Biden nominates two Democrats, one Republican to federal energy regulator
Last edited Fri Mar 1, 2024, 09:02 AM - Edit history (1)
Source: Reuters
February 29, 2024 6:05 PM EST
WASHINGTON, Feb 29 (Reuters) - President Joe Biden on Thursday nominated two Democrats and one Republican to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), an independent panel that rules on energy transmission and liquefied natural gas projects.
The two Democrats nominated were David Rosner, a FERC energy industry analyst currently on detail with the U.S. Senate energy committee, and Judy Chang, an energy economics and policy expert and former undersecretary of energy and climate solutions for Massachusetts.
The Republican, Lindsay See, recommended by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, is the solicitor general of West Virginia. The nominees must be confirmed by the Senate. FERC has been mainly known recently for approving natural gas pipelines and LNG export terminals.
It is expected to issue rules this year that could expand or upgrade electricity transmission, getting power from wind and solar projects to cities, which would help implement measures in Biden's climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act. The panel, which has a maximum of five members, currently has two Democrats and one Republican. This month Biden promoted Willie Phillips to head FERC.
Read more: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-nominates-two-democrats-one-republican-federal-energy-regulator-2024-02-29/
Since the freak-out has begun - see this post - https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3202207
Federal Commissions/Panels/Boards have a REQUIREMENT BY LAW to be "bipartisan", with seats set aside for a "majority" (administration's) party and a "minority party" (including "independents" ) and the charter will designate "no more than" some number of members from the administration's party.
Think. Again.
(8,376 posts)Knowing now that the republican ideology is to break down any and all of our nation's systems and institutions, wouldn't it be extremely dangerous to include one of them in an active office of any kind?
catrose
(5,073 posts)BumRushDaShow
(129,432 posts)Voltaire2
(13,153 posts)we deliberately refuse to learn.
BumRushDaShow
(129,432 posts)elleng
(131,088 posts)Elessar Zappa
(14,047 posts)Bidens not a lawbreaker.
BumRushDaShow
(129,432 posts)Federal Boards, Commissions, Panels have a requirement to nominate members of both "major" parties (and/or "independent" party), where an administration's party can have a "majority" of members but NEVER "all".
Established in 1977, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission controls the country's natural gas industry, hydroelectric projects, electric utilities, and oil pipelines and has played a critical role in the deregulation of these industries. Here's an explanation of the origins of the agency, what it does, and its role in the California crisis.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, traces its history back to the 1920s and the creation of the Federal Power Commission, a small federal agency that controlled hydropower dams. A decade later, President Franklin D. Roosevelt championed legislation to dismantle utility monopolies, and in 1935 Congress passed the Federal Power Act, requiring the Federal Power Commission to set "just and reasonable" wholesale electricity prices.
When FERC was established in 1977 as a replacement for the Federal Power Commission, its mandate was to determine whether wholesale electricity prices were unjust and unreasonable and, if so, to regulate pricing and order refunds for overcharges to ratepayers. Today, this little-known federal agency regulates the country's natural gas industry, hydroelectric projects, oil pipelines, and wholesale rates for electricity. With a modest $175 million budget and 1,200 employees, FERC is responsible for overseeing a $250 billion electricity industry, which puts the agency in charge of regulating pricing for about 73 percent of the electricity used in the United States.
FERC's five-member governing board is selected by the president and consists of five commissioners, all of whom serve staggered five-year terms. No more than three commissioners may belong to the same political party. The president designates the chairman of the commission, which means the chairman is usually from the same political party as the president and serves as the tie-breaking vote on matters that are deadlocked by party-line vote.
(snip)
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/blackout/regulation/ferc.html
Think. Again.
(8,376 posts)....to avoid the threat to the commission's work that republicans pose.
padah513
(2,505 posts)Think. Again.
(8,376 posts)...the rules only limit the number of the commissioners from any given party and doesn't mention limiting commissioners to only 2 specific parties:
"No more than three commissioners may belong to the same political party."
BumRushDaShow
(129,432 posts)was the Postal Board of Governors (which was interesting as she is a mail voting advocate) -
Skepticism of the postmaster general looms large in the confirmation hearings for Democrats Ron Stroman and Anton Hajjar and independent Amber McReynolds
By Jacob Bogage
April 21, 2021 at 12:00 p.m. EDT
(snip)
Amber McReynolds
The political independents nomination was the biggest surprise to postal industry insiders. She is chief executive of the National Vote at Home Institute, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group that advises election officials on how to expand mail-in voting. The group became a darling of liberals during the 2020 election cycle for helping 37 states, including Georgia, send and collect ballots through the mail, though it maintained a strict apolitical stance.
If confirmed, she would be the only woman on the governing board.
(snip)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/04/21/biden-usps-nominees/
Actually finding an "independent" (who might lean your way) is a way around the fixed party membership criteria, although obviously since the Senate still has to confirm, they may balk if that is done so it's probably not done often if at all (except I noticed it was in this case).
Think. Again.
(8,376 posts)Although nominating anyone who doesn't belong to the party dedicated to dismantling our country would be a safer move in any situation, I'd think.
BumRushDaShow
(129,432 posts)and this is something that can obviously get skewed when a (R) President nominates a (D) member and picks someone unsavory (and that is where the (D) Senators need to jump in and try to block a bad nominee when necessary),
Think. Again.
(8,376 posts)...the president only has to restrict the number of commissioners to 3 from any given party. It does not dictate that those parties must be Dem or repub.
BumRushDaShow
(129,432 posts)although 99 44/100% of the time, the "majority" number will be from the President's party.
Unfortunately because there are a pile of these types of "Commissions", etc., the vacant slots often go unfilled.
There's a good tracker here - https://ourpublicservice.org/performance-measures/political-appointee-tracker/
We are tracking 812 government positions among about 1,200 that require Senate confirmation.
93 positions have no Biden nominee.
0 picks are awaiting formal nomination.
77 nominees are being considered by the Senate.
555 have been confirmed by the Senate.
Additionally, we have identified 87 appointees so far who are serving in termed positions or who were held over from previous administrations.
Think. Again.
(8,376 posts)Mike Nelson
(9,966 posts)... what would the other side do? I think we know... also, anyone recommended by Mitch McConnell would be immediately be off my list.
BumRushDaShow
(129,432 posts)Mike Nelson
(9,966 posts)... I see that now. I like a President to follow the law!
BumRushDaShow
(129,432 posts)Since these types of positions need Senate confirmations, then unless we have a super-majority in the Senate, we have to try to get someone who won't be outright blocked (and that has happened a number of times, and they have to withdraw).