By Jeanne Cummings
Defying conventional wisdom that a hardened partisan divide and looming midterm elections will prevent the type of compromises necessary for big reforms, business leaders and environmentalists are redoubling their efforts to advance an energy and climate bill in the Senate.
It’s a seemingly improbable goal, but upending that way of thinking is one of the objectives of a Capitol Hill lobbying blitz launched last week by executives from nearly 200 large and small companies. A dozen CEOs — including Shell Oil’s Marvin Odum, Duke Energy’s Jim Rogers and NRG Energy’s David Crane — are scheduled to meet with lawmakers and administration officials Tuesday.
“Comprehensive climate change legislation is not part of the liberal agenda,” said Crane, whose company operates a wide range of energy facilities that run from wind to coal to nuclear. “It’s a decidedly centrist thing. We reduce carbon emissions, and we reduce our dependence on Middle Eastern oil. Both parts of the political spectrum should come together on that.”
“Any capitalist with a pulse knows China is moving forward,” said Tad Segal, a spokesman for U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a coalition of business and environmental groups that favor reform. “We can solve a crisis at the same time we grow jobs.”
Another business coalition, called We Can Lead, which includes a mix of pro-reform businesses, is taking the campaign to the public by running television and print ads urging Congress to “move swiftly and boldly” and pass legislation.
The intensive lobbying effort comes at a time when the so-called tripartisan team of Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) is working to develop a bill that can pass.
In addition, the White House is working aggressively to demonstrate its willingness to make significant compromises to get a bill passed.
“We’re going to need more than Lindsey Graham,” Carol Browner, who is overseeing the legislative effort at the White House, told POLITICO. “He’s very cognizant of that, as are we. As we demonstrate that we are being pragmatic and open to thinking about all of the energy solutions, that will be important to some Republicans.”
Nowhere has the White House shifted its stance more clearly than in the area of nuclear energy — a topic President Barack Obama didn’t even mention in his first address to Congress last year, outlining his administration’s goals.
In addition to blessing an expansion of nuclear energy in his State of the Union speech last month, the president’s budget calls for increasing Department of Energy loan guarantee authority for nuclear construction projects by $36 billion, to a total of about $55 billion.
Obama also has instructed Energy Secretary Steven Chu to create a commission to study and provide new recommendations about how to manage nuclear fuel and waste — an issue that has bedeviled the industry and tied up Congress.
A strong nuclear plank in a comprehensive bill is critical to Graham and could be a lure for other Republicans, such as Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander, who is a longtime nuclear advocate.
Crane, who noted that Obama’s public embrace of nuclear industry was the top water-cooler topic inside the industry the day after his speech, said one mission of the business leaders lobbying Congress is to “see if we can help expand the Lindsey Graham circle. That’s what we are going to try to do.”
Lieberman has taken the lead in drafting a nuclear plank for a comprehensive bill. But it’s unclear whether any other parts of the legislation are even in the drafting stages.
Graham, Lieberman and Kerry, for now, are still privately meeting with members to gauge what each could support and what could become a deal-breaker.
A great unknown is what the Senate might propose to replace the House’s cap-and-trade program, which has been vilified as a “cap-and-tax” system by critics and deemed a nonstarter by Graham.
But putting a price tag on carbon, many believe, is still essential to reform and spurring the kind of free-market, money-making opportunities that would unleash a burst of new investments and inventions that could be sold at home and abroad.
“What business leaders are saying is, if we don’t give them that certainty here, they are not going to build their new facilities here. They are going to build them somewhere else,” said Browner. “That’s just a pragmatic business decision. They are going to build where demand is.”
The White House is monitoring the Senate talks closely. In late January, Graham, Lieberman and Kerry met with chief of staff Rahm Emanuel to assess their progress, and Browner and other White House officials are providing them technical advice.
The Senate has tentatively set aside time for a debate later this spring, but the talks have been slowed by negotiations among Democrats about how to move the bill forward and how many committees could be involved.
Such delays eventually will turn the calendar into the greatest hurdle for the effort.
In any midterm election year, most legislative business is pretty much set aside after the August recess. Given the widespread unrest among voters, the window for action could be even smaller this year as lawmakers insist on more time back in their districts and states.
But with health care reform put on the back burner, the notion of running without a major accomplishment could spook some lawmakers enough to engage in the energy debate, which typically is driven by regional interests rather than party identification.
In addition, the shift in emphasis in the debate to job creation — an issue that better fits the voters’ top priorities — could make an energy and climate bill more appealing.
White House officials point to job expansions in the clean energy industry spurred by last year’s stimulus bill as a rare bright spot in the still sluggish economy.
The American Wind Energy Association recently issued an annual report that credited the stimulus bill with fueling record growth despite the recession.
“The wind manufacturing sector has the potential to employ many more Americans in green jobs, but without a renewable electricity standard to provide a long-term market, the sector will be slow to grow,” it said.
Other business leaders also argue that before they can and will sink billions into new plants and technologies, they first must be assured that there will be enough domestic demand to justify such expenditures.
That helps explain why the business community has decided to become more engaged in the energy and climate debate.
“We are there to say we are concerned about jobs,” said Crane. “We are ready to invest billions of dollars, but we have to follow the plan laid out in Washington.”
