Minnesota Sen. Al Franken, right, is one of eight Great Lakes senators urging that protection of manufacturing jobs be part of climate change legislation. Photo: Sen. Franken's office
By Andrew Norman
Oct. 26, 2009
Political liabilities and the absence of key committee posts mean that senators from Great Lakes states are unlikely to play major roles in climate change legislation. But the region’s members will influence the bill by defending specific industries, according to political analysts.
“The folks will not be major players,” said Richard Hula, chair of the political science department at Michigan State University. Instead, they will form a loose coalition to resist anything that further dampens the manufacturing sector.
California Sen. Barbara Boxer’s Environment and Public Works Committee plans to hold a hearing on the bill on Tuesday. She expects her committee to vote on the legislation in November.
In Great Lakes states, the buzzwords are economy and jobs, Hula said.
“You cannot be seen as supporting anything that’s going to threaten that, and I don’t think you will,” he said.
The House narrowly passed climate change legislation in June, before health care took most of Congress’ attention. The bill marks a radical change in how the U.S. regulates pollution. It caps carbon emissions and allows companies that can’t meet the limits to buy credits from companies that can restrict emissions even more. The legislation aims to cut greenhouse gas production 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050.
The senate version introduced by Sens. Boxer and John Kerry includes a more ambitious 20 percent decrease in greenhouse gases by 2020. The bill offers incentives for natural gas and nuclear power, but leaves many of the details to the committees expected to help craft the measure.
The Senate and House will reconcile the two bills in a conference committee before sending the legislation to their full members and then on to the president.
It remains to be seen, if like the House, whether the Senate will placate concerns of influential legislators by granting significant concessions, said Barry Rabe, professor of public policy at the University of Michigan. House leaders granted many concessions late in negotiations, including enough to gain the votes of about 30 key members from agriculture-based districts, he said. Great Lakes senators have their own list of desired concessions for constituents.
“States are going to be looking to see, can you deliver short-term economic benefits in the form of grants and [research and development] money,” he said.
Great Lakes members chaired four of the nine key committees that shaped the House bill. But it’s a different story in the Senate.
While 14 of 16 Great Lakes senators are Democrats, and presumably more likely to support climate change legislation in theory, none hold key posts on the five committees the bill likely will pass through. Only 10 are members of one or more of the key committees.
“I think some of these people, theoretically, probably have some real sympathy on climate legislation, but at best I think you’re going to see a low profile,” Hula said. “It’s hard to imagine any will get out in front on this bill.”
Powerful Senators Carl Levin of Michigan and Charles Schumer of New York aren’t likely to hold much sway on the climate bill. Majority whip Dick Durbin of Illinois will be charged to some degree with convincing fence sitters to form a 60-senator, filibuster-proof majority to support the legislation.
There are a lot of butts on the fence regarding the Senate bill, and Durbin’s may be one of them.
Senate party leaders often have to balance party leadership with state responsibilities, said Marjorie Hershey, professor of political science at Indiana University.
“That’s exactly what [Durbin] has to do,” she said. “He has to be on both sides of that line.”
Durbin and seven other Great Lakes Senators wrote President Obama, Boxer and Majority Leader Harry Reid in August, warning that it would be “extremely difficult to support” a bill that does not adequately protect manufacturing jobs. They called for initiatives to protect energy-intensive industries, including trade sanctions on carbon-intensive goods from countries like China that have weaker climate policies.
The letter was signed by Sens. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin of Michigan, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Evan Bayh of Indiana, Robert Casey and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Al Franken of Minnesota.
Democrats hope to gain the support of moderate Republican Sens. George Voinovich of Ohio and Richard Lugar of Indiana. Both are concerned about the loss of manufacturing jobs in their states. Voinovich wants provisions for carbon capture and sequestration technology for the coal industry, and for nuclear power.
“Punitive measures that take coal out of the energy mix and mandates that do not meaningfully incentivize new nuclear power do not recognized the magnitude of the challenge we now face,” Voinovich said in a statement about the Kerry-Boxer bill.
Opponents of the bill’s cap-and-trade provision have successfully labeled it as a tax increase, Hula said, which will make the legislation “toxic” to many Great Lakes senators whose states are already hurting economically.
“[Climate change legislation is] a tough sell anywhere in the country,” Hula said. “In this part, I think it’s particularly deadly.”
Editor’s note: This story has been corrected to accurately report the states represented by Durbin and Bayh.