Contact The Editor
Articles By This Author
The Senate moved this week to advance a controversial bill that could make it easier and faster to build energy infrastructure - ratcheting up a fight between left-leaning groups who argue that it will gut environmental protections and Republicans and Democrats who want to speed development.
On the heels of an election in which affordability was a key issue, legislators are focused on boosting power generation to tackle rapidly rising electricity bills and meet the energy demand from data centers powering the artificial intelligence boom. The Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act could accelerate the construction of a wide variety of infrastructure, including roads and housing, as well power generation.
If the bill passes, obtaining permits would become easier regardless of whether a company is building climate-friendly solar farms or fossil fuel power plants that drive greenhouse gas emissions.
On its first day back since last week's midterm elections, the Senate opened debate Monday night with a vote of 73-25, including 21 Democrats, to take up the bill, signaling that it may have enough support to pass with a 60-vote majority. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-New Mexico) and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island), long-standing environmental advocates, have championed the bill after forging a compromise deal with Republicans ahead of the midterms.
In the hours before and after the vote, statements of support and opposition poured in from environmental advocates, Native American tribes and politicians from both parties, including President Donald Trump. Former vice president Al Gore, an early climate advocate, said the bill "would do far more harm than good."
What alarms many liberals and environmentalists is the sweeping changes that the bill would make to bedrock environmental laws, including the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Policy Act. The measure would make it difficult to take permits away after they have been awarded to projects and narrow the ability of lawsuits to stop projects.
"It will profoundly transform key areas of environmental law with sweeping consequences for pretty much all project development of all types," said Danny Cullenward, an economist and lawyer at University of Pennsylvania's Kleinman Center for Energy Policy. "That is true whether you like the transformations it proposes or whether you have profound concerns."
Tracy Stone-Manning, president of The Wilderness Society, an advocacy group, said in a statement that the bill represents a threat to iconic public lands, including in the Alaskan Arctic, the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in Minnesota and Bears Ears National Monument in Utah. It would make it easier to build oil and gas infrastructure, data centers, mines or other industrial projects in or near millions of acres of public lands, said Stone-Manning, who served as the head of the Bureau of Land Management under President Joe Biden.
But proponents say it has become too difficult to build anything in the United States, and overhauling permitting rules would offer a solution.
Power plants and transmission lines must often go through a complex, years-long permitting process. One wind energy project in Heinrich's state of New Mexico included a 550-mile transmission line to Arizona that took 17 years to obtain all its permits.
"Today, even for really good projects, they still get litigated, and so power lines takes 15-20 years to build," Heinrich told reporters on Monday. "Changing that is hard. And that means that organizations are going to have to reevaluate the best move to the clean energy transition forward."
Heinrich, speaking alongside Whitehouse, said they were making good on the promises made by Democrats in the election to make voters' lives more affordable - they would bring down energy costs by allowing a faster build out of solar, wind and other renewable energy.
"If we can create an open competitive level playing field, clean is cheap and cheap wins in the market place," Heinrich said.
The bill text was first presented on Sept. 30 ahead of the congressional recess for the elections, with revisions proposed over the weekend. Heinrich said those included strengthening the ability of states and tribes to weigh in on projects and a program to help communities determine the impact of data centers before handing out permits.
Some Democrats are urging the bill be set aside until the next Congress, when they will have the majority and can secure a better deal for clean energy.
"Voters sent a clear message last week that they want better deals than the ones they've gotten under unified Republican leadership. I believe we owe it to them to fight to win a better deal," Sen. Ed Markey (D-Massachusetts) said in a statement.
But Heinrich and Whitehouse, who have sought a permitting agreement for years, including a narrowly defeated effort near the end of Biden's term, are urging that now is the time to pass a bill.
"We don't have more years to lose as clean energy projects sit on the sidelines, and there's no guarantee Congress would ever find another compromise that would be able to pass the Senate," Whitehouse said in a statement.
Republican have a razor thin margin in the House, where they can only afford to lose two votes.
Democratic support is also uncertain. A spokesperson for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries last week criticized the bill for falling short. Jeffries on Monday said he was reviewing whether proposed changes addressed his concerns.
Rep. Jared Huffman (California), the top ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, has blasted the bill, saying his fellow party members should not be "gullible enough" to believe Trump will start issuing permits for renewables projects.
Some environmental groups like the League of Conservation Voters have not taken a hard position on the bill, stating they hope it can be improved.
The Natural Resources Defense Council opposes the bill as currently written, according to Manish Bapna, the advocacy group's president and chief executive.
"We support the elements of the legislation that help accelerate needed transmission, clean energy deployment, and grid modernization; but the current package goes too far in weakening essential environmental safeguards and public participation requirements," Bapna said in a statement. "The bill must be further improved, and we are willing to continue to assist in that process."
Trump's support could complicate the bill's passage, as Democrats may be wary to hand him and Republicans a win so soon after promising to oppose him on the campaign trail. Trump urged all senators to vote for the bill on Truth Social on Sunday.
"This Landmark Permitting Reform Legislation will codify our America First Energy Agenda, and ensure that we can build Pipelines, Mines, and Power Plants faster than ever before, lowering Energy Costs for American Families, and creating High Paying American Jobs," Trump said.
Trump on Monday evening again said "we are behind it 100%."
But major questions remain about whether Trump will enact the bill. As written, it would enable wind and solar projects that his administration has sought to block.
"For the first two years, Trump is going to be the one implementing this bill, and it's pretty clear that he does the bidding of the fossil fuel industry," said Leah Stokes, an environmental politics professor at the University of California at Santa Barbara.
Trump said on Monday he would not give permits to wind projects despite what the bill currently says, adding that it wasn't fully negotiated yet.
The bill could still be weeks from final Senate passage and would face an uncertain future in the House.
The Senate continued to work on the bill through Veterans Day on Wednesday, after Majority Leader John Thune called off a planned recess to work on permitting reform and other legislative priorities.
(COMMENT, BELOW)
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.