Senate Panel Backs EPA Nominee, with Notable Exception (Carper may "hold")

[DeepModem Mom]

New York Times
Senate Panel Backs E.P.A. Nominee, With One Notable Exception
By DAVID STOUT

Published: April 13, 2005


WASHINGTON, April 13 - Stephen L. Johnson, a scientist who has spent 24 years at the Environmental Protection Agency, was overwhelmingly endorsed by a Senate committee today to be the new E.P.A. administrator. But a serious new threat to his confirmation arose.

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee voted, 17 to 1, to send Mr. Johnson's nomination to the Senate floor. But the lone dissenter on the committee, Senator Thomas Carper, Democrat of Delaware, is weighing whether to put a "hold" on the nomination, an aide to the senator said.

Mr. Carper has complained that the Bush administration is blocking studies that he has requested on ways to cut power-plant pollution. "If Steve Johnson is to be an effective administrator, he needs to be unfettered by this administration," Mr. Carper told the committee. "To get the right legislation, we need to get good, timely technical data."...

***

Mr. Carper's spokesman, Bill Ghent, told The Associated Press that the senator was "keeping his options open as far as blocking the nomination." Under Senate rules, any senator has the power to block the confirmation of a nominee indefinitely simply by imposing a "hold," a tactic that can even be invoked anonymously. (Under the rules, however, a hold can be voided by 60 votes.)...


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/13/politics/13cnd-enviro.html?hp&ex=1113451200&en=3b55bbc12f33fce6&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[LynneSin]

1. Carper did block - I wonder if it has anything to do with the BP LNG pier?

The big stink is that NJ wants to allow BP to build a Liquid Natural Gas Pier off the coast of NJ. This pier would be mostly in Delaware waters and very close to a highly populated area of the state of Delaware (unlike the NJ side of the pier - the population is actually sparse there except a Nuclear Power Plant). Delaware doesn't want the pier. It's a threat to our coastal waters and if that pier goes u in flame it'll wipe out a nice size chunk of Northern Delaware. Now I read in the paper today about this:


http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2005/04/14billwouldforceg.html

WASHINGTON -- The House of Representatives is pushing ahead with legislation that could prevent coastal states from halting the construction of liquefied natural gas terminals.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee signed off Wednesday on a bill that would rewrite U.S. energy policy, shifting power from states to federal regulators. The provisions are part of Congress' omnibus Energy Policy Act, a national blueprint that touches on everything from renewable energy to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The bill goes to the full House. The Senate is working on its own version.

Republicans have been trying unsuccessfully to pass comprehensive energy legislation for three years, but supporters now have the added incentive of an energy crunch that has drastically raised gas and oil prices.

Lawmakers from California, Delaware, New Jersey, Massachusetts and other states that are being eyed as likely terminal sites have condemned the natural gas provisions, which they describe as a blow to states' rights and a threat to public safety and the environment. The provisions would give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission sole authority to site the terminals, and to override state laws and community objections in the process.



What I'm thinking is that Carper is holding up the EPA nomination in order to prevent this bill from being passed since it would allow the federal government to make the decisions on where LNG piers are located and not the state.

[DeepModem Mom]

2. Thanks for this info, LS! nt

[Moderator]

3. kick to combine