Latest news with #Democrats
Politico
an hour ago
- Business
- Politico
Breaking up with Big Oil is hard to do
IT'S COMPLICATED: California still wants to break up with Big Oil — but it needs a ride first. California Energy Commission Vice Chair Siva Gunda outlined his much-anticipated plan on Friday to keep gas prices from spiking as the state weans itself off of oil. TLDR: Support in-state crude oil production, boost imports of refined oil — and pause a profit cap on refineries passed by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2023. Newsom had already previewed the pivot when he asked Gunda to redouble efforts to keep in-state refineries operating profitably in April after two of them announced plans to close amid a long-term decline in demand. The recommendations on Friday not only mark a softening of the state's fight against the oil and gas industry, but also a recognition that attacks from Republicans on gas prices are sticking. 'The gist is, 'We get it,'' Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot told reporters Friday. California's climate officials are now on the tightest of political tightropes. For example, Gunda recommended the Legislature waive some environmental review rules to streamline further oil extraction from oilfields in Kern County — while also expanding limitations on new offshore oil and gas development and codifying a ban on well stimulation treatments. Meanwhile, the California Air Resources Board stuck by its hot-button emissions trading program for transportation fuels, announcing Friday that their changes to the low-carbon fuel standard will take effect early next week despite fears that tightening the restrictions on the carbon intensity of fuels could cause a spike in gas prices. Senate Democrats are already girding for a fight with the agency. They introduced a bill backed by Senate Pro Tem Mike McGuire on Tuesday to freeze credit prices that encourage the switch to electricity, hydrogen and other non-fossil fuels, cutting the legs out from under the program. For a deeper dive into the LCFS fight, read our exclusive Q&A with CARB Chair Liane Randolph below. — CvK, AN Did someone forward you this newsletter? Sign up here! CARB'S COUNTER: Randolph isn't taking Senate Democrats' attempt to weaken the LCFS quietly. The state's top air quality official pushed back against the bill, SB 237, in an interview Friday, saying the proposal 'is just irresponsible' after the Trump administration already revoked the state's power to enforce its electric car and heavy-duty truck mandates. POLITICO spoke with Randolph about the heated LCFS debate. Read the full interview on POLITICO Pro for her thoughts on California's climate disclosure law and what's next for discussions with automakers. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. What are you concerned about as the news of the LCFS changes taking effect becomes public, and what are you trying to get ahead of? It's super important to be proactive, to remind people about the importance of this program. It is designed to provide a cost-effective path to support the transition to lower-carbon fuels and to zero-ignition infrastructure that reduces greenhouse gas emissions, right? And so in all of this conversation about cost, I don't want people to forget about the incredible benefits of the program and the fact that it's generated $4 billion in annual private sector investment in the clean transportation sector. It attracts dollars. It attracts investment in the state. It delivers, under our estimate, $12 billion in health-related savings, and California businesses will see increased revenue of $6 to $8 billion from LCFS credit generation sales through the life of the program. It's really important to emphasize that this program has clear economic benefits. This news is coming against the backdrop of SB 237, a new bill that would weaken the LCFS program. Do you regret at all how the rulemaking was done and the initial estimate that LCFS would raise gas prices up to 47 cents? Has that put you in the crosshairs of lawmakers? The LCFS rulemaking was an incredibly robust process. There were multiple workshops, tons of stakeholder engagement, two public hearings in front of the board. So the idea that there was not a robust public discussion about all the pros and cons of all of the complexities of the program is just inaccurate. And we had multiple briefings with legislative staff, outreach from members that we responded to. So it was an absolutely robust public process. The second thing I'll say is that in this era, when the federal administration is literally taking away every tool that they can think of, the idea that we as a state would attempt to cripple programs that have been effective, that have resulted in economic development and better air quality, cleaner fuels, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, is just irresponsible. SB 237 is endorsed by Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire. How seriously do you take it, have you talked to the governor about this, and what could result from a proposal like this even if it doesn't move forward? It is a proposal that has the potential to set California back. And I think that it's really important for our elected leaders to be thinking about all the different aspects of how we achieve our air quality and climate goals, and to recognize that we as Californians really should control our own destiny as much as we possibly can. — AN SEE YA, CEQA: Newsom is asking lawmakers to approve an overhaul of one of California's landmark environmental laws before he signs off on this year's budget. A trailer bill introduced Friday carves out sweeping exemptions from the California Environmental Quality Act, which mandates environmental reviews of construction and has drawn the ire of pro-building and Republican voices accusing it of slowing down key projects. Under the bill, environmental review of housing projects would be limited, and many wildfire mitigation projects, including fuel breaks near homes and vegetation thinning near evacuation routes, would no longer need to be reviewed. Improvements to certain community water systems as well as some construction on the state's high-speed rail project would also be exempted. The exemptions got immediate praise from the California State Association of Counties on Friday. 'No longer will CEQA be leveraged to stall critical county wildfire, water and housing projects,' said CSAC President and Inyo County Supervisor Jeff Griffiths. They were panned, however, by environmental groups. 'The trailer bill 131 is the worst rollback of environmental and public health protections that we've seen in decades,' said Matthew Baker, the policy director at the Planning and Conservation League, in a press conference Friday. The bill is expected to be approved Monday in the statehouse and then signed into law by the governor. — CvK BYE BYE, LOCOMOTIVES: CARB officially repealed its rule to phase out diesel locomotives Thursday night. Board members voted unanimously to revoke the in-use locomotive rule, six months after the agency announced that it had withdrawn the emissions standard from consideration for an EPA waiver, once it became clear approval wouldn't happen before former President Joe Biden left office. The rule, approved in April 2023, was projected to reduce 386,300 tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxides by 2050, making it CARB's most impactful vehicle emissions standard. The loss compounds the blow from car and truck rules being axed, and means regions like Southern California and the Central Valley are all but guaranteed to be out of compliance and face the threat of federal sanctions. — AN BILLABLE HOURS: A Sacramento County Superior Court judge gave Attorney General Rob Bonta the green light late Thursday to keep his big climate lawsuit against oil and gas companies in the hands of an outside firm, Lesley Clark of POLITICO's E&E News reports. The decision to outsource the headline-grabbing lawsuit to the San Francisco law firm Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein got Bonta in a tussle with his own employees. Their union, the California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing Officers in State Employment sued over the decision, arguing in-house lawyers were capable of handling the complex work themselves. But Judge Shelleyanne Chang wrote in her preliminary ruling that there was not enough evidence of that and that hiring an outside firm was well within state law. As Lesley has previously reported, the state's contract with Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein lawyers shows its lawyers billing up to $1,241 an hour; lawyers with another outside firm, Sher Edling, hired to help with the work are making up to $625 an hour. — CvK — A California appeals court struck down one of the state's largest planned communities for not analyzing its greenhouse gas emissions impacts enough. — The San Diego region's water wholesaler approved a rate hike of 8 percent amid declining demand and high fixed costs. — Western states have had relatively cool temperatures this summer, but a national heat surge is coming.
New York Post
an hour ago
- Politics
- New York Post
Fetterman foe and ex-congressman Conor Lamb touring Pennsylvania as Dems express frustration with often Trump-backing senator
ENOLA, Pa. — Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania isn't even up for reelection until 2028, but already a one-time primary foe, former U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb, is crisscrossing Pennsylvania and social media, looking and sounding like he's preparing to challenge Fetterman again. At town hall after town hall across Pennsylvania, Democrats and allied progressive groups aren't hearing from Fetterman in person — or Republicans who control Washington, for that matter. But they are hearing from Lamb, a living reminder of the Democrat they could have elected instead of Fetterman. The former congressman has emerged as an in-demand town hall headliner, sometimes as a stand-in for Fetterman — who just might bash Fetterman. Advertisement 'I thought I was going to play Senator Fetterman,' Lamb joked as he sat down in front of a central Pennsylvania crowd last are frustrated with Fetterman 4 Former U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb, who lost to John Fetterman in the 2022 Pennsylvania Democratic primary, has been crisscrossing the state of late. AP Lamb's reemergence comes at an in-between moment, roughly halfway through Fetterman's six-year term, and is helping define the struggle facing Democrats in swing-state Pennsylvania. Advertisement There, Democrats figure prominently in their national effort to push back on President Donald Trump, but also in their struggle to figure out what to do about Fetterman, who is under fire from rank-and-file Democrats for being willing to cooperate with Trump and criticizing how Democrats have protested him. Frustration with Fetterman has been on display on social media, at the massive ' No Kings ' rally in Philadelphia and among the Democratic Party's faithful. The steering committee of the progressive organization Indivisible PA last month asked Fetterman to resign. It's quite a turnabout for the hoodies-and-shorts-wearing Fetterman, elected in 2022 with an everyman persona and irreverent wit, who was unafraid to challenge convention. For some progressives, frustration with Fetterman began with his staunch support for Israel's punishing war against Hamas in Gaza, an issue that divides Democrats. Advertisement It's moved beyond that since Trump took office. Now, some are wondering why he's — as they see it — kissing up to Trump, why he's chastising fellow Democrats for their anti-Trump resistance and whether he's even committed to their causes at all. Most recently, they question his support for Trump's bombing of Iran. 4 Fetterman has confounded Democrats of late with his support of some Donald Trump policies. AP 'It hurts,' said John Abbott, who attended Sunday's event in suburban Harrisburg. Advertisement Speaking at the flagship 'No Kings' rally in Philadelphia, Indivisible co-founder Leah Greenberg name-checked Fetterman. 'We're looking to the leaders who will fight for us, because even today there are folks among the Democratic Party who think we should roll over and play dead,' Greenberg said. 'Anyone seen John Fetterman here today?' The crowd is Conor Lamb crisscrossing Pennsylvania again? In Pittsburgh, progressives trying to land an in-person town hall with Fetterman or first-term Republican Sen. David McCormick noticed when the two senators advertised an event together at a downtown restaurant to celebrate the release of McCormick's new book. Progressive groups organized to protest it and — after it got moved to a private location with a private invite list — went ahead with their own town hall. They invited Lamb and a local Democratic state representative instead. More invitations for Lamb started rolling in. By his count, he's now attended at least a dozen town halls and party events, easily clocking more than 2,000 miles to appear in small towns, small cities and suburbs, often in conservative areas. 4 Lamb says he'll do anything to 'stop this slide that we're on toward a less democratic country and try to create one in which there's more opportunity for people.' AP Advertisement 'Showing up matters and it really does make a difference,' said Dana Kellerman, a Pittsburgh-based progressive organizer. 'Is that going to matter to John Fetterman? I really don't know. I don't know what he's thinking. I don't know if he's always been this person or if he's changed in the last two years.' Fetterman has brushed off criticism, saying he's a committed Democrat, insisting he was elected to engage with Republicans and — perhaps hypocritically — questioning why Democrats would criticize fellow Democrats. At times, Fetterman has criticized Trump, questioning the move to 'punch our allies in the mouth' with tariffs or the need for cuts to social-safety net programs in the GOP's legislation to extend 2017's tax cuts. Fetterman's office didn't respond to an inquiry about Conor Lamb running for Senate? For his part, Lamb — a former U.S. Marine and federal prosecutor — says he isn't running for anything right now, but he'll do whatever he can to 'stop this slide that we're on toward a less democratic country and try to create one in which there's more opportunity for people.' Advertisement To some Democrats, he sounds like a candidate. 'That he's doing these town halls is a good indication that he'll be running for something, so it's a good thing,' said Janet Bargh, who attended the event in suburban Harrisburg. Aside from the town halls, he spoke at the Unite for Veterans event on the National Mall. He has also been active on social media, doing local radio appearances and appearing on MSNBC, where he recently criticized the June 14 military parade ordered up by Trump. 4 Lamb claims he isn't running for office, although some Democrats believe he's positioning himself to do so. AP Advertisement Not long ago, it was hard to envision Lamb losing a race, ever. In 2018, he won a heavily Trump-friendly congressional district in southwestern Pennsylvania in a special election. It was the center of the political universe that spring, drawing campaign visits by Trump and then-presidential hopeful Joe Biden. Suddenly, Lamb was ascendant. Then he ran for Senate and lost handily — by more than two-to-one — to Fetterman in 2022's primary. Advertisement People often ask Lamb if he's going to challenge Fetterman again. Lamb said he reminds them that Fetterman has three years left in his term and pivots the conversation to what Democrats need to do to win elections in 2025 and 2026. Still, Lamb is unafraid to criticize Fetterman publicly. And, he said, he's a magnet for Democrats to air their unhappiness with Fetterman. What he hears, over and over, is frustration that Fetterman spends too much time attacking fellow Democrats and not enough time challenging Trump. 'And that is, I think, what's driving the frustration more than any one particular issue,' Lamb said. At the town hall, Lamb wasn't afraid to admit he'd lost to Fetterman. But he turned it into an attack line. 'When I watch the person who beat me give up on every important issue that he campaigned on … the more I reasoned that the point of all of this in the first place is advocacy for what's right and wrong,' Lamb told the crowd. 'And advocacy for not just a particular party to win, but for the type of country where it matters if, when you stand up, you tell the truth.' The crowd cheered.
The National
an hour ago
- Politics
- The National
US Senate rejects bid to curb Trump's Iran war powers
The Republican-led US Senate rejected a Democratic-led bid on Friday to block Donald Trump from using further military force against Iran, hours after the President said he would consider more bombing. The Senate vote was 53 to 47, along party lines, against a war powers resolution that would have required congressional approval for more hostilities against Iran. Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, a member of the Senate armed services and foreign relations committees, on introduced the bill last week. The legislation expressed concern about the escalating violence in the Middle East and its potential to pull the US into conflict - which it–ultimately did when Mr Trump ordered strikes on Iran's nuclear infrastructure days later. 'It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States,' the Democratic senator said. 'I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict." Asked o' Friday if he would bomb Iranian nuclear sites again if he deemed necessary, Mr Trump said: 'Sure, without question.' Passage of the resolution was seen as a long shot. Republicans have a majority in the Senate, and have overwhelmingly stood with the President in support of his decision to strike Iran. There were some fractures in the Make America Great Again movement that seem largely to have healed now that it seems the strikes will not provoke a longer conflict. Most Republicans hold that Iran posed an imminent threat that required decisive action from Mr Trump. Democrats, meanwhile, have cast doubt on that justification, arguing the President should have come to Congress first. They also said the President did not update them adequately, with Congress's first briefings taking place on Thursday.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politics
- Politico
Senate rejects push to rein in Trump on Iran
The Senate on Friday rebuffed a Democratic-led push to require President Donald Trump to seek approval from Congress before taking further action against Tehran following U.S. airstrikes against Iranian nuclear sites last weekend. Support for Sen. Tim Kaine's (D-Va.) war powers resolution — the first legislative challenge to Trump on the strikes — fell almost entirely along party lines. The measure failed in a 47-53 vote. Democrats in both the Senate and House have sought to force a vote that would allow them to weigh in against Trump launching military operations without consulting Congress. The U.S. launched airstrikes last weekend targeting Iran's nuclear sites at Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz, marking the first ever combat use of the 30,000-pound GBU-57 bunker busting bomb to strike deeply buried facilities. The move followed strikes by Israel on Iran's nuclear sites and days of the two nations trading air and missile strikes. Trump announced a ceasefire between Israel and Iran Monday. But the president said Friday he would bomb Iran again 'without hesitation' if intelligence suggests Tehran continues to have the capability to enrich uranium, even as he and his administration maintain the airstrikes 'obliterated' its nuclear program. The surprise attack, Democrats argued, amounted to a breach of Congress' constitutional prerogative to declare war. 'I pray the ceasefire continues, but I fear we're going to be back here on this floor,' Kaine said in a speech Friday. 'And I hope when we are on this floor again, members of this body will stand for the proposition ... that war is too big an issue to allow one person to make the decision that sends our sons and daughters into harm's way.' The measure was doomed without Republican support, and only Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky supported it. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Penn.), a vocal supporter of Israel and strikes against Iran's nuclear program, bucked his party to oppose it. Republicans, who control the Senate, were unlikely to break ranks and largely touted the success of U.S. strikes on Iran this week. Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, the No. 2 Senate Republican, accused Democrats of rushing to turn a 'successful strike into a political fight.' 'Iran used diplomatic talks to stall. It did so as it raced towards nuclear weapons. As commander-in-chief, President Trump has full authority to act,' Barrasso said on the Senate floor. 'He did so decisively. It was a limited, powerful and precise strike. It was aimed specifically at Iran's nuclear facilities – at not Iran's leadership and not at Iran's people.' The near-party-line outcome contrasts with the last Senate vote to restrain Trump's war powers on Iran in his first term. Four Senate Republicans voted for the proposal in 2019 as tensions between Washington and Tehran ratcheted up: Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Mike Lee of Utah, Jerry Moran of Kansas and Paul. But all but one of those Republicans opposed the resolution Friday, as did other GOP senators who've often been skeptical of broad presidential war powers — a sign of shifting attitudes in the party following Trump's return to the White House. Trump has called out Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) this week after the libertarian lawmaker called out the president's decision to attack Iran as unconstitutional and sponsored a resolution to block further military action.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Politics
- Reuters
US Senate rejects bid to curb Trump's Iran war powers
WASHINGTON, June 27 (Reuters) - The Republican-led U.S. Senate rejected a Democratic-led bid on Friday to block President Donald Trump from using further military force against Iran, hours after the president said he would consider more bombing. The Senate vote was 53 to 47 against a war powers resolution that would have required congressional approval for more hostilities against Iran. All the senators had voted, but the vote was being held open.
