Legislative Update: Vinyl Institute Joins Broad Industry Push for Coordinated Worker Protection Rules

Vinyl Institute Joins Broad Industry Push for Coordinated Worker Protection Rules

A coalition of 76 trade associations, including the Vinyl Institute, has urged the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to establish a single, coordinated federal framework for workplace chemical safety.  In a letter sent to administration officials on July 20, the American Alliance for Innovation argued that EPA regulations issued under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) increasingly overlap with OSHA’s workplace safety requirements, creating duplicative and sometimes conflicting obligations for employers and workers. The groups contend that EPA’s implementation of TSCA has undermined regulatory consistency and called on the agencies to strengthen coordination, update their memorandum of understanding, and better align their regulatory activities.

The request builds on longstanding industry concerns that EPA should rely more heavily on OSHA to regulate workplace chemical risks where appropriate, an argument also advanced in litigation challenging EPA chemical regulations such as the methylene chloride rule. The coalition’s appeal comes as the Trump administration has indicated it intends to clarify the respective roles of EPA and OSHA, although an updated interagency agreement has yet to be released.

VI and Stop the Rail Merger Coalition Renew Objections After Latest Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern Proposal

On July 27, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern submitted additional commitments to the Surface Transportation Board (STB) in an effort to strengthen their case for approval of their proposed $71.5 billion merger. The companies pledged to expand committed gateway pricing by doubling the number of eligible shipments with fixed pricing agreements, provide competing railroads with access at certain locations where competition would otherwise decline, and offer customers temporary access to alternative rail service if service deteriorates during the integration process. They also proposed a new rate relief mechanism to ensure customers receive the promised benefits of the merger in a timely manner. The commitments were submitted in response to the STB’s request for supplemental information as regulators continue evaluating the transaction amid concerns from customers and rival railroads about competition and freight rates.

The Vinyl Institute, as part of the Stop the Rail Merger Coalition, issued a July 28 statement reiterating its opposition to the merger, saying it is unconvinced by the railroads’ latest filing with the STB, that the supplemental filing fails to resolve longstanding concerns that the proposed merger would reduce competition and does not satisfy the Board’s public interest standard. The statement contends the transaction would concentrate nearly half of U.S. rail traffic under a single company, resulting in higher shipping costs, fewer transportation options for agriculture, manufacturing, and energy industries, job losses, and a less resilient freight network.

“Three filings later, the central flaw remains: Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern have failed to demonstrate that this merger will enhance access to competitive rail service,” said Chris Jahn, President and CEO of the American Chemistry Council. “To make America the best manufacturing country in the world, we need more freight rail competition, not a mega-merger that concentrates monopoly power and leaves shippers with fewer choices.”

BNSF CEO Katie Farmer also argued that the merger would increase monopoly power without demonstrating meaningful competitive benefits. Specifically, Farmer criticized the expanded committed gateway pricing proposal as offering limited benefits to few customers while doing little to offset what she described as the anticompetitive effects of a combined railroad controlling roughly half of U.S. rail traffic. Citing Union Pacific’s history following prior mergers, the coalition urged the STB to conduct a rigorous review and reject the transaction unless the applicants can demonstrate that it will enhance rail-to-rail competition and provide enforceable protections for shippers.

Thune Pushes to Complete Packed Senate Agenda Before August Recess 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) is seeking to complete an ambitious legislative agenda before the Senate plans to depart on August 6 for the August recess, including a government funding bill, Russia sanctions legislation, Todd Blanche’s nomination for attorney general, dozens of executive branch nominations, and a procedural vote on cryptocurrency legislation. Most of these items require unanimous consent to expedite consideration, and Thune has warned senators that they may be required to remain in session through the weekend if agreements cannot be reached.

Despite these efforts, we expect the Senate to adjourn for the August recess without completing action on several of its remaining priorities. As the Senate prepares to join the House in recess, the following is an overview of the status of several legislative and regulatory issues of importance to the Vinyl Institute.

Farm Bill – On August 6, the Senate Agriculture Committee rejected a five-year farm bill at a markup after Democrats lined up against the measure in a partisan dispute over food stamp costs borne by states. The panel voted 10-11 against the bill, which raised doubts about prospects for passing a new farm bill before the end of the year. Republican Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) were absent, leaving the GOP two votes shy of a majority.

The committee was considering a revised five-year farm bill that incorporates several significant policy changes that were aimed at broadening bipartisan support. Among the most notable provisions is language to permanently authorize year-round sales of gasoline containing up to 15 percent ethanol (E15) by amending the Clean Air Act and making changes to nutrition policy in an effort to attract Democratic support. It would delay by one year the requirement established in the 2025 reconciliation law (PL 119-21) that states with higher Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payment error rates contribute toward the cost of food stamp benefits and would provide states with greater flexibility in calculating their SNAP cost-sharing obligations.  The Senate markup comes after the House passed its own five-year farm bill (H.R. 7567) in April, setting the stage for negotiations over the legislation’s final form.

Appropriations – Senate appropriators on August 2 released a bipartisan continuing resolution (CR) that would fund the federal government through Dec. 11 while temporarily blocking the White House from finalizing or implementing a Office of Management and Budget (OMB) proposed rule that would significantly reshape how federal grants are awarded and managed. On August 3, the Senate took a small step in advancing the CR by voting 89-4 to invoke closure and proceed with limited debate on the legislation. The proposed rule would align federal grants with President Donald Trump’s policy priorities by allowing political appointees to review awards, eliminating environmental justice considerations from grant evaluation criteria, strengthening agencies’ authority to terminate grants, and requiring grants to demonstrably support the administration’s objectives. The Senate CR would prohibit OMB from issuing or enforcing the rule through the duration of the stopgap measure.

The House Republicans’ version of the continuing resolution does not include similar restrictions, while House Democratic appropriations leaders, including Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), support the Senate provision and continue to seek a permanent prohibition on the rule, arguing it would politicize federal grants. Republicans and the administration have defended the proposal as ensuring federal spending better reflects presidential policy priorities. The dispute also reflects continuing congressional disagreements over the administration’s efforts to restructure EPA and federal research programs, following previous bipartisan attempts by Senate appropriators to preserve EPA’s research office that were ultimately unsuccessful. Although Senate leaders hope to enact a CR before the August recess to avoid a government shutdown, deep partisan disagreements over spending priorities and administration policies continue to cloud the path forward, with some lawmakers warning that another shutdown later this year remains a distinct possibility.

Budget and Reconciliation – Senate Republicans remain divided over whether to advance a budget resolution before the August recess, leaving the fate of a new reconciliation package and several other legislative priorities uncertain. During a closed-door conference meeting, Republicans failed to reach consensus on the size and scope of the package, particularly regarding defense spending. Defense hawks are pressing for substantially higher military funding in light of the ongoing conflict involving Iran, while fiscal conservatives continue to debate how such spending should be financed. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) acknowledged the difficult legislative outlook, describing the Senate’s crowded agenda as a “train wreck” and declining to predict whether Republicans have enough votes to adopt a budget resolution before lawmakers depart for recess. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-WI) has continued to push for at least a procedural vote, arguing that a broad reconciliation package with instructions to multiple committees would provide Republicans greater flexibility to advance priorities, including portions of President Donald Trump’s voter identification proposal.

Meanwhile, the Senate is still working through key policy details of the reconciliation package, including how many committees would receive reconciliation instructions and the extent to which election-related provisions would be included. The House has already adopted a budget resolution (H. Con. Res. 113) authorizing up to $95 billion in additional spending for defense, intelligence, agricultural assistance, and voting-related initiatives, but many Senate Republicans are signaling that substantially higher defense funding may ultimately be necessary.

TSCA Reform – With Congress preparing to leave for its August recess, the prospects for enacting bipartisan reforms to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) before the Sept. 30 expiration of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) authority to collect TSCA user fees have continued to diminish. Neither the House nor the Senate has advanced comprehensive TSCA legislation beyond hearings and discussion drafts, and the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee did not hold the anticipated markup of its proposal. Although negotiations between industry and EPA reportedly remain ongoing, stakeholders acknowledge that the limited number of legislative days remaining, coupled with competing congressional priorities, makes enactment of a broad reform package increasingly unlikely.

As confidence in comprehensive legislation fades, stakeholders are increasingly discussing narrower alternatives. Some industry representatives have suggested pairing a reauthorization of EPA’s fee authority with a limited set of bipartisan statutory changes rather than pursuing the broader reforms originally sought, while others have emphasized that EPA could implement a number of administrative improvements under existing law, particularly regarding the agency’s review of new and existing chemicals under TSCA Sections 5 and 6. At the same time, industry organizations are also pursuing administrative reforms outside of Congress, including urging EPA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to revise interagency procedures governing workplace chemical risk management in an effort to address longstanding concerns over TSCA implementation.

Permitting Reform – Supporters of bipartisan permitting reform are intensifying their efforts to secure congressional action before the end of the year, arguing that the current Congress represents the best opportunity to enact legislation streamlining federal permitting for energy, infrastructure, and industrial projects. At a Capitol Hill forum hosted by the American Council for Capital Formation, Sen. Alan Armstrong (R-OK) warned that if Congress fails to act before the November elections, the prospects for comprehensive permitting reform could diminish significantly, particularly if control of the House changes. Negotiations continue among Senate leaders on the Environment and Public Works (EPW) and Energy committees, although many observers now expect any legislative package to emerge after the August recess and potentially move during a post-election lame-duck session. Armstrong also urged lawmakers to build on existing House proposals while emphasizing that permitting certainty would benefit both conventional and renewable energy projects.

Negotiators continue to debate the scope of a bipartisan permitting reform package, with Democrats seeking to include electric transmission reforms as a key component of any final agreement. Supporters, including Sens. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) and Mike Rounds (R-SD), argue that faster permitting and grid modernization are increasingly critical to meeting the energy demands of artificial intelligence, data centers, and economic growth while strengthening U.S. competitiveness with China, though opponents warn that public resistance to large infrastructure projects could complicate efforts to streamline environmental reviews.

Twenty-five states challenge Trump administration’s Section 301 forced-labor tariffs

A coalition of 25 states has filed suit in the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) challenging the Trump administration’s Section 301 tariffs on 60 trading partners, arguing the duties were unlawfully imposed under the stated objective of combating forced labor in global supply chains. The lawsuit contends that the 10% and 12.5% tariffs are arbitrary and exceed the administration’s legal authority because the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) failed to establish a meaningful connection between the tariff rates and the prevalence of forced labor in individual countries. The states also argue that the administration did not adequately address public comments challenging the tariffs and failed to provide affected countries with a clear path to remove the duties through corrective actions.

The lawsuit further alleges that the Section 301 tariffs are an attempt to replace the broad tariffs the Supreme Court invalidated earlier this year under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The case follows a similar legal challenge filed by two U.S. importers shortly after the tariffs took effect on July 24, with both suits asserting that the administration failed to satisfy the statutory requirements for imposing Section 301 tariffs and is using them as a backdoor mechanism to restore previously invalidated trade duties.  The Trump administration has defended the tariffs as a lawful use of Section 301 authority to address trading partners that fail to adequately prevent goods produced with forced labor from entering U.S. supply chains.

House Republicans Back Trump Approach to UMCA Review

Rep. Rudy Yakym (R-IN) led a letter signed by 168 House Republicans expressing strong support for the Trump administration’s approach to the ongoing U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) Joint Review, urging the administration to secure meaningful improvements before agreeing to extend the agreement. While endorsing a long-term renewal of USMCA, the lawmakers argued that the review presents an opportunity to strengthen market access for U.S. manufacturers, farmers, and service providers, address harmful trade practices by Canada and Mexico, confront unfair trade and investment practices from third countries, and rationalize tariff structures to enhance North American competitiveness.

The letter shows broad support within the House Republican Conference, with nearly 90% of members on the Ways and Means, Agriculture, and Energy and Commerce Committees signing on, along with large majorities of Appropriations Committee members and committee chairs. Although Mexico and Canada agreed during the July 1 joint review to extend the agreement for another 16 years, the United States withheld its support pending additional commitments. USTR Jamieson Greer has stated that the administration intends to negotiate stronger market access and other reforms before agreeing to renew the agreement, which remains in force through 2036.

Senate Democrats Unveil Bill to Verify Recycled Plastic Claims

Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Adam Schiff (D-CA) have introduced the Tracking Plastic Act (TPA), legislation that would establish a standardized federal system for tracking and verifying recycled plastic content throughout the supply chain. The bill is intended to address inconsistent industry reporting practices, reduce fraud and mislabeling, and provide consumers with greater confidence that recycled-content claims on product labels are accurate. Supporters argue that the measure would create a transparent, science-based framework for measuring and tracing recycled plastic content, improving accountability while helping consumers make more informed purchasing decisions based on reliable environmental information.

The legislation would establish a federal working group composed of representatives from EPA and other agencies, along with scientific and academic institutions. The group would develop recommendations for standardized methods for recycled-content traceability, strategies to expand domestic markets for post-consumer recycled plastics, improved trade data, and approaches to measuring toxic substances in recycled materials. The bill is cosponsored by Senators Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) and primarily supported by environmental organizations and mechanical recycling groups.

The introduction of the legislation comes as Congress continues to debate how recycled content in packaging should be defined and marketed. The Tracing Plastic Act has emerged as a possible alternative to the bipartisan Recycled Materials Attribution Act (RMAA, H. R. 7502) which is supported by VI and the plastics industry.   The RMAA , introduced by Rep. Nicholas Lanworthy (R-NY), would immediately establish a legal framework for recycled-content claims and expressly authorizes mass balance accounting as an acceptable chain-of-custody methodology when certified by an approved third party. This is particularly important for advanced recycling because recycled feedstocks are often mixed with virgin materials during production, making physical segregation impossible. The bill also directs the FTC to revise its Green Guides to reflect these standards and gives the agency enforcement authority over misleading claims.