Senate panel approves creation of competing Gulf oil spill commission

A key Senate panel delivered a rebuke to President Barack ObamaBarack ObamaAn important week for Puerto Rico In Philadelphia Clinton and Trump should start naming their foreign policy picks Jesse Jackson group urges blacks to unite — and vote MORE on Wednesday in approving the creation of a bipartisan oil spill commission that would effectively compete with his own.


Five Democrats joined all 10 Republicans on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in agreeing to create a new bipartisan panel whose members would mostly be appointed by Congress.

ADVERTISEMENT
The proposal — offered by Sen. John BarrassoJohn BarrassoGoonies, Pokemon and ‘transsexual shake’ speak to raucous scene at convention GOP passes rules vote over outcry from Trump opponents Overnight Healthcare: Feds defend ObamaCare's affordability MORE (R-Wyo.) — would establish a commission of 10 whose members would be appointed equally by the two parties, with Obama naming the chairman and congressional leaders selecting the vice chairman and remaining eight members. The commission would have subpoena power, which the Obama-appointed panel does not.

Barrasso said the newly proposed commission — which he said is modeled after the 9/11 Commission — is needed to provide a “truly unbiased bipartisan review” of offshore drilling in the wake of the Gulf of Mexico spill. Obama’s commission “appears to me to be stacked with people philosophically opposed to offshore drilling,” Barrasso said.

In particular, Republicans have criticized the selection of Natural Resources Defense Council President Frances Beinecke, a leading critic of offshore drilling. But some Democrats raised concerns as well.

“I would suggest to my Democratic friends that if the shoe were on the other foot, and President Bush was the president and he had submitted a list of names like this to us and everyone was related to the defense of oil companies, we would say this is not fair,” Sen. Mary LandrieuMary LandrieuBrazile’s new role? Clean up DNC mess oil is changing the world and Washington Ex-Sen. Kay Hagan joins lobby firm MORE (D-La.) said. “And I’m saying to my colleagues this is not fair.”

But Sen. Jeanne Shaheen Jeanne ShaheenDemocrats ‘freaked out’ about polls in meeting with Clinton GMO labeling bill advances in the Senate over Dem objections Overnight Defense: US blames ISIS for Turkey attack | Afghan visas in spending bill | Army rolls up its sleeves MORE (D-N.H.) added, “If there are questions about the views of the presidential commission … then I would err on the side [of] saying let’s get another point of view on the issue.”

Obama by executive order on May 21 established a commission co-chaired by former Florida Sen. Bob Graham (D) and William Reilly, a Republican who headed the Environmental Protection Agency under former President George H.W. Bush. Its official name is the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling.

The administration has halted deepwater offshore oil-and-gas drilling while the commission develops recommendations; Reilly has suggested those may not come until next year.

Barrasso’s amendment gives the new commission 180 days to develop its recommendations.

In arguing against creating a new commission, Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) said Obama “appointed two outstanding individuals to chair that commission.” He called it “bipartisan and … distinguished” and said that another commission is “unlikely to shed more light on the causes of this catastrophic accident and event.” 

But Republicans not only attracted Landrieu — who often sides with Republicans in trying to balance the need to address the Gulf spill with protecting crucial oil-and-gas-industry interests in her state — but also Democrats Shaheen, Blanche Lincoln (Ark.) and Mark UdallMark UdallColorado GOP Senate race to unseat Dem incumbent is wide open Energy issues roil race for Senate Unable to ban Internet gambling, lawmakers try for moratorium MORE (Colo.).

“I think Sen. Barrasso made an excellent point that Congress ought to have its voice heard,” Udall told The Hill.

The bipartisan support for Barrasso’s plan “makes the case that the committee isn’t operating on a pro-forma basis; we listen to each other here,” Udall said.

But the bipartisanship shown in that panel stands in stark contrast to much of the congressional debate on how best to address the Gulf spill and future spills.

Over on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Wednesday, Republicans tried, unsuccessfully, to get approval for a plan giving the president the discretion to determine whether and how much to raise an oil company’s liability cap in the event of a major oil spill.

Democrats — who outnumber Republicans 12-7 on the panel — instead easily adopted a proposal from Sen. Robert MenendezRobert MenendezTim Kaine backs call to boost funding for Israeli missile defense GMO labeling bill advances in the Senate over Dem objections Overnight Finance: Trump threatens NAFTA withdrawal | Senate poised for crucial Puerto Rico vote | Ryan calls for UK trade deal | Senate Dems block Zika funding deal MORE (D-N.J.) that would retroactively remove any liability cap on economic damages for BP and companies involved in future spills. Sen. David VitterDavid VitterTim Kaine backs call to boost funding for Israeli missile defense David Duke will bank on racial tensions in Louisiana Senate bid Former KKK leader David Duke running for Senate MORE (R-La.) was the lone GOP supporter of the Menendez plan.
Republicans got a sympathetic ear from the one centrist Democrat on the panel — Sen. Max BaucusMax BaucusGlover Park Group now lobbying for Lyft Wyden unveils business tax proposal College endowments under scrutiny MORE (Mont.).

Baucus voted against the Republican substitute from Environment and Public Works ranking member James InhofeJames InhofeGOP chairman: Kids are ‘brainwashed’ on climate change Feds withdraw lesser prairie-chicken protections A GMO labeling law that doesn’t require English? No thanks! MORE (Okla.) but said he shares some of their concerns about removing the liability cap entirely and will try to make fixes later.