One of the keys to NRA’s success on Capitol Hill lies in the fact the association doesn’t approach issues in a partisan way. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), alternative energy, tax breaks, and so forth are not strictly Democrat or GOP issues. Granted, there are folks in both parties with a strange view of the world of rendering, but thanks to organized lobbying of both sides of the aisle and a focused fly-in effort, NRA managed to stay above the partisan fray.
I’m asked these post-election days what the shift in congressional power means to me as a lobbyist. My response is the same today as it was 12 years ago when the GOP wrested the majority from the Democrats, and that is, quite frankly, it means very little. There’s a truism in this town: Very little is achieved alone, victories rarely occur without the help of friends and allies, and that extends to the men and women who cast the votes. I take my allies where I can find them, and that’s usually on both sides of the Hill and both sides of the aisle.
But it is a fascinating exercise in political reality to watch the transition of congressional control from one party to the other, especially when the party in control is not the party of the sitting president. It’s a traditional but calculated risk to pitch campaign rhetoric and promises against the party in power, especially when that party has done little to overcome the logjams and partisan wrangling hamstringing Congress for nearly four years – and when the sitting president represents a global policy not popular with the majority of those pulling the voting booth levers for their congressional representatives.
But there’s also the old expression, “The best laid plans of mice and men…” Well, it’s apparent the honeymoon is over for the newly empowered Democrat leadership, and the harsh reality is that with majority comes power, but also accountability.
The media is watching House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) like a hawk. This is how it should be based on the overwhelming scrutiny given her predecessors. In just the last few days, evidence of congressional reality has set in. For instance, the five-day workweek ballyhooed during the honeymoon days may be a thing of the past. My guess is Congress will convene for four days – from Monday evenings through Friday mornings – because for reps in far-flung districts and states, travel time is a real consideration and a five-day schedule doesn’t accommodate district work. Pelosi met with the chairs of the five most powerful House committees recently to coordinate priorities and basically deliver the message of where leadership wants those chairs to go. According to media reports, she got push back from some of the more senior members of that quintet, along with grumbling about the six-year term limit for committee chairs. And as far as the war in Iraq is concerned, public statements about limiting war funding have been met with criticism not just from the GOP, but from her own lieutenants who question the constitutionality of such a move.
So, where does this political reality check leave NRA and its members? Here’s my take on how some of the industry’s issues will likely play out during the 110th Congress, laced with a bit of rumor and what-ifs.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continues to pursue a proposed final BSE rule “some time during the first quarter” of 2007. NRA’s economic impact analysis threw the agency for a loop, forcing FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine back to the drawing board to calculate the real economic impact of its proposal. However, it is known that the reanalysis is complete and the draft proposed final rule is being vetted through the system. FDA is keenly aware its progress on this rulemaking has been the stuff to which Democrat critics on the Hill have paid close attention. I expect a “proposed” final rule during the first 120 days so Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) are appeased, as well as making happy Representative Rosa De Lauro (D-CT), new chair of the House Appropriations Committee subcommittee on agriculture and FDA spending.
Alternative fuel – mainly the bio-based variety, including biodiesel – is a hot topic in Washington, DC, right now. The president will make a major federal commitment to biofuels during his State of the Union address at the end of January, including references to biodiesel. Adding to this excitement is growing concern about food versus fuel when it comes to ethanol and plant-based biodiesel. Already the Senate Agriculture Committee has slated a hearing on alternative fuels, as has the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Just about every ag and food group in Washington has awakened to the increased competition among food, fuel, export, and industrial uses of corn and soybeans particularly, and the resulting impact on price, availability, and the rural economy. In fact, so hot is this issue some have “suggested” – no formal policy proposals are out there – that if a farmer raises a program crop, a crop eligible for a payment or loan, and that producer is selling the crop for energy rather than food use, then the producer is ineligible for program benefits. There have also been discussions of how or if the House Agriculture Committee should be restructured, and some have suggested a new alternative fuels subcommittee. And while no decision has been made on how or if to tackle these issues, they will definitely be part of the 2007 farm bill energy title – and such concerns work to the advantage of animal-based biofuels.
Energy tax breaks are in the bull’s eye for the new House and Senate leadership. The focus here, though, is the number and value of congressional tax incentives granted to big oil companies, not alternative fuel producers. Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) both pledge to go after and either outright repeal or scale back some of the energy tax breaks given big oil over the last two years. They contend that by providing similar incentives to alternative energy producers, the country will be better served. That notion only works if there are mandates to the oil companies to use the alternatives, similar to the requirements carried in the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). Oh, and efforts are already underway on the Hill to increase the mandatory alternative fuel use levels in the RFS.
The farm bill is shaping up to be a big, long, and noisy legislative train in 2007, the political conveyance on which a number of major issues will be loaded. In addition to energy issues, the House and Senate Agriculture Committees will struggle with trying to control spending on farm programs, how to maintain export promotion programs, how to better accommodate fruits and specialty crop producers within U.S. Department of Agriculture programs, and how to strengthen animal and plant disease control, along with maintaining traditional ag research programs. Bottom line on the farm bill is that just about every issue NRA cares about or watches closely could or will be part of that broad-based debate.
View from Washington - February 2007 Render