Whiff of bipartisan possibility after hearing on Clean Air Act bills

By E & E News

There were brief hints of potential bipartisan compromise at a Wednesday House hearing on Clean Air Act rules, even as most lawmakers stuck to their usual scripts. 

It was unclear whether the overtures made by Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.) would lead to the substantive Democratic support needed to move most of the GOP bills past the Senate filibuster. 

But his tentative outreach across the aisle stands out at a time when Republicans and Democrats are almost always at loggerheads on air regulations — including most of the attendees at Wednesday's Energy and Commerce hearing. 

“I'm somewhat offended that you would think that we don't want clean air,” Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) said at the Environment Subcommittee hearing. “We all want clean air, but we want to be smart about this, and we want to have policies in fact in place that apply to today and are applicable to today.” 

The full committee's ranking member, Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), hammered the majority's legislation for promoting fossil fuel vehicles during a time of high gas prices. 

“Republicans are choosing to put forth a slate of bills that I think are only going to make matters worse,” Pallone said. “Gas prices hit a four year high around Memorial Day weekend, and my Republican colleagues remain content to just sit back and do nothing while Trump continues to wage his reckless war of choice in Iran. 

The hearing covered a broad slate of mobile source bills on topics including diesel engines' exhaust fluid, idling buses, California train regulations and snow plow classification. 

Only one bill earned widespread support — the "Diesel Emissions Reduction Act" from Reps. Nick Langworthy (R-N.Y.) and Doris Matsui (D-Calif.), which would reauthorize the popular federal program that retrofits or replaces dirty old diesel engines. The program was last reauthorized in 2021, although Congress continues to fund it annually as it enjoys support from both parties. 

“This is an example of the type of bipartisan bill that we should be advancing to reduce air pollution and deploy new innovative technologies,” said Rep. Paul Tonko (R-N.Y.), who was otherwise critical of the GOP legislation. 

But Peters indicated that he could see middle ground on some of the GOP bills — if they made certain changes. 

Environmental laws like the Clean Air Act “didn't come to us from Moses on tablets,” he said. “We have to look at them and we have to revise them and modernize them, and so a couple of you have made points I think are good.” 

Peters cited testimony from Fred Ferguson, president and CEO of the American Bus Association, about local anti-idling ordinances for motor coaches, the type of bus with a passenger deck above a baggage area. 

Motor coaches are required under federal law to undergo certain safety inspections before each trip that require them to sit idle while running for 15 minutes or longer, Ferguson said. 

But some states and localities have anti-idling laws fining motor coaches for running while stationary for longer than a few minutes, which Ferguson said can rack up hefty penalties. 

Idling time "is something we should look at,” Peters said. “The only thing is, I want it to be enforceable. It seems to me that these drafts take some of that away, but I think we could probably close that gap." 

Other Democrats were skeptical of the bus idling bill. 

“The other side is for states' rights when it's convenient for them, but not on this one,” said Rep. Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.).  

“I can understand Mr. Ferguson's point about certain situations where commercial busses need to idle for a limited amount of time, but I believe that is up to state and local governments to strike the right balance based on specific situations they deal with.” 

Peters also acknowledged complaints about agricultural equipment and heavy-duty trucks losing power because of malfunctioning diesel exhaust fluid systems as “something we should take seriously.” Republicans floated several bills that would stop diesel engines from powering down when out of “DEF” or when the system malfunctions. 

“Maybe we could work an answer around that,” Peters added. “But I just want to keep in mind that everybody's been complaining for decades that ‘we can't possibly comply,' and it often works out that we can, so let's work together on real fixes that I think we can tailor and that can be can meet our moment.” 

Other Democrats, again, assailed the Republican legislation. 

“Rolling back the tools manufacturer, states and localities used to reduce diesel pollution is not modernization, like my  

Republican counterparts push for. It is regression,” said Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Calif.). 

Peters wasn't all about finding comity, however. He complained about unpermitted gas turbines installed at an xAI date center in Memphis, suggesting Congress should address any loopholes. 

And he criticized one of the Republican bills that would block EPA from issuing any vehicle rules that would "result in limited availability of new motor vehicles based on the type of new motor vehicle engine," saying it was "so broad and vague" it could prevent EPA from issuing any rules at all. 

"Now, none of these bills are going to get 60 votes in the Senate, so the administration will be forced to do them unilaterally, and then a Democratic president will unwind them," he said. "I do think we should work in this room on real fixes." 

Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-Iowa) called Peters' remarks “interesting.” 

“I agree with Rep. Buddy Carter that we have regulations that were put in place almost half a century ago and need to be modernized, and I also agree with Rep. Peters that sometimes we hear that a regulation will be so onerous that it will eliminate an industry,” she said. “And so I think that what we're hearing is that there's actually bipartisanship here on Capitol Hill.”