Six energy policy changes to watch for in a Republican-controlled Congress

This is a long one from Marita, but it needs to be.  Read all of it … it is worth the few minutes you’ll spend compared to the enjoyment and satisfaction you’ll receive.

Commentary by Marita Noon

Executive Director, Energy Makes America Great Inc.

Contact: 505.239.8998, marita@responsiblenergy.org

Words: 2463

Six energy policy changes to watch for in a Republican-controlled Congress

Now that the dust has settled on the 2014 midterms, we can get a sense of how things will change in Washington under a Republican controlled Senate—and energy will be front and center.

Republicans and Democrats have very different views on energy development and policy. The past six years have seen taxpayer dollars poured into green-energy projects that have embarrassed the administration and promoted teppan-style renewables that chop-up and fry unsuspecting birds midflight and increase costs for consumers and business. Meanwhile, Republicans have touted the job creation and economic impact available through America’s abundant fossil-fuel resources.

Voters made their preference clear: Republicans won more seats, and with bigger majorities, than anyone predicted.

The day after the election, the Friends of the Earth, wasting no time, sent out a dramatic fundraising pitch, opening with: “The election’s over—the planet lost.” (You may not have even known that the planet was on your local ballot, but apparently it was.)

The email’s proclamation, once again, exposes the environmentalists’ agenda: “President Obama hasn’t always done the right thing for the environment. He should have denied the Keystone Pipeline years ago, he should be rolling back unchecked fracking, and he should have taken stronger action on climate both at home and in international negotiations.”

Gratefully, though ideologically aligned with them, he attempted to appease and didn’t take the extreme level of action Friends of the Earth would have liked.

The Keystone pipeline remains a strong possibility, though the Canadians have nearly given up on us. Fracking is regulated at the state level, which, mostly, allows it to continue to increase America’s energy freedom—resulting in lower prices at the pump. Because more than 96 percent of the wells drilled in America today use the decades-old, but new-and-improved, technology of hydraulic fracturing, a federal fracking ban, like environmental groups have been trying to pass through city and county initiatives, would virtually shut down our booming energy economy. President Obama tried, but couldn’t pass a cap-and-trade bill—even when his party controlled both houses. Nor could he get a new Kyoto-like international treaty ratified. Most of the western world is now retreating on the climate pledges made in a different political era.

Friends of the Earth is correct, though. The email states: “Now, with both the Republican Senate and the House salivating and ready to sink their teeth into our most basic environmental laws, the President’s environmental legacy is truly at stake.” The Republicans are likely “salivating”—though not specifically about “basic environmental laws.”

Big changes in energy policy are in the works. Not just because Republicans want to destroy the president’s “legacy,” but because a wealthy country is better able to do things right. A growing economy needs energy that is efficient, effective and economical—which is why countries like China and India will not limit energy availability and why Republicans want to expand access in the U.S.

What energy policies might the Republicans want to “sink their teeth into”?

Keystone pipeline
At a November 13 breakfast presentation on “the unconventional oil and gas revolution,” Senior Director, Energy Insight IHS, Chris Hansen said: “I expect to see action on the Keystone pipeline within the next few months.” While it is widely believed that Keystone would be an easy win in the Republican-controlled congress, the November 4 results are already making a difference.

Post-election, the Keystone pipeline—which the State Department has projected would create more than 40,000 jobs—has suddenly leapt to the front of the lame-duck-legislation line. Months ago, Senators Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and John Hoeven (R-ND), along with 54 others (including 11 Democrats), reintroduced legislation to authorize building the Keystone pipeline—but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has blocked the popular bill by repeatedly denying requests to take up the legislation. The House has already approved eight previous Keystone bills and quickly passed an identical bill sponsored by Landrieu’s election opponent Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-LA).

The question remains is whether or not the White House will approve the bill, though spokesman Josh Earnest hinted at an Obama veto—which would further anger his union supporters that have pushed for its passage for the past six years. If the president vetoes what many are calling the Save Mary Landrieu Act, all is not lost for the Keystone pipeline.

With many Democrats already on board with Keystone and a push for more support from union leadership, the new Congress may be able to pass it again—this time with a veto-proof majority.

Federal lands
President Obama likes to brag about the increased U.S. production of oil and gas. In his post-election press conference he stated: “Our dependence on foreign oil is down.” While the statement is true, it falsely implies that he had something to do with that fact.

Reality is, as a Congressional Research Service report makes clear, while oil production has increased 61 percent on state and private lands, it has decreased 6 percent on federal land where the administration has authority. Additionally, the report points out, applications to drill on federal lands take nearly twice as long to process under the Obama administration than they did previously.

Not only has the White House discouraged drilling on federal lands, President Obama has used his pen to lock up federal lands with potential development, such as the newly designated Organ Mountain Desert Peaks National Monument—which blocks production without analyzing the economic impact. “Every time they lock up federal lands, whether through national monuments, conservation areas, or wilderness areas,” Steven Henke, President of New Mexico Oil and Gas Association, told me, “they eliminate the potential for royalties from the federal estate. Those funds benefit both the state and federal government and reduce the burden to the taxpayers.”

For example, one prediction has drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) becoming a part of the Republican Party’s vision of energy independence: Alaska’s senior Senator “Lisa Murkowski has long argued that drilling in ANWR would help reduce the national deficit.”

Not all federal lands have oil-and-gas, or other mineral-extraction, potential, so a reversal of policy may not increase production by the 61 percent seen on state and private lands—but it could mean the U.S. not only passes Saudi Arabia in oil production, it leaves it in a dust storm.

Oil and natural gas exports
Before the new Congress is sworn in, we already hear a lot of talk about lifting the ban on oil exports that was put into place in response to the 1970s Arab oil embargo. Reuters reports: Senator Murkowski “has fought to relax the ban all year by issuing a series of papers detailing how such exports have been allowed in the past, holding a private meeting on the subject with Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, and hinting that 2015 could be the time to introduce ban-ending legislation.”

With the Republicans now in charge come January, Murkowski will become the Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. She is expected to start by “holding hearings, pressuring Obama administration officials, and testing the level of support from party leadership.”

Oil producers continue to lobby for the lifting of the ban, as the light crude now being produced in the U.S. is difficult for domestic refiners to process with current equipment. If Congress can increase drilling access to federal lands, even more crude will flood into refineries with limited capacity. Reports indicate exports will have little impact on pricing within the U.S.

“Policy makers need to catch up with the industry,” Harold York, an analyst of the refining sector at Woods Mackenzie said. He projects that easing the crude oil restrictions “would lead to $70 billion in investment spending in the U.S. oil sector and further economic stimulus.”

Different from crude oil, the law currently allows liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, but the Energy Department has dozens of applications for LNG export terminals languishing on some bureaucrat’s desk. Just six applications have been approved in the past year. Bipartisan support exists for expediting the permitting process—especially in light of Russia’s stranglehold on natural gas supplies to many of our European allies. Legislation must be drafted and passed to allow exports to non-European free-trade countries.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
President Obama’s Clean Power Plan (CPP) has widespread opposition within the Republican Party—including state governors who struggle to interpret the regulations but who are asking the right questions regarding the impact on their individual states. Even coal-state Democrats, such as Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), have concerns with the CPP.

The CPP has the potential to prematurely shutter hundreds of coal-fueled power plants when viable option exists for the plants’ replacement. This winter, Massachusetts is experiencing a 37 percent increase in electricity rates over last year because plants closed without sufficient infrastructure for their replacement.

The CPP, plus the many other regulations—such as those coming on ozone and methane—have many lawmakers concerned about the EPA’s impact on grid reliability and the economy. President Obama is not likely to sign any legislation designed to rein in his personal priorities, but Republicans can make changes in EPA appropriations.

In a post-election analysis webinar, Scott Segal, founding partner of the Washington, DC-based Policy Resolution Group, declared Obama’s approach to greenhouse gas emissions—specifically the CPP which projections show may cost $42 billion—as the number one priority of the Energy and Natural Resources and Environment and Public Works Committees. He believes the committees’ oversight will look at reliability, cost, and, benefits. Segal said: “I think you can expect tailored legislation to focus on these topics. You can expect use of the Congressional Review Act for resolutions of disapproval when these regulations become final. You can also look to the appropriations process. …that might mean an Interior and Environment appropriations bill might have a rider, not that sets aside the CPP entirely, but that makes narrowly targeted changes to that plan. Then the president would be confronted with a choice: ‘do I essentially shut down the EPA or do I work with Republicans in the House and Senate to reform my proposal?’”

The Endangered Species Act (ESA)
The ESA direly needs revision, updating or outright repeal as, though well-intended in the beginning, it has more recently been used as a funding tool for environmental groups and a way for them to block economic activity, such as oil-and-gas extraction, and ranching, farming, and mining.

Earlier this year, a group of 13 GOP lawmakers released a report, which called for an ESA overhaul, though CBS News called the changes “unlikely given the pervasive partisan divide in Washington, DC.” CBS continues: “The political hurdles to overhaul are considerable. The ESA enjoys fervent support among many environmentalists, whose allies on Capitol Hill have thwarted past proposals for change.”

While repeal is unlikely, this may be the time to introduce legislation that would reform the ESA to curtail litigation from wildlife advocates and give states more authority—two ideas that were brought forth in the report.

Kent Holsinger, a Colorado-based attorney specializing in ESA issues, told me: “As radical groups continue to push their agendas, other parts of the country are now beginning to feel the threat that westerners have long suffered. The House moved significant, but targeted, legislative measures just recently. Perhaps the Senate might follow suit?” Maybe we can encourage them.

Climate Change
The biggest change will come on the climate change agenda. While Obama will not back down, committees have significant influence, as previously mentioned, through the appropriation process. Also, expect oversight on Obama administration policies.

The Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) Chairmanship will change from one of the biggest supporters of Obama’s climate change agenda (Senator Barbara Boxer [D-CA]) to the biggest opponent of his policies (Senator Jim Inhofe [R-OK]). On election night, Inhofe stated: “I am looking forward to taking back the environment committee”—a role that, according to Environment & Energy Publishing (E&E): “Already has greens cringing.”

“A leadership transition would mark a seismic shift in the tone of the EPA Committee,” states the E&E report. The switch will mean, according to Frank O’Connell, president of the environmental group Clean Air Watch, that instead of serving as a “shield for the executive branch” the committee could turn into “a battering ram against the executive branch.”

This reversal of attitude in climate change policies is already evident in the response to the president’s newly announced pact with China to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and his promised $3 billion contribution to a U.N. climate fund designed to help poor counties deal with potential impacts of climate change.

About the deal with China, Inhofe said: “This deal is a non-binding charade. The American people spoke against the president’s climate policies in this last election. They want affordable energy and more economic opportunity, both which are being diminished by overbearing EPA mandates. As we enter a new Congress, I will do everything in my power to rein in and shed light on the EPA’s unchecked regulations.”

Reports now declare: “Climate change compromises may be easier with China than Congress.”

What does Inhofe have in his power? Andrew Wheeler, EPW staff director when Inhofe was chairman previously, says: “I know he won’t hesitate to conduct oversight of the Democratic Obama Administration.”

The E&E report projects: “Among the topics Inhofe would likely zero in on: EPA’s rules to clamp down on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, a controversial EPA proposal to clarify the scope of the Clean Water Act and the science underpinning federal environmental rules. EPA management could also be the topic of some oversight hearings.” Wheeler added: “I think his climate work will probably be focused more on the EPA regulation.”

The $3 billion pledge to developing countries is subject to Congressional appropriations. In a statement from Inhofe’s office, he vows to work with his colleagues “to reset the misguided priorities of Washington in the past six years.” He says: “The President’s climate change agenda has only siphoned precious taxpayer dollars away from the real problems facing the American people.”

The National Journal states: Republicans “want nothing less than to send money to poor countries to fight climate change.”

As a part of this shift, watch for environmental activists to be more aggressive on the state level—pushing for increased mandates for renewables and more regulation and/or bans on hydraulic fracturing.

***

For those of us who watch the politics of energy policy, it is going to be an interesting two years. If the Republican policies turn the economy around as predicted—offering a sharp contrast to the stagnation of the past six years, they will pave the way for victory in 2016. Call your Senators and Congressman and ask him or her to support these six energy policy changes that will give America energy security and economic strength.

(A version of this content was originally published at Breitbart.com)

The author of Energy Freedom, Marita Noon serves as the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens’ Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE). She hosts a weekly radio program: America’s Voice for Energy—which expands on the content of her weekly column.

Conspiracy Brews 09.27.14

If you like your coffee and your politics flavorful, served with a heaping dose of civility by a diverse group of interesting people from all parts of the political spectrum then you should be joining us every Saturday. Started in 2007 over coffee and lively conversation by a group of concerned friends and neighbors, ‘Conspiracy Brews’ is committed to finding solutions to some of our State’s toughest problems. Our zest for constructive political discourse is only equaled by our belief that the only way forward is to exchange our views in a relaxed and friendly setting. For additional information or to be added to our e-mail list contact: ConspiracyBrews@aol.com.

Conspiracy Brews
“Be civil to all; sociable to many; familiar with few; friend to one; enemy to none.”

Benjamin Franklin

Not your average political discussion group!

September 27, 2014

9:00 AM – 12:00 PM
at
Southwest Secondary Learning Center
10301 Candelaria Rd NE
(northwest corner of Candelaria and Morris)

We think that government should be open and honest at all times.
People from all political parties are welcome.

*** Quotes of the Week ***

“When you appeal to force, there’s one thing you must never do – lose.”

Dwight D. Eisenhower

English: Gen. of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower...

English: Gen. of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower (detail). See orginal for stamp of origin. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

(Dedicated to Tom Udall)

“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

Thomas Jefferson

 

– Robert F. Kennedy Jr wishes there were a law where he could jail politicians that oppose Global Warming…Potential Tyrant or reasonable political who like Udall would destroy the First Amendment?

English: U.S. Senator for New Mexico

English: U.S. Senator for New Mexico (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/66190

Suggested Topics

– What do National Democrats stand for?

2012 Democrat Platform 32 page PDF

– What do National Republicans stand for?

2012 Republican Platform 64 Page PDF

(Light Quotes of the week)

“His mother should have thrown him away and kept the stork.”

Mae West

“Sometimes I lie awake at night, and I ask, ‘Where have I gone wrong?’ Then a voice says to me, ‘This is going to take more than one night.”

Charles M. Schulz (Charlie Brown in Peanuts)

“Rejoice not at thine enemy’s fall – but don’t rush to pick him up either.”

Jewish Proverb
——-

Nancy Pelosi — Needs to straighten up

She could start with a “strait”jacket and a muzzle as she becomes increasingly irrelevant and irreverent with her antics on the floor of the House. Her latest tirade had her running across from her place in the House chamber to berate, or should we say, attempt to berate a fellow congressperson from across the aisle.  Here’s the URL for the story from the blaze:

The Harridan Speaks And Gestures

Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi

Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi (Photo credit: Wikipedia) Two harbingers of hate and mistaken messages

 

RPNM’s Weekly Update (Week of 3/10/13)

RPNM’s Weekly E-Update. Thanks for subscribing. Visit us online at http://www.gopnm.org for all the latest.
Republican Party of New Mexico

RPNM E-Update
Week of March 10, 2013

Dear Charles E.,

Best wishes to you this Sunday from the Republican Party of New Mexico.

This week, our Republican lawmakers have continued the uphill battle of trying to positively reform New Mexico despite Democrat majorities in both chambers.Senate Democrats voted to pass Senate Bill 276, which reinstates straight ticket voting in New Mexico. The bill passed along a straight party vote, with Republicans opposing the measure. There is no doubt that this is a political game, and that eliminating straight ticket voting allows voters to look at each candidate individually and make more informed choices. The bill will now go to the House, and we should all let our Representatives know that this is a bad bill.

Additionally the Senate Rules Committee has continued to delay a vote on confirming Public Education Department Secretary-designate Hanna Skandera. After over seven hours of testimony at the beginning of March and three hours more on Saturday, they have failed to move forward. We can all agree that Secretary-designate Skandera has made positive changes to our troubled education system and deserves confirmation. Call those on the Senate Rules Committee and let them know that it is past time to put aside political ploys and confirm Skandera.

This week, the House saw its share of partisanship as well. On Wednesday, following a Call of the House, Republican Representative Nate Gentry attempted to bring House Bill 606—the driver’s license compromise bill—to the House floor. While a few Democrats helped to vote the bill out of House Labor and Human Resources Committee and House Judiciary Committee, the vote to bring it out of House Appropriations and Finance Committee failed.

On Saturday, Democrats in Appropriations voted against the bill, tabling it once more. This is an issue of public safety and an issue for which many New Mexicans have expressed their concerns. Each year, our efforts to repeal the law that allows illegal immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses fail because of Democrat opposition. But, it is beyond time for the State Legislature to deal with this issue so that we can move on and focus on other areas of reform.

On a positive note, the House voted unanimously to pass House Bill 36, introduced by Representative Dianne Miller Hamilton. The bill sets up a pilot program using virtual reality therapy to help treat veterans who are suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). This is a great way to help our veterans and show our gratitude for all that they have done to serve our great nation, and we are thankful to Representative Hamilton for bringing forward this legislation.

We are now 6 days away from the end of the session, and we—like many of you—are excited to see what the next 6 days hold. We hope that both sides—and both chambers—can come together to pass legitimate reform for New Mexico families.

Visit Our Events Page
Visit Our News Page
Contribute to RPNM Today!
RPNM disclaimer
Copyright © 2013 Republican Party of New Mexico, All rights reserved.
Related articles

Cliff Notes From Crowder

From jumping off the cliff and everything in between; who has the best solution … Conservatives or Progressives?.  And do Democrats  progressives really know what they believe?

In Recovery — Forge Ahead

The video shown below was sent to us by Ralph Hill.  If you don’t know David Horowitz or Bill Whittle, you have not been looking or listening.  Or, maybe you spend all your time watching the Big Boob Tube.  Your choice of course, but perhaps you might want to wean yourself of MainScream media log enough to watch this video.

Merriment & Mirth For The Future President’s Camp

 

And nothing but despair for the mainScream media.  John Sununu rules over Andrea Mitchell in this video exchange.  Have a listen and look:

Sununu Helps Mitchell Understand Significant Facts

Related articles

 

Jay Carney’s Actions And Images

From his actions and images as he goes about his days telling whoppers on Obama’s transparency, opaque as it is, it is plain to see that Jay Carney is the reincarnation of Harry Reid. And that is true even though Reid appears as a zombie out in the open and not back in his permanent abode six feet under. Observe Carney’s tightly shut pursed lips and the deer in the headlights puzzlement … each solid attributes of Harry Reid.

This could be the start of a new television series with a cast of Democrat liars and apologists: LYING FOR DOLLARS.

Related articles

Where Are The Jobs For Young Black Males

This is the third video installment of Thomas Sowell’s commentary on intellectuals in America.  This time he makes the case that actions by the intelligentsia impacted unfavorably on the employment rate of young black males.

 No Job — Who is responsible

Related articles

Harry Reid: Needs To Be Out The Door ASAP

United States Senate election in Alabama, 1996

United States Senate election in Alabama, 1996 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

For Immediate Release

Contact:  Stephen Miller,

Andrew Logan: 202.228.0575

Sessions: Senate Dem Majority ‘Deliberate And Determined’ To Avoid Tough Budget Votes

The fact is it’s now three years—three years—into the execution of a deliberate and determined policy by the Democratic leadership of the United States Senate to avoid responsibility for the financial future of America. It’s not acceptable for the Senate leadership to not face up to the challenge of our time…

 

Is it really okay to wait until after the election to vote? Is that what the American expect of us? Are they satisfied that we say, ‘Oh, we can’t take votes close to an election. That might be tough. We don’t want to do that’? I don’t think so.”

Senator Sessions’ Video Remarks


###