Legislative Update: House GOP Chooses New Speaker, Path for Farm Bill Still Uncertain

House GOP Chooses Mike Johnson as Speaker Amidst Leadership Shuffle

The House of Representatives elected Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) as the 56th Speaker in a unanimous 220-209 vote.  The decision comes after a three-week halt in the House’s legislative agenda, during which Republicans made multiple attempts to fill the Speaker seat following the removal of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).  None of the other candidates, including Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA), Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH), or House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN), could secure the majority vote needed to take the gavel.

Rep. Johnson previously served as the vice chair of the House Republican Conference.  He is also a former chair of the conservative Republican Study Committee and currently holds positions on the House Judiciary and Armed Services committees.  He is now responsible for leading the fractured GOP conference through legislative and political challenges. The first of which is the looming Nov. 17 expiration of government funding.

Speaker Johnson unveiled an ambitious legislative schedule in a letter to colleagues in advance of his election.  He intends to promptly resume efforts to pass individual FY24 appropriations bills, commencing with the House meeting on October 26 to conclude consideration of H.R. 4394 – Energy and Water Development appropriations. The House has passed four of the twelve spending bills to date. Speaker Johnson proposes addressing the Legislative Branch (HR 4364), Interior-Environment (H.R. 4821), and Transportation-HUD (H.R. 4820) bills in the following week. Subsequently, the Financial Services (H.R. 4664) and Commerce-Justice-Science bills would be considered during the week of November 6, and the Labor-HHS-Education and Agriculture measures the week of November 13.

Speaker Johnson’s tenure presents challenges reminiscent of his predecessor’s, navigating a complex appropriations landscape with a slender majority. Whether he will pursue additional spending cuts, as some in the Republican conference advocated under McCarthy, remains uncertain. Moreover, he will need to negotiate with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), both Senators with whom he has not previously met or established working relationships. They lead a caucus with divergent views on the appropriations topline and oppose the House’s proposed spending reductions.

Johnson also anticipates the need for another stopgap spending bill in the form of a continuing resolution (CR) “to ensure the Senate cannot jam the House with a Christmas omnibus.”  Such a CR may require support from Democrats, although House Appropriations ranking member Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) said she prefers a CR extending into December over a longer-term solution.

Farm Bill’s Path Still Uncertain

The Farm Bill still has major hurdles to overcome as new House Speaker Mike Johnson takes the gavel.  In his letter to colleagues on the House schedule, Johnson said he would like to pass the Farm Bill in December.  House and Senate committee leaders say they can still deliver a final negotiated bill by Dec. 31 despite missing their initial Sept. 30 deadline.  House Agriculture Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA) says the Committee is “coming along” and in a “really good place,” adding that he would like to release the text in November.

Missing the Dec. 31 deadline would send some programs back to operational practices of the 1940s unless Congress approves an extension of the expired farm bill.  On Oct. 25, Senate Agriculture Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) acknowledged that she knows they will need an extension, stating that it would be irresponsible to allow “vital programs and the farm safety net to lapse and revert to Depression-era policies in January.”   She said she would support a one-year extension given the short number of legislative days left to get the bill done.  She had preferred a shorter extension but says that USDA told her that would make it difficult to administer commodity programs.

The expiration of the Farm Bill has not significantly impacted USDA conservation programs so far due to the funding in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The IRA reauthorized and invested in key conservation programs in advance of the full Farm Bill reauthorization. These programs, which include the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), Agriculture Conservation Easement Program (ACEP), and Regional Conservation Program (RCPP), have all been reauthorized through 2031.

However, the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), administered by the Farm Service Agency (FSA), is an exception. CRP is crucial in conserving soil, safeguarding water quality, and providing wildlife habitat by establishing long-term cover on environmentally sensitive land. As of September 30, CRP’s statutory authorization and the rest of the Farm Bill expired.

EPA Collaborates with NASEM to Explore Costs and Benefits of MSW Recycling Programs

As directed by Congress, the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) initiated a study in collaboration with the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to gain insights into the costs and benefits associated with municipal solid waste (MSW) recycling programs. The purpose of this study is to provide guidance on the potential implementation of federal recycling policies and enhance the overall understanding of recycling. The ad-hoc NASEM committee formed for the project, titled “Costs and Approaches for Municipal Solid Waste Recycling Programs,” will assess programmatic and economic costs of MSW recycling programs at various government levels, including local, state, and tribal entities.

Their goal is to suggest options and potential policy approaches to facilitate effective MSW recycling programs. This study aims to find ways to support state and local recycling initiatives, especially in areas facing economic challenges. The committee will analyze data and case studies representing diverse recycling contexts within the U.S. and focus on differences in costs across governments and materials accepted for recycling. Ultimately, they will provide recommendations to the EPA on incentivizing and funding recycling activities economically and environmentally sustainable, which may involve various policy measures and metrics for assessing their effectiveness. Additionally, the committee will consider environmental impacts, particularly transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions, and address uncertainties in recyclable material supply and demand. Nominations for committee members will be accepted until November 15^th.

EPA Agrees to Timetable for Reviewing Air Toxics Regulations in Chemical Industries

As part of EPA’s regulatory efforts to address emissions and environmental concerns within the chemical industry, the agency agreed with environmental groups to establish a timetable for reviewing air toxics regulations pertaining to smaller “area source” chemical manufacturing facilities. This initiative encompasses a wide range of sectors, including pesticides, plastics, pharmaceuticals, and synthetic rubber, with the potential to impose stricter emissions limits.

Under the proposed consent decree, the EPA is committed to publishing a rule for these sectors by November 13, 2024, and finalizing it by September 17, 2025. This action stems from a lawsuit, California Communities Against Toxics v. Regan, filed by environmental advocates in 2022, alleging that the EPA had failed to review these standards within the mandated Clean Air Act deadline of December 2020. The Clean Air Act obliges the EPA to conduct a technology review every eight years and tighten regulations if cost-effective control technologies are available.