Hello again. Wow. Long day. Sitting up here in the House gallery, awaiting the House vote on whether or not to accept SB 327, the Holcomb/ energy compromise bill. Will there be drama? Will there be anticlimax? Unknown. I’m too tired to go out in the hall and listen to the gossip right now. Even if I did, we still wouldn’t know.
Sitting here in a stupor, I decided to check blog stats – and, whoa! within the last hour, two entries are going thru the roof (our happy little CEP smallfriendlyblog roof). The final House vote on the measure, and the final Senate vote. Folks, what you are probably looking for is this entry, which contains links to the complete vote count for both.
Moments like these, I really wish I had the time to go back and spellcheck. And link to House and Senate journal entries for those days (they are so interesting…) but. Probably not going to happen.
We await the representatives. They are now caucusing. What should happen today? If I understand the procedure aright, the representatives can say yes or no, that they love it or hate it, but there can be no amendments from the floor at this juncture.
Will the vote splits from the first vote change? Dunno. Smarter people than I are speculating wildly on same right now, and I’d be foolish to even guess. I suppose that it could be argued that this vote might be indicative of whether the measure has become veto-proof yet. However, I bet there is also some form of an argument that goes the other way.
While we are waiting, here’s a snippet from Sarah Kessinger on how the conference committee went earlier in the day (Hays Daily News). Some interesting quotes. Ooo. And an interesting editorial from the Hawver report on the connection between campaign finance votes and the coal bill (Kansan.com). Also, while I am mentioning it, an editorial from the Salina Journal on an upcoming energy seminar with local legislators, and the need to learn more about coal. (The seminar is co-sponsored by the Land Institute, CEP’s parent organization.) Quotables:
It should matter to you how our representatives are voting on Sunflower Electric’s plan to build two coal-fired power plants near Holcomb.
Are they obstructionists standing in the way of a $3.6 billion jolt to the state’s economy and a reliable, safe energy source for years to come? Or, are they deluding themselves if they truly believe that dumping millions of tons of CO2 into the air won’t have long-term, life-threatening consequences for Kansas and the planet?
If you plan to base your support for Sen. Pete Brungardt and Reps. Deena Horst, Charlie Roth and Josh Svaty, in part, on how they’re voting on this issue, here’s your chance to question them.
No, we’re not scientists. We’re ordinary citizens trying to make the right decisions for our state. Saturday’s forum provides a great chance to question our legislators, gain some knowledge, and just maybe influence Kansas’ energy future.
Yeah baby! Investigate, question, learn. Then go talk about it. The CEP mantra. We want to facilitate an active, informed citizenry getting involved in climate and energy issues, including engaging on the political level, and creating a broad public conversation. Yes, that is the sort of thing one writes in a grant application – but in this case it also happens to be true.
Is this thing going to start soon…? The room is filling, but slowly. Some key figures are not visible on the floor , at least not from my cherry seat in the gallery.
CRACK! Gavel. House comes to order. Clerk reads. Chairman Holmes is standing by up front, papers in hand. Senate agreement to agree-to-disagree is read. Holmes presents conference committee report on HB 327. He mentions that it now includes a balloon (of KCPL language), as well as its other contents. He stands for questions on report.
Rep Kuether – she thanks the conference committee for their participation. Lots of meetings Very collegial, despite differences. She opposes the conference committee report. It left the committee a whole lot less green than when it arrived, and it didn’t get any better. It is dangerous also to set these precendents for Bremby, restrciting his authority. The grass is greener somewhere else, but right now that is not in Kansas.
Final action – wait, no. Holmes moves they adopt. Now final action. MH does not have Eileen, so can’t take names, sorry, but they should be in journal tomorrow (I think).
Hmm. Rep.Flora did not get chance to make his comment.
Explanations of votes and changes.
Rep. Flora – In regards to mercury part of bill, mh understanding is that it only affects new plants. The amendment I made on floor had to do with all plants. This is a very low standard. I don’t know why it has been changed. I just wanted body to be aware of that.
Rep. Sloan – brings up his statement. clerk reads it. He changed his vote to yes. Statement will be in journal tomorrw.
Rep. Holmes explains vote. Clerk reads. Will be in journal tomorrow.
Ayes – 75. Noes – 47. Abstain – 3. (MH – these votes have flipped a litle bit as I have updated. Check official records for final tally)
It passes. Does not appear to be veto-proof – (they would need 84) although who knows. it is possible that some folks might not change vote until the last minute.
Adjourned.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
CEP live blogging from House Select Committee on Energy and Environment in the Future, Day 1 of briefings on HB 2949
March 5, 2008
Hi there. Welcome for Round Three of CEP live blogging from the Capitol today. I hope that all the CEP funders are noting our tireless efforts to make the democratic process regarding climate and energy issues ever more open and accessible…!
The committee members today (and some of these names are probably familiar. I’m starting to feel like I should post photos): Chairman Don Myers, Vice-Chair Rob Olson, Ranking Minority Vaughn Flora, and Representatives Watkins, Light, Whitham, Proehl, Faust-Goudeau, and Rardin. The bill at issue is HB 2949, the Kansas Energy Plan Act, which proposes to establish in law a baseload mix of fuel that will up nuclear, support coal, eliminate gas, and marginalize intermittent power, aka wind.
Today Chairman Meyers will brief the committee on the bill. Tomorrow Paul Genoa of the Nuclear Energy Institute will brief the committee on the costs of nuclear power. Next week there will be hearings on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday.
Written materials available for the audience today: The recent article in the KC Star on nuclear power, an article from the Sun Telegram on the recent dip in wind power on the TX grid (although I note not the article from the Houston Chronicle reporting that the issues is actually under investigation as a failure by a baseload provider), and an article from the LJWorld on black coal needing to be part of green debate.
Larry Holloway of KCC has also apparently offered balloon language (potential amendments) to the bill.
Myers – we want to accept this balloon language later, I know that is not usually how it is done in committee, but I asked reviser and she said it was okay.
news updates – RUS funding suspended going forward
March 5, 2008
More on the energy financing picture for traditional fossil fuel generation of electricity – following on the heels of Wall Stree backing off from coal, and after Congressman Waxman called for an investigation of the RUS program which finances coal-fired power plant generation in rural areas with taxpayer dollars – the RUS has suspended financing for 2008 and probably 2009 (Business Week).
The article is not clear on exactly what ongoing applications are affected by the suspension. Some of the utilities affected stated their willingness to wait out the suspension.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
Surprise bonus! MH decided to attend the hearing on the KCPL bill (HB 2362) before the Senate Committee on Energy and Utilities, which begins at 9:30 a.m. Add this to the House Select Committee hearing at 1:30, and we are going to have a day full of fun.
We await the committee. Actually, every time I say that – imagine the scene. The conference room is slowly filling full of lobbyists, reporters, etc. People either laugh loudly or talk quietly. We wait… we wait… groups change and merge, like little social amoebas who feed off information… there is always the interesting exchange and retreat of impression, domination, submission, a constantly shifting hierarchy that’s always reinforced yet undermined, at the same time – I remain amazed at how political folks have an uncanny sense for reading reactions (and adjusting) on the turn of a dime. You kind of have to be born like that. It’s a fairly impossible skill to learn – at least on that high a level.
That’s just the audience. Somewhere, where I can’t see them, are the players upon the stage. The members of the committee itself are frantically talking among themselves – either in person, or on their phones – to members of their party, to members of the other party that they either consider (a) somewhat friendly, and/or (b) easy to squeeze for info. These hearings/ meetings are all scripted, to the extent possible – well, they are both scripted and haywire. I’m sure some folks think they have it down, and then someone they thought they had figured comes in and throws them for a loop.
Anyway! Just a bit of the atmosphere. We await the committee. Hit your refresh button around 9:30 to catch up on yet another episode of energy and climate drama, I mean policy! Kansas-legislature-style.
From two copies of written testimony that I have – KCPL is testifying pro. To summarize: they are raring to go on energy efficiency, so they need rate recovery. Like, yesterday. KCC is testifying con. To summarize – yes they love energy efficiency and they are working on it themselves quite hard, thanks, so, um, don’t rush them by doing this legislatively.
Hey. Just a summary. Homebuilders Assoc of KC is testifying pro. Westar is – testifying. Generally, yay energy efficiency, but I don’t see a statement of whether they are pro or con. AARP is pro. Sierra Club is pro. KC Chamber is pro. Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) is pro. Olathe School District is pro. CEP is pro.
Yawn. It’s not that it’s early – it’s that I had to get up early to make it clear to Topeka for an 8 a.m. meeting. However, I expect so did lots of other people.
The usual suspects still make up the conference committee on the Holcomb bill, also known as SB 327 – Senators Emler (R), Apple (R), and Lee (D), and Representatives Holmes (R), Olson (R), and Kuether (D).
What’s going on? Why are we here? Well, many reasons. Off the top of someone else’s much smarter and wiser head, the committee could agree to disagree on the bill, kick it out of conference back to the House floor, and then just the House has to vote to concur on it for the bill to go to the Governor’s desk. To await (cue the music from Jaws) a probable veto. If that hapens, then (cue Star Wars theme for Darth Vader) the bill will return to the legislature and be voted on again.
In the original vote on the measure, the Senate went 33-7, which means they could override a veto. The compromise bill looks different than the original, most notably in that it now contains an RPS, but that may or may not make a difference. The original House vote on their version of the bill was seven votes shy of being able to withstand a veto, but Speaker Melvin Neufeld says he now has the votes for an override.
We await the committee. “We” being myself and one other gentleman. Hopefully the room number didn’t get changed on us. Hit your refresh button to check back in.
Hey guess what! the room number was changed. but I’m here now. Late, but here. They are going over definitions with staff on new section 7. Holmes is clarifying elements of the bills, especially “best available control technology” and “affected facility.” Reviser based the former on EPA language, if I remember correctly.
Lee – since we have seen the agreement between westar and KDHE, why do we have to limit this agreement and this mandate to those facilities constructed after Jan ? 2008
