House Republican leaders are barreling ahead with taking up Natural Resources Chair Bruce Westerman’s big permitting legislation even as a handful of detractors threaten to tank the effort.
The “SPEED Act,” which would overhaul the National Environmental Policy Act project approval process, is supposed to be part of broader bipartisan negotiations on permitting. It includes demands the GOP has been making for decades.
But in recent days, the legislation has hit resistance from hard-line conservatives and lawmakers who contend the bill could benefit offshore wind projects that President Donald Trump has tried to block.
This week will see whether that group of critics — including House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) and Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) — will stall the bill’s progress and deliver a major blow to the permitting talks.
Westerman has relentlessly argued H.R. 4776, the “Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development Act,” is technology-neutral, and proponents say the bill may do much more for oil and gas projects than a handful of wind projects.
But Van Drew said last week, “I just got to do what I think is right,” stressing the years he’s spent talking to fishermen and the tourism industry about their problems with offshore wind. “It’s a hard issue.”
On Monday, the House Rules Committee will consider debate parameters for the “SPEED Act,” along with other energy and permitting bills. A big test will be whether hard-right conservatives on the panel — including Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) — let the process move forward.
The Rules Committee will consider more than 30 Republican and Democratic proposed amendments to the “SPEED Act.” Only a handful may reach the floor.
An amendment added during a Natural Resources markup would make it harder for the administration to kill already-issued permits. But Democrats want to fight harder against the administration’s anti-renewables agenda.
The conservatives and offshore wind opponents, meanwhile, want to do the exact opposite: strike the language added in committee. They also want to exempt offshore wind from provisions meant to limit NEPA lawsuits.
That kind of carve out is exactly what Westerman and others want to avoid. Instead, proponents point out that the bill’s technology-neutral language would be useful during a future Democratic administration.
In an interview Friday, Westerman said he’s not keen on making dramatic changes at this point, though he’s reviewing the proposed amendments and said he would consider any that “make sense and keep the integrity of the bill.”
“SPEED Act” critics are trying to get the White House on their side, telling the president the legislation would undermine his fight against the Biden-era “Green New Scam.”
Westerman said he approached Trump about the issue while visiting the White House when the president signed five measures to repeal Biden-era land development restrictions.
“I had a chance to talk to the president a little bit,” Westerman said. “I mean, you can’t get into really deep conversations. We talked about permitting. We were talking more broadly — not to say that the ‘SPEED Act’ didn’t come up in our conversation but it wasn’t like an official discussion on policy.”
The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Because the Westerman bill enjoys some bipartisan support — including co-sponsor Jared Golden (D-Maine) — critics’ best change to block is in the Rules Committee or when the full House votes on the panel’s resolution to govern floor debate. That vote is usually along party lines.
Such a revolt would not only throw the future of the “SPEED Act” into limbo but also throw much of this week’s House schedule into disarray.
Schedule: The Rules meeting is Monday, Dec. 15, at 4 p.m. in H-313 Capitol and via webcast.
