attracting support from both sides of the aisle, but Republicans have and some some Republican members that I have talked to who have jurisdiction over an interest in federal permitting have expressed a willingness to work with him on this. Something could happen.
There are other Democrats to not necessarily in the progressive wing, but other Democrats who would really like to see some kind of overhaul to the permitting process. Yeah, it blocks projects in red states and blue states. Correct, So there is some some um. There are some Democrats that I want to have this conversation, want to get something done. I think as far as the Lame Duck is concerned,
it's we don't have much time at all left. People I have talked to on the Hill don't have much UM appetite for putting something like this in the n d A because they don't want to derail the NDA, which again is a very important piece of legislation. So I think it could crop up again. You know, we could have um, some flurry of activity where maybe maybe it gets dropped into this or that. But I think we're just the clock is running out, and um, you know,
we'll see what happens next year. I don't think it's it's dead, but I don't think it's gonna go anywhere this year. Staying with um mansion and staying with the end of here, let's talk about nominations, and specifically I want to talk about one nomination in particular, Richard Glick, who the Biden Administration nominated to serve on FIRK, which is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Senator Mansion has said he does not want to hold a hearing on this domination.
Hasn't given a lot of reasons why. But uh, it seems like now that Mansion is going to continue on as the chairman of this committee, is this nomination toast Like, is he going to have to you know, withdraw the nomination pretty much? Yeah? Wow, Okay, I think it might be a rap for Richard Glick um because you know, he's getting to the end of the year. He's not going to get a hearing this year. Biden could obviously renominate him next year and the process kind of starts
over again. But that doesn't mean that Mansion is going to change his mind um, and he's still in charge of the committee that has to advance the nomination to the floor. So I think that glick is probably getting caught up in the larger politics around and energy. Yeah. I was gonna ask, do we have a sense of why Mansion opposed opposes him. I've heard a few things, and my my colleague Daniel Moore at Bloomberg Law has done some excellent reporting on this topic. A few weeks ago,
Biden gave a speech. He talked about energy, and there was some comments that he made essentially saying, we're gonna shut down you know, coal plants. We're gonna you know, it was it was a bit toned off and it's not the kind of thing that Joe Manson likes to hear. It made him angry, and Mansion, you know, shot off statement after those remarks, basically saying that they were you know, that was a terrible thing to say and it's not true in etcetera, etcetera. So you know, Biden kind of
needlessly angered Mansion over that. And this is also around the time where reporters have been asking, Okay, when are you going to have the Glick nomination? Hearing you know, his time is running out, and I think so, I think Glick got caught up in the sort of crossfire. But you know, and Glick is a former Energy Natural Resources staffer, He's worked on that committee. He knows Mansion.
Mansion knows him. Um And as I mentioned earlier, you know, my colleague Daniel More wrote a story I believe yesterday that mentioned this issue, and he had talked to Glick yesterday at the Firk meeting, and Glick said that Mansion called him and and you know, talked to him about it before he said that he wasn't going to do the hearing. You know, I think it's pretty clear that Mansion is navigating a very tricky path on these issues,
on energy and environment issues. Um, given the state he's from. Oh and by the way, Senator Mansion is up for re election in two years. Yes, yes, uh, let's cross the rotunda and head on over to the House. That we don't know what the majority will be like in the House. We know Republicans will be in control, but
we don't know the size. We do know that it's going to be very, very very small, So Republicans are going to have trouble I think probably passing anything, let alone passing something and then getting the Senate to pass it and Senate to the President's desk. However, they will have the ability to do investigations into the Biden environmental agenda. What do you expect those to look like? What do you think that Republicans in the House will target in
terms of their investigations. I think that they're going to look at the administration's probably starting out the administration's policies on gas prices and how much of a role that they've played in inflation, and how the administration's energy policy has affected the country's ability to be energy independent and keep prices affordable and service reliable for for the country. I think that's going to be a key area that
they look at. I think they're also going to UM be interested in how the administration pursues UM domestic oil and gas drilling on federal lands. UM. That's been a sticking point UM for a while. You know, there was the executive action that Biden took putting a temporary moratorium on that that has been litigated. Now we're essentially at a point where the administration can't keep delaying and slow
walking UM those types of LEAs sales. So I think you're going to see Republicans push them on on being more proactive on holding oil and gas LEA sales on shore and offshore on federal lands UM. And I think you're going to see a lot more appearances by Cabinet secretaries like Deb Hall and an Interior UM, Michael Reagan a d p A, and Jennifer Granthome and Energy on the Hill asking about all of those things. I think d Oe in particular, d O, we got a lot
of money in the Infrastructure Law. They also got a decent amount of money in the um Inflation Reduction Act. So they're in a position where they're deciding how they're going to disperse that money. You're going to see Republicans do a lot of oversight on how that money is spent,
where it goes, what kind of projects it goes to. Okay, and finally, really quickly, UM, our colleague Ari Nader wrote a story recently about how the president may use the administrative rulemaking process to get done what he can't get done in the next two years through Congress. He certainly wouldn't be the first president to try to do this when Congress doesn't give him what he wants. UM, what
do you think about that? Do you think that that is an avenue that the president will pursue, and if so, do you think it will be accessible? I think it's definitely an avenue he'll pursue, and it's an avenue that's open to him. Um. And this is this is the time that presidents used that avenue to not necessarily successfully, but they try to use it more often at this period of time, when they've got a divided Congress there in their last two years of their administration, they really
want to get things across the board. The issue with rulemaking and other executive executive actions like executive orders, proclamations, things like that, you can do those things, but they're not durable, so they can always get overturned, reversed, thrown
out executive actions, especially executive actions for sure. But but rules too, you know, there's the Congressional Review Act and that you know, Congress can can undo regulations in a certain period of time, and you know there's always litigation
that comes along with rules too. So I mean, I think it's certainly an avenue, it's not it's not necessarily I think one that could yield a lot of significant action, though, I mean he may be able to do some stuff tinkering here and there, maybe on like social cost of carbon, maybe on methane, which you're seeing right now happen um
with the e p A and those are. You know, it's it's not nothing, but it's not the big sweeping, transformative um investment that you that you know, we've seen with infrastructure, the Infrastructure law with the inflation Reduction Acts. So there's only so much you can do with the rule making process. All right. Well that was Kelly Lenny talking about the end of one seventeen and the beginning of one eighteen. Thank you Kelly so much for for chatting.
I really appreciate it. Yeah, thanks for having me. And that's it for today's episode of Parts Rebellion. If you want more environmental news, check us out on Twitter. We used to handle at environment just that at Environment, and I of course I'm at David B. Shorts. Today's episode of Parts Billion was produced by myself, David Jolts. Parts of Billion was created by Jessica Coombs and Rachel Dagle and is edited by Zach Sherwood and Jack McCutcheon. Our
executive producer is Josh Block. Thanks everyone for listening and Happy Thanksgiving. An individual's race should not be used to help him or harm him in his life's endeavors. A pair of lawsuits has made its way to the Supreme Court, and the decision could dramatically change just who gets into which college. Bloom is effectively using the Asian community as pawns. Every lawsuit needs a villain to mask an anti black and anti Latino agenda? Does this demoralize me? No, it
doesn't demoralize me. This season on Uncommon Law will explore the arguments and the people driving this latest battle over affirmative action. Can the Constitution be used to remedy society's ills? I'm the only person in class, must raise my hand and say, okay, well, actually, here's how this affects people that look like me. Does the Fourteenth Amendments Equal Protection
Clause prohibit all discrimination based on race? You let somebody in because of their race, you're keeping somebody else out because of their race. There might have been two or three Latinos, including me, and so somehow that's too much. Somehow that goes too far. It's hard not to take that very personally. Coming October, part one of a three
part series on affirmative action. What's being decided is whether black and brown people are going to be excluded in significant numbers only An uncommon Law from Bloomberg Industry Group