Coalition for Regulatory Innovation

Coalition for Regulatory Innovation

Background

The Coalition for Regulatory Innovation was created by The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and North America’s Building Trades Unions (NABTU) and includes representation from a range of industry groups such as American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM)American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF), the National Automobile Dealers Association, and numerous others. [12]

The group was formed shortly before President Donald Trump‘s expected “Cut The Red Tape Day” speech, underlining the president’s deregulation agenda, reported the Washington Examiner. [1]

We launched the Coalition for Regulatory Innovation to help Americans understand this thicket of state and federal rules and champion common-sense reforms that remove unnecessary burdens on the economy. The coalition will highlight some of the most misguided rules and outline principles for reform,” the group said. [1]

NAM President Jay Timmons and NABTU President Sean McGarvey announced the group’s creation in a September 2017 Fox News Op Ed: “Many people wouldn’t expect us to agree on such a high-profile political issue,” they said of the partnership. “But we do – for the same reason: jobs.” [2]

The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) describes itself as the largest manufacturing association in the US, and has long opposed environmental regulation like the Clean Air Act and regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Power Plan (CPP). Sean McGarvey of NABTU was a proponent of Trump’s plan for the Keystone Pipeline, among other projects in 2017. [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]

The Coalition for Regulatory Innovation released initial white papers on three “Focus Areas” including ”Accountability,” “Transparency,” and “Scientific Integrity.” It claims that its goal is to “modernize our regulatory system” and “champion commonsense reforms that remove unnecessary burdens on the economy.” Given the examples given in Timmons’ and McGarvey’s article, such burdens would include regulations slowing the quick approval of natural gas transport projects and pipelines. [8], [9], [10], [11] 

Coalition Members

The Coalition for Regulatory Innovation describes itself as a “bipartisan coalition made up of diverse members that represent a wide range of sectors within the U.S. economy” with the shared mission of “examining the impact of regulations on our small businesses, communities and overall economy to create a smart path forward for a transparent, efficient and accountable regulatory system.” [12]

Initial members included: [12]

Stance on Climate Change

While the Coalition for Regulatory Innovation does not provide an official statement on climate change at its website, its parent group—the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM)—has a history of lobbying against emissions reductions. According to the NAM‘s official policy positions document, “The NAM will identify and oppose overly restrictive regulations and the implementation of policies that limit or eliminate energy sources and production.” [13]

Notably, the NAM was a founding member of the Global Climate Coalition (GCC), a group established to “coordinate business participation in the international policy debate on the issue of global climate change and global warming.” [14]

“Scientific Integrity”

The Coalition released a document on “Scientific Integrity” where it criticizes “advocacy science.” The document criticizes the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA‘s) rulemaking for clean air standards and Ozone levels. [10]

EPA’s air quality standards are among the most expensive rulemakings in U.S. history, with the most recent ozone revision in 2015, according to EPA estimates, costing $1.4 billion annually to implement (industry estimates put the cost even higher). Thus it’s important to know whether the science behind them—that is, the health impacts of air pollution, and the benefits of EPA’s rulemakings—is accurate, objective, and reliable. Yet EPA has not made the underlying datasets from the two studies in question available for public review and analysis, despite requests to do so,” the document claims. [10]

The Coalition cites as evidence for the above statement a letter from Rep. Lamar Smith and Sen. David Vitter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. Lamar Smith, who has also consistently questioned the science behind man-made climate change, received over half-a-million dollars in campaign contributions from the oil and coal industries between 1999 and 2016. [15]

Funding

In addition to its current members, The Coalition for Regulatory Innovation’s parent group, the National Association of Manufacturers, has included board membership of some of the largest manufacturing, oil, and electric generation companies in the United States including ConocoPhillipsDTE Energy CompanyFord Motor CompanyKoch IndustriesBPArch Coal, Inc.DowShellMarathon Petroleum CorporationAltria Group, Inc.American Electric PowerPeabody Energy CorporationSempra EnergyGeneral Motors, Norfolk Southern Corporation, and hundreds others. The Coalition does not detail the process in which it receives its funding or support from member organizations.

Key People

  • Jay Timmons — National Association of Manufacturers President.
  • Sean McGarvey — North America’s Building Trades Unions President

Actions

September 28, 2017

Jay Timmons and Sean McGarvey announced that the North America’s Building Trades Unions and the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) would be working together to create The Coalition for Regulatory Innovation. Their co-authored their September 28 Fox News Op Ed shortly before Donald Trump’s “Cut the Red Tape Day” speech, presumably to catch the wave of the President’s anti-regulation agenda. [2]

“As the heads of the North America’s Building Trades Unions, representing more than 3 million craftsmen and women, and the National Association of Manufacturers, the leading association for manufacturers, many people wouldn’t expect us to agree on such a high-profile political issue,” Timmons and McGarvey wrote. “But we do – for the same reason: jobs.” [2]

They argue that the current regulatory system is “too inefficient, too complex and too exposed to shifts in the political wind.” More specifically, “there are dozens of privately financed infrastructure projects” currently “stuck in a regulatory snarl.” [2]

An example of such projects, which the groups want to push forward, include a LNG (liquefied natural gas) export terminal in Oregon which they lament has “delayed the creation of hundreds of shovel-ready jobs.” Another sample projects supposedly slowed by inefficient regulation include an energy transmission line, and the Constitution Pipeline. [2]

Contact & Address

The Coalition for Regulatory Innovation, based in Washington DC, does not list an address on their website. The group only lists an email address as a method of contact: [email protected].

Social Media

Resources

  1. John Siciliano and Josh Seigel. “Daily on Energy: Perry tells FERC to get cracking on helping coal and nuclear,” The Washington Examiner, September 29, 2017. Archived September 30, 2017. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/BqR0f
  2. Business, labor leader: Regulatory reform means jobs – let’s get it done,” Fox News, September 29, 2017. Archived September 30, 2017. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/B6yaR
  3. About,” National Association of Manufacturers. Archived September 20, 2017. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/rh1rQ
  4. COMMENTS on PROPOSED ENDANGERMENT AND CAUSE ORC ONTRIBUTE FINDINGS FOR GREENHOUSE GASES (GHGs) Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act” (PDF), National Association of Manufacturers, June 23, 2009.
  5. Manufacturers Lead Legal Challenge to Clean Power Plan,” National Association of Manufacturers, October 23, 2015.
  6. “Dear Mr. President:” (PDF), National Association of Manufacturers, June 19, 2015.
  7. Steven Greenhouse. “The Unions That Like Trump,” The New York Times, April 8, 2017. Archived September 30, 2017. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/8LVlu
  8. Accountability,” Coalition for Regulatory Innovation. Archived September 30, 2017. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/YVlr1
  9. Transparency,” Coalition for Regulatory Innovation. Archived September 30, 2017. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/qtKB2
  10. Scientific Integrity,” Coalition for Regulatory Innovation. Archived September 30, 2017. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/783hx
  11. The Time is Now to Modernize our Regulatory System,” Coalition for Regulatory Innovation. Archived September 30, 2017. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/x93CG
  12. Coalition Members,” Coalition for Regulatory Innovation. Archived September 30, 2017. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/iwtZ8
  13. NAM POLICY POSITIONS” (PDF), National Association of Manufacturers, February 2016.
  14. The Global Climate Coalition” (Homepage), Global Climate Coalition. Archived March 2, 2001. Archive.is URLhttps://archive.is/vDnp0
  15. Lamar Smith (R-TX21),” Oil Change International. Data retrieved October 14, 2016. Archive.is URLhttps://archive.is/RvG29

Other Resources

  •  

Related Profiles

APCO Worldwide Background APCO has been described as “one of the world's most powerful PR firms.” [1], [2] According to its agency profile at O'Dwyers, “APCO Worldwide is a...
Hugh W. Ellsaesser Credentials Ph.D., Meteorology. [1] Background Hugh W. Ellsaesser, born in 1920, is a meteorologist by training and retired “guest scientist” at the Lawren...
Alfred (Al) Pekarek Credentials Ph.D., University of Wyoming (1974). [1]B.A. University of Minnesota-Twin (1965). [1] Background Alfred (Al) Pekarek is a former ass...
Benny Josef Peiser Credentials Ph.D. , University of Frankfurt (1993). Peiser studied political science, English, and sports science. [1], [2] Background Benny Peiser is a sports ...