With the "fiscal cliff" crisis largely behind it, a new Congress convenes today with continued fights over the federal budget looming over the next few months.

It remains to be seen whether the coming battles over the debt ceiling, mandatory spending cuts and federal appropriations will monopolize lawmakers' attention or poison the chances for bipartisan cooperation on energy and environmental policymaking -- on incentives for renewable energy, efforts to confront climate change, decisions on whether to export North American oil and natural gas resources, how to regulate oil and gas extraction or myriad other areas.

The safest bet seems to be in favor of continued gridlock for the 113th Congress, but as 18th-century poet Alexander Pope once wrote, "Hope springs eternal."

Some congressional observers said yesterday that they remain cautiously optimistic that lawmakers will be able to put aside their differences to tackle emerging issues and those that have languished for years.

'It can't be any worse'

At the stroke of noon today, the 112th Congress will go down as the least productive Congress in modern political history. Unless hundreds of bills miraculously become law by then, the 112th will have passed only a fraction of the 906 bills enacted under the 80th Congress, which President Harry Truman dubbed the "Do-Nothing Congress."

"It can't be any worse than the 112th" Congress, said congressional expert Thomas Mann of the Brookings Institution in an email yesterday.

While Congress managed at the eleventh hour to avoid the worst of the so-called fiscal cliff, the deal passed earlier this week leaves a few more high-stakes showdowns looming. Around late February, Congress will need to increase the debt ceiling to avoid a government default, and by the end of March, the current appropriations continuing resolution will expire and across-the-board spending cuts known as the sequester will kick in -- unless Congress acts.

Analysts at ClearView Energy Partners, a Washington-based research firm, dubbed those three showdowns "mini-cliffs" that "virtually guarantee partisan conflict" over the first three months of the year, despite the bipartisan vote this week in favor of the cliff package.

While acknowledging that those fights are sure to see plenty more political posturing, Mann said he also believes those issues can and will be resolved through some kind of deal.

Afterward, "a reeling Republican Party worried about its political marginalization and a skillful president could produce a surprisingly productive 113th Congress," he said. "Nothing guaranteed, but some surprising achievements ... are possible."

Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and Mann's co-author on the book "The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track," said the tribalism and deep dysfunction that exist in Congress won't be erased by the swearing in of 95 new members.

"It's fairly clear that you've got a lot of forces out there, including some outside the political process, that thrive on division," he said.

Ornstein pointed to the partisan skepticism in some circles about Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's concussion and her subsequent illness as an example of the problem.

"Jumping in and challenging people's integrity, savaging them, there's still a market for that," he said. "A good part of it is a media problem. Another part of it is the money problem," as powerful special-interest groups use their deep pockets to threaten members who dare to try to come together with those on the other side of the aisle.

But like Mann, Ornstein offered a few avenues where he believes the 113th Congress has some potential to move legislation in a bipartisan way.

After Republicans took a beating from Hispanic voters in the November election, Ornstein said the GOP has indicated a willingness to do more on the issue of immigration reform.

"You have a very different dynamic on immigration than we had a year ago," he said.

And the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., last month has opened the door for some sort of bipartisan movement on the gun issue. Though it likely won't be a sweeping new gun-control measure, Ornstein said, a targeted piece of legislation, perhaps tightening restrictions on private gun sales or restricting certain types of ammunition, is possible.

Ornstein also pointed to limited opportunities for legislative progress on funding for infrastructure projects, tax reform and moving an energy bill.

In an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," which aired Sunday, President Obama highlighted energy as one of his top three priorities for his second term.

"We've got a huge opportunity around energy. We are producing more energy, and America can become an energy exporter," the president said. "How do we do that in a way that also deals with some of the environmental challenges that we have at the same time?"

Energy policy

Paul Bledsoe, an independent energy consultant and former Clinton White House and Senate aide, said yesterday that when it comes to energy policy, he believes the two parties agree on much more than the 2012 campaign suggested.

"There seemed to be an effort by Democrats to paint Republicans as only interested in oil company tax breaks and an effort by Republicans to paint Democrats as only interested in funding Solyndra," he said, referring to the now-bankrupt solar energy company. "Obviously that's not the case at all."

Bledsoe noted that Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who will be leading the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in the 113th Congress, have repeatedly stressed their close personal friendship and their desire to make the next Congress a productive one on the panel.

"There's every reason to believe that an energy bill can move forward," at least in the Senate, he said. "It strikes me that a package that included increased access to domestic oil and gas reserves in tandem with more robust energy efficiency standards could strike the right balance to gain broad bipartisan support in both chambers because both of those measures are good for the economy."

A Wyden aide said the incoming energy chairman hopes for some successes in the new Congress.

"Senator Wyden isn't going to give up trying to advance better policies, including overhauling energy incentives," Wyden spokesman Keith Chu said in an email. "Given that those incentives were once again extended in piecemeal, short-term fashion, it's even more important that Congress work on a permanent solution, to replace the boom-and-bust cycles and uncertainty that have plagued the energy sector."

Some energy experts say the fiscal cliff deal has made them optimistic for the future, pointing in particular to its extension and modification of the production tax credit for wind and other renewable sources (Greenwire, Jan. 2). The wind industry lobbied most aggressively this year for an extension to the credit, with help from a diverse cast of lawmakers from both parties.

"It demonstrates that even in the very difficult environment we find ourselves in now, where there's bipartisan support for something, there is an opportunity," said Manik Roy, vice president for strategic outreach at the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, formerly the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

The fiscal cliff debacle -- and the new showdowns it has created -- came amid a growing desire for comprehensive reform of the tax code, which leaders of both parties reiterated this week.

Tax reform

Speaking after passage of the cliff deal, Obama called for more spending cuts in conjunction with "further reforms to our tax code so that the wealthiest corporations and individuals can't take advantage of loopholes and deductions that aren't available to most Americans."

And Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), who chairs the Ways and Means Committee, said on the House floor Tuesday night that the cliff deal was only the "first step" of a process to simplify the tax code through "comprehensive and fundamental tax reform to make American businesses and workers more competitive in the global marketplace."

The tax code has not been fundamentally updated since 1986 -- a process that stretched over several years -- and a new overhaul would be an unquestionably heavy lift for any Congress.

Nonetheless, lobbyists from all sectors are gearing up for the tax reform fight, which could have broad implications for tax benefits enjoyed across energy technologies, from wind to oil to natural gas. A reformed tax code could seek to strip away those incentives, such as the temporary production tax credit for wind that won a one-year extension in the cliff deal or baked-into-the-code incentives like the "intangible drilling costs" deduction enjoyed by oil and gas producers.

The oil industry is resisting changes to its tax preferences. The wind industry's main lobby, meanwhile, last month offered some ideas to Congress on how the production tax credit could be phased out over six years, in an effort to get ahead of the conversation (E&E Daily, Dec. 13, 2012).

"We've seen a growing consensus that the existing suite of tax breaks and credits for both fossil and renewable energy are under pressure, and I think there is reason to believe that a broader-based tax proposal that rewards energy innovation could gain support," Bledsoe said.

Some lawmakers and advocates are pushing new ideas that could gain steam in a tax reform debate. For example, Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) is the lead sponsor of bipartisan legislation that would allow renewable energy companies to organize as master limited partnerships to attract new investors, while Roy's group is spearheading a coalition urging expanded tax credits to encourage the use of captured carbon dioxide in enhanced oil recovery.

Numerous groups also continue to push Congress to enact a carbon tax to offset revenue that would be lost by lowering corporate rates in tax reform.

Environmental issues

Environmental groups aren't particularly optimistic that a divided Congress will come together on their issues in the next two years.

Clean Air Watch's Frank O'Donnell said yesterday that he doesn't expect any significant Clean Air Act action anytime soon.

"There may be continued attempts in the House to pass 'message' bills, protesting various EPA rules. But at this point, it's a little like the boy who cried wolf too often. At some point, even the lobbyists will stop paying attention," O'Donnell said.

Paul Billings of the American Lung Association said that he doesn't see much hope for Congress' playing a constructive role in improving public health on clean air over the next two years.

"The pattern of the last two years was to try to weaken and undermine Clean Air Act public health protections," he said.

Still, there seem to be at least some Washington insiders who believe that the 113th Congress is poised to do more.

In a speech on the House floor during the final hours of the fiscal cliff showdown Tuesday, outgoing House Rules Chairman David Dreier (R-Calif.), who is retiring after 32 years in office, said he believes Congress is on the verge of being better than ever.

Dreier -- who in his speech listed climate change as one of the "great challenges to which we all must rise," despite having voted against carbon cap-and-trade legislation in 2009 -- said that while political division is a current reality, it is not Congress' fate.

"I believe that as an institution, Congress can and must forge new consensus and restore hope and optimism for future generations," he said.

While Dreier may be among the most optimistic voices, it does appear that on the dawn of a new Congress, there are at least a few in Washington believe the new body should be entitled to a "free shave," as the famous Washington Post cartoonist Herbert Block once put it.

Before Richard Nixon was elected president, Block was famous for drawing him as a shady character with a permanent five o'clock shadow. After the 1968 election, Block decreed that as the new president, Nixon was entitled to a "free shave."

But it didn't take long for Block to resume portraying Nixon as evil -- even without the stubble.

Reporter Jeremy Jacobs contributed.

Congress this week sent a handful of public lands bills to President Obama's desk, including measures to fund endangered fish recovery programs and allow maintenance of a natural gas line that runs through a portion of Glacier National Park in Montana.

Although the Senate this week approved more than a dozen lands and wildlife bills in total -- including one to designate new wilderness in Michigan -- the rest are unlikely to pass unless the House takes them up in the remaining hours of the 112th Congress, which ends at noon. That means the 112th Congress is set to become only the second since 1964 to designate no new wilderness.

Congress sent to Obama H.R. 6060, a bill by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) to safeguard endangered fish.

The bipartisan bill, which the House unanimously approved in September and the Senate passed this week, would reauthorize funding for programs recovering four endangered fish species in the Upper Colorado River and San Juan River Basin (E&E Daily, Sept. 20, 2012).

Two programs have been working for more than 20 years to restore populations of the Colorado pikeminnow, razorback sucker, humpback chub and bonytail by 2023. Bishop's bill would reauthorize $6 million, adjusted for inflation, from power revenues for the programs through 2019.

The Senate also gave final approval to H.R. 4606, by Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.), to clarify the National Park Service's authority to allow maintenance of a natural gas line that runs through a portion of Glacier National Park in Montana. The House approved the bill last month 286-10 (E&E Daily, Dec. 18, 2012).

Another bill headed for Obama's desk, H.R. 3641 by Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.), will upgrade California's Pinnacles National Monument to a national park, a move that is expected to draw more tourists to the area (Greenwire, Jan. 2).

Two other measures headed into law are H.R. 3263 by Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), to authorize the Interior secretary to allow the storage and conveyance of nonproject water at the Norman project in Oklahoma, and H.R. 4073 by Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.), to clarify the legal status of Colorado's popular Manitou Incline hiking trail. The bill addresses a right-of-way issue with the Manitou and Pikes Peak Railway Co., Lamborn said.

Bills passed by the Senate but not the House include measures to designate new wilderness at a national lakeshore in Michigan, expand the boundaries of the San Antonio Missions National Historical Park and clarify federal jurisdiction over an abandoned lead mine in Colorado.

A Democratic House aide said there was no indication that the Republican leadership intends to act on the Senate bills.

A spokeswoman for the House Natural Resources Committee said it is unlikely the House will act but noted that the chamber has passed 16 of the 17 bills the Senate sent the committee by last September.

The Senate bills include S. 140, from Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), which would designate nearly half of the 71,000-acre Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore as wilderness, while maintaining access to county roads and state highways, boat launches and historical structures.

The bill, which is among only a handful of wilderness bills to pass the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee this Congress, is sponsored in the House by Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-Mich.) and co-sponsored by eight others, including Michigan Republican Reps. Fred Upton, Dave Camp and Dan Benishek.

The bill was the only wilderness measure passed by the Senate this Congress. No wilderness bills were passed in the House, where Republican leaders have generally frowned on new restrictions on public lands.

But a spokesman for Levin said the senator remains hopeful the House will take up the bill.

"The Senate's action is a big victory for all those who have worked to protect this precious slice of Michigan's natural and cultural heritage," Levin said in a statement earlier this week. "I'm hopeful that even in the last days of the 112th Congress the House can act and send this bill to the president."

Levin said many of the areas in the bill have been managed as wilderness since 1982. The lakeshore in the northwest corner of Michigan's mainland is a favorite spot for hunters, anglers, hikers and boaters and was ranked "The Most Beautiful Place in America" by ABC's "Good Morning America" last year.

The Senate also passed the following bills, but not the House:

• S. 302, by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), to permit construction of a natural gas pipeline along the Parks Highway through Denali National Park. The bill offers a "clear legal path" for North Slope natural gas to be transported to market, Murkowski said yesterday.

• S. 3563, by Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), to amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to modify an oil and gas permitting pilot project by the Bureau of Land Management.

• S. 2015, by Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), to convey about 322 acres of federal lands to the Powell Recreation District in Wyoming for a shooting range.

• S. 264, by Sen. Thad Conchran (R-Miss.), to convey two parcels of Interior Department lands within the Natches Trace Parkway to Mississippi.

• S. 1047, by Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), to clarify federal jurisdiction over an abandoned lead mine in Colorado.

• S. 1421, by Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), to authorize the Peace Corps Commemorative Foundation to establish a commemorative work in Washington, D.C.

• S. 1478, by Sen. Tim Johnson (R-S.D.), to modify the boundary of the Minuteman Missile National Historic Site in South Dakota.

• S. 499, by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), to authorize the Interior secretary to facilitate the development of hydroelectric power on the Diamond Fork System of the Central Utah Project.

• S. 114, by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), to expand the boundaries of the San Antonio Missions National Historical Park.

Under fire from enraged Northeastern lawmakers, House Republican leaders yesterday scheduled two votes on aid for victims of Superstorm Sandy.

The House will vote tomorrow on a measure to allow $9.7 billion in additional borrowing authority for the National Flood Insurance Program, which could hit its limit as soon as Jan. 7. It will vote on another $51 billion Sandy package on Jan. 15, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) announced in a joint statement yesterday afternoon.

"Getting critical aid to the victims of Hurricane Sandy should be the first priority in the new Congress," the leaders said following a meeting with livid members of their own party from New York and New Jersey.

The House had been set to vote on a $60.4 billion Senate-passed aid package late Tuesday when Boehner abruptly scrapped the vote. The move quickly drew an angry backlash from the region's lawmakers, with some of the strongest criticism coming from Republicans (Greenwire, Jan. 2).

New Jersey's famously blunt governor, Chris Christie (R), called a press conference yesterday in which he blasted the failure to hold a vote during the 112th Congress as "disgusting" and placed the blame squarely on his own party.

"There's only one group to blame ... the House majority and their speaker, John Boehner," Christie said. "This was the speaker's decision. He is alone."

And yesterday morning, Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) took to the airwaves to urge Northeasterners to close their wallets to the Republican Party.

"I'm saying anyone from New York or New Jersey who contributes one penny to the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee should have their head examined," King said on CNN. "Often, you give the benefit of the doubt to your party; I'm over that."

But King buried the hatchet after the meeting with GOP leaders in which they announced the votes.

"What's done is done," the New York lawmaker told reporters. "This was a very intense 24 and 48 hours; we're all big boys, we understand that. All that counts is the bottom line -- the bottom line is, we're getting the help we need, and the speaker and majority leader have committed to follow through."

Some Republicans had cringed at the cost of the Senate-passed measure and argued that the package includes funding unrelated to the storm. Lawmakers at the meeting yesterday said Boehner felt he couldn't ask Republicans to vote on it on the heels of a fiscal cliff package that some conservatives criticized as not including enough spending cuts.

Republicans had planned a two-part approach to their version of the bill, with House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) filing a $27 billion bill to address urgent needs, including the flood insurance program, and Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) filing a $33 billion amendment for longer-term recovery projects that would bring it to the Senate total.

Freylinghuysen said yesterday that Republicans have agreed to proceed with the same two-step scenario on Jan. 15, with $9.7 billion less in the first bill if that amount is approved tomorrow.

Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.), whose Staten Island district was hard hit by Sandy, said he was hopeful that he would be able to whip enough votes for the package.

"I did it once before -- on New Year's Eve, I had the votes -- and I'm going to tell you, I'm going to get the votes this time," Grimm said. "I can tell you that the New York and New Jersey delegation is going to be a force to reckon with, and I don't think there is anyone in this House that is going to be able to overcome [the] New York-New Jersey delegation."

The Senate will have to reconsider the legislation, though, since its bill dies at noon today when the 112th Congress ends.

A Senate aide said yesterday that the upper chamber plans a unanimous consent vote on the $9.7 billion for flood insurance tomorrow following the House vote.

"This is a positive step forward for the families and businesses still struggling after Sandy," Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said in a statement to Greenwire. "I will urge Senate leadership to make this our first priority in the next Congress."

Congress' last-minute scramble to avert tax increases and spending cuts provided plenty of drama on New Year's Day, but the fallout from that vote -- anything but a typical split along party lines -- could stretch into the 2014 election cycle.

Democrats carried the fiscal cliff legislation in the House, providing 172 of the "yes" votes needed to pass the bill, which prevailed 257-167.

While House lawmakers, including leadership on both sides, offered a range of explanations for their votes in the hours following, few of those rationalizations -- ranging from demands for more spending cuts to higher taxes -- hinted toward the political realities members could face in 2014 re-election bids. In the view of many political professionals, Republicans who voted for the measure could be particularly vulnerable to challenges from the right next year.

Among the most notable of the 151 Republicans to vote against the measure were House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia -- who made his opposition known shortly after the Senate passed the measure 89-8 early on New Year's Day -- along with Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy of California and Chief Deputy Whip Peter Roskam of Illinois. They broke with House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) -- and with House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the GOP's vice presidential nominee last year.

Incoming House Democratic Caucus Chairman Xavier Becerra of California, a rising star in his party, also voted against the measure, arguing publicly that the compromise fell short on closing tax loopholes and addressing the deficit.

"In the end, I could not support this short-term fix, which may spawn additional long-term problems, putting off until later the tough decisions on taxes and our nation's debt and deficits, while also ignoring the biggest deficit challenging America's prosperity: a jobs deficit," Becerra said in a statement yesterday.

Much as the House split over the measure, California's 53-member delegation offered a mixed bag of endorsements -- possibly a reflection of the state's new open primary system, in which the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, advance to the general election, meaning candidates don't necessarily have to appeal to the more extreme elements of their parties.

Among the Golden State House delegation's departing lawmakers, those who either retired or were defeated for re-election, all who were present favored the legislation: Reps. Joe Baca (D), Howard Berman (D), Laura Richardson (D), Brian Bilbray (R), Mary Bono Mack (R), Elton Gallegly (R), Wally Herger (R), Dan Lungren (R) and David Dreier (R). Among the 51 members (there are two vacancies in the delegation), 29 Democrats voted "yes," while 11 Republicans did the same.

While House GOP lawmakers in reliably conservative Southern states like Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee voted unanimously against the measure, all the Republicans voting from New York and Pennsylvania joined their Democratic colleagues in supporting the bill.

In the West, Idaho Rep. Mike Simpson (R) split with his colleague Rep. Raul Labrador (R) to support the bill, a move that could draw the ire of tea party conservatives who have failed to gin up a challenger to Simpson in prior elections.

"They like him in Washington, D.C.," Tea Party Boise President Chad Inman told the website Watchdog.org in December after Simpson said publicly he could support a compromise that included tax increases for the wealthy. "That doesn't mean he's loved here."

In a statement issued Tuesday, Simpson appeared to try to pre-empt such criticisms, calling for additional spending cuts in future legislative debates.

"While I remain a strong proponent of a more comprehensive approach to solving our nation's long-term fiscal crisis, this bill is a critical piece of legislation that lowers taxes for nearly every taxpayer," Simpson said.

Conservative South Dakota Rep. Kristi Noem (R) also voted to pass the fiscal cliff measure, following the lead of South Dakota Sens. John Thune (R) and Tim Johnson (D).

In a statement posted to her campaign's Facebook account, Noem defended her decision, citing a continuation of tax cuts for individuals earning less than $400,000 annually and for couples earning less than $450,000.

"The fiscal cliff vote protected 99 percent of South Dakotans from President Obama reaching into their pockets and taking more of their hard-earned money to subsidize his continued deficit spending," Noem wrote. "As a member of the political party that does not control Washington, DC, I'm here for damage control. I won't stand by and allow this President to bring more uncertainty into this country by preventing farm families from passing on their family businesses and hard-working moms and dads from being able to put food on their tables."

Whistle-blowers are calling on a key Senate committee to beef up security at nuclear reactors in New York and South Carolina that they say are vulnerable to terrorist attacks, gas pipeline explosions and dam failures.

Two nuclear engineers warned Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), the outgoing chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, that a gas pipeline is dangerously close to Entergy Corp.'s Indian Point plant north of New York City and that dams upstream from the Oconee Nuclear Station in South Carolina could fail.

In both cases, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of Homeland Security have failed to act, said Lawrence Criscione, a risk engineer at NRC, and Paul Blanch, a former nuclear engineer who now works as an energy consultant.

"Both the NRC and Homeland Security have been aware of these potential threats for years and have as yet failed to determine whether any action is needed to prevent or deter these events," they wrote in a Dec. 18, 2012, letter to Lieberman.

Richard Perkins, with NRC's Division of Risk Analysis, told NRC's inspector general that the agency was withholding information from the public about the threat of flooding at the Oconee plant (Greenwire, Sept. 17, 2012).

NRC maintains the plants are safe. The agency found in 2006 and 2008 that an explosion on the gas pipeline about 600 feet from the Indian Point reactors "would fail to damage safety related systems or components," said NRC spokesman Scott Burnell.

Jim Steets, a spokesman for Entergy in the Northeast, said the pipeline is located at a higher elevation than the reactors and any explosion would not jeopardize the reactors or safety equipment.

"It's old news," Steets said. "This is an issue that was brought up many years ago."

And Burnell said Duke Energy Corp., which operates the Oconee plant, is upgrading flood protection at its plant, should the Jocassee Dam on the Keowee River fail.

But David Lochbaum, a nuclear plant safety expert with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said NRC has redacted or withheld various studies related to the gas pipeline at Indian Point and dam at Oconee, which raises questions about the facilities' safety.

"All we have is their words that it's still OK," he said.

Criscione and Blanch said they plan to take their concerns to Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), who is expected to replace Lieberman as the committee's chairman this month. Carper oversaw nuclear issues as chairman of the Clean Air and Nuclear Safety Subcommittee.

"I'm asking the Homeland Security committee to step in because the NRC refuses to do anything about this, other than stick their head in the sand," Blanch said. "It's extremely significant."

Click here to read the whistle-blowers' letter.

In one of the 112th Congress' final acts, lawmakers sent legislation to the president's desk that addresses tainted imported drywall that has contaminated thousands of homes across the country.

The House earlier this week passed an amended version of Virginia Rep. Scott Rigell's (R) H.R. 4212 in a 378-37 vote. Virginia Sen. Mark Warner (D) had already shepherded the bill through the Senate by unanimous consent.

"This is a bill about protecting American families -- their health and financial well-being," Rigell said in a statement yesterday. "Too many of our friends and neighbors have suffered because of the effects of Chinese drywall in their homes, and this bill ensures that preventative standards are in place so no American family is faced with the hardship and heartache from contaminated drywall ever again."

At issue is millions of pounds of potentially toxic drywall that was used during the country's housing boom and through reconstruction of the Gulf Coast following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005.

Most of the drywall came from China. There have been thousands of reported cases of respiratory problems associated with it, as well as corrosion of electrical systems. The Consumer Product Safety Commission testified in 2011 that it had received nearly 4,000 complaints about the drywall from 43 states. Lawmakers have estimated that the product has been used in roughly 8,000 homes.

But the government has done little to address the problem. CPSC has not issued a recall, and hardly any compensation has been provided to the affected families.

Rigell and Warner's bill expresses a sense of Congress that Chinese manufacturers need to pay the victims of their products. It also establishes a labeling requirement so defective drywall can be traced to its maker.

Further, it sets chemical standards on the amount of sulfur allowed in domestic and imported drywall and requires CPSC to update remediation guidelines so the product isn't reused or recycled.

"Hundreds of Virginia homeowners have been put through hell after building or repairing their homes with toxic drywall," Warner said. "Our bipartisan legislation should ensure that, in the future, more Virginians will not have to go through similar nightmares."

Warner, Rigell and other members of Virginia's delegation have been looking for ways to address the drywall issue for several years since a significant amount of the product was used in the state's Hampton Roads area. Warner and his staff have worked with 100 affected Virginia families for three years, his office said, including approaching mortgage lenders, insurance companies and the IRS.

Still, in 2011 Warner said he could not "think of a more frustrating issue" that he's been involved with (E&E Daily, Dec. 7, 2011).

"This legislation helps make sure that unsafe drywall won't be sold in the future," Warner said, "and that the manufacturers of tainted drywall will be held accountable."

The White House has not said whether it supports the bill. However, President Obama has vetoed very few pieces of legislation, and CPSC has said it supports the measure.

Texas' Sen.-elect Ted Cruz (R), a fervent supporter of energy development, will be sworn in today, and it's fair to say his actions will be closely watched by both energy sector champions and environmentalists.

Heralded as a rising star in the Republican Party, Cruz burst on the scene last year with the backing of the tea party, laden with impressive credentials -- degrees from Princeton and Harvard Law School -- and experience as a domestic policy adviser during the 2000 Bush-Cheney campaign, as a lawyer leading U.S. Supreme Court cases, and as associate deputy attorney general at the Department of Justice. Before throwing his hat in the ring for the Senate race, he was the solicitor general of Texas from 2003 to 2008.

SPECIAL SERIES

E&E Daily profiles new members of Congress who will quickly become players on energy and environmental issues.

Cruz's political ascension was especially noteworthy because he prevailed in the Republican primary over the wishes of the Texas GOP establishment, which is plenty conservative -- but seen as insufficiently so by many tea party activists.

However, given the unstable political situation facing the gridlocked Congress, including a GOP on the defensive after a lost presidential election, fights over the budget, tax policy, spending and cuts, "it's unlikely that a freshman senator like Ted Cruz, talented as he is, will be a pivotal player in altering the discussion" on energy, said Bruce Buchanan, a University of Texas, Austin, professor of government who specializes in presidential politics. With a Democratic Senate majority, "nothing in a policy sense is going to happen in the Senate [for Republicans], and therein lies the rub for Mr. Cruz and much of the energy policy," he said. "My guess is that his impact will be more personal than on energy policy."

Personal in that Cruz's Hispanic roots and professional background lend him a chance to redefine a heavily white Republican Party that is trying to reach out to ethnic voters. As a new wave of nonwhite Republican stars emerge -- like Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal -- Cruz stands among them and is being closely watched as a potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate.

A first-generation Cuban-American, born 42 years ago in Calgary, where his father was working in the petroleum business, Cruz touts his family's experience in Cuba as motivation behind his views on achieving the American dream through limited government, fiscal responsibility and individual freedom.

Cruz ran on a platform of conservative values -- both fiscal and social -- and a narrative of promoting domestic energy development and an "all of the above" energy policy to catapult the nation into not just achieving energy independence but also becoming a global energy exporter. His positions hardly differed from his principal rival in the Republican primary, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, the initial frontrunner. But Cruz's lack of experience in elective office became a selling point as the primary developed.

"We are witnessing a great awakening," Cruz told supporters in Houston after swamping Dewhurst in a runoff at the end of July. "Millions of Texans, millions of Americans are rising up to reclaim our country, to defend liberty and to restore the Constitution."

Cruz supports allowing states to determine energy regulation on matters including hydraulic fracturing and was endorsed during the campaign by groups like the Texas Association of Business, the Associated Builders & Contractors of Texas and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Sen.-elect Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is a tea party favorite. Photo courtesy of the Cruz campaign.

"Senator-elect Ted Cruz has called for policy that will limit the scope of the federal government and reduce the federal deficit. We look forward to working with him in the 113th Congress on issues that will create growth and jobs," the U.S. Chamber said in a statement.

For the Washington, D.C.-based Independent Petroleum Association of America, the most pressing issue is tax policy, which remains tied up in the budget negotiations and could have the ability to dramatically affect oil and gas producers.

"For independent producers, our capital comes from selling the product we make, and if you raise taxes, you're essentially taking the money that we're receiving from our production as tax. And we invest that money back into new U.S. production," said Lee Fuller, IPAA vice president of government relations. "I anticipate [Cruz] will be a strong supporter as we begin the debate here in Washington."

Cruz is also an ardent supporter of the $7.6 billion Keystone XL pipeline, which, if approved, would carry crude from the Alberta oil sands to Texas refineries. He said President Obama's move to postpone a pipeline approval decision until an environmental assessment has been completed was part of the president's "war on jobs."

"With the stroke of a pen, the president eliminated tens of thousands of jobs, which the Keystone XL would've provided," Cruz told the Houston Business Journal.

The pipeline is expected to generate billions of dollars in economic activity nationwide -- but has triggered dire warnings from environmental groups.

"I strongly support exploration drilling and seeking any and all energy sources we can domestically," Cruz said in an interview posted on his website. "I think this administration has been the most hostile administration in history to the oil and gas industry."

Last year, Cruz fought the Gulf of Mexico offshore drilling moratorium that Obama initiated in the wake of the 2010 BP PLC oil spill, which became the worst environmental disaster in the nation's history.

The much-bandied-about cap-and-trade discussion will likely see no support from Cruz, who signed the grass-roots "Contract From America" that rejects the policy, arguing it hinders competitiveness, boosts unemployment and does little to prevent a warming world.

Cyrus Reed, acting chapter director of the Sierra Club's Texas-based Lone Star Chapter, expects Cruz will oppose "further regulations on emissions of carbon dioxide," such as ozone pollution standards expected to be released by U.S. EPA that could increase the number of Texas regions that don't meet the new rules. Those "nonattainment" zones, according to Fuller, "will impose significant restrictions on growth in the state" and have been problematic for Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth.

Reed also expects Cruz to oppose regulations that would establish a baseline on power plant emissions that could limit the types of plants that would be built and also limit the ability to produce coal-powered electricity unless plants have advanced technology to capture carbon dioxide emissions.

Reed isn't banking on Cruz's support when it comes to regulations of oil and gas development on federal lands, either. "We would want strong regulation that would not necessarily prohibit oil and gas development on public lands, but would limit it," he said.