Speaker 1: It's the day after the election. Do you know how
Speaker 1: your environment is doing? Today? On Parts Pervilion, we look
Speaker 1: at last night's results and talk about what that means
Speaker 1: for the federal government. Hello, and welcome to a very
Speaker 1: special episode of Parts per billion, the environmental podcast from
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law. I'm your host, David Schultz. Well, it is
Speaker 1: the morning of Wednesday, November fourth. We just had an
Speaker 1: election here in the US yesterday. Maybe you heard about it,
Speaker 1: and we decided to just get a few reporters on
Speaker 1: the line and chat it out and find out what's
Speaker 1: going to be happening with the environmental agencies that we
Speaker 1: all cover, regardless of the outcome of the election, which
Speaker 1: as of this moment is still unknown. So I'm joined
Speaker 1: here today by Stephen Lee, Bobby McGill, and Pat Rizzuto,
Speaker 1: who are all on Bloomberg Law's environment desk. This conversation
Speaker 1: was recorded a few moments ago, and let's get right
Speaker 1: into it. Of course, we don't know who the next
Speaker 1: president is going to be, but let's start with Stephen. Stephen,
Speaker 1: you know, if Joe Biden becomes the next president, what
Speaker 1: does the EPA look like? Who would be even leading
Speaker 1: the EPA. Well, I'm going to give you three names
Speaker 1: on the shortlist for EPA chief. One is Mary Nichols.
Speaker 1: She's the chair of the California Air Resources Board. She's
Speaker 1: been one of the Trump administration's biggest adversaries. She's the
Speaker 1: person who has pushed back really hard on things like
Speaker 1: the EPA's decision to take back California's waiver to set
Speaker 1: its own greenhouse gas limits from cars. She's also former
Speaker 1: EPA Chief of Aaron Radiation under President Clinton, so she
Speaker 1: knows her way around that agency, and she also has
Speaker 1: the support of a lot of national environmental groups. So
Speaker 1: you would have to say that Mary Nichols has the
Speaker 1: inside track on the job. Two other names. One is
Speaker 1: Heather McTeer Tony. She's the former Southeast Regional Administrator of
Speaker 1: the EPA under President Obama. And she makes sense because
Speaker 1: she has worked hard throughout her career on environmental justice issues,
Speaker 1: and we know that's going to be a top priority
Speaker 1: of the Biden administration. So if Joe Biden wants to
Speaker 1: make good on his promise to take action for fence
Speaker 1: line communities, then Tony makes sense. The third name, Jay Insley,
Speaker 1: Governor of Washington, You'll remember he ran for president this
Speaker 1: year and his campaign was very heavily focused on climate change.
Speaker 1: He actually asked for an entire debate on climate change.
Speaker 1: So he's a guy. He's got a national profile and
Speaker 1: a good amount of, you know, star power that could
Speaker 1: raise the profile in the APA. One wrinkle is that
Speaker 1: he also won his re election bid for governor last night,
Speaker 1: but it doesn't mean that he's out of the running
Speaker 1: for the Biden cabinet. That's a great point, and I'm
Speaker 1: glad you brought up environmental justice because I actually want
Speaker 1: to go to Pat now and talk about what the
Speaker 1: situation would be on environmental justice if Joe Biden does
Speaker 1: end up becoming president. You know, this is an issue
Speaker 1: that the Obama administration, I think, tried to do a
Speaker 1: lot of work on. The Trump administration received a lot
Speaker 1: of criticism for not doing enough work on this issue.
Speaker 1: Would that then switch if Biden becomes president, Pat, Well,
Speaker 1: if Biden were to be president, every single person I've
Speaker 1: interviewed expects environmental justice to be front and center throughout
Speaker 1: his administration, not just an EPA, but in other agencies.
Speaker 1: And let's just look at what each candidate said when
Speaker 1: NBC's Kristin Welker, who moderated the last presidential debate, asked
Speaker 1: them about the people who live near oil refineries and
Speaker 1: chemical plants who are scared that they're getting sick from
Speaker 1: emissions and often can point to ill neighbors to show
Speaker 1: why they're scared. President Trump talked about the vast amount
Speaker 1: of money chemical and oil finery workers earned. Well, there's
Speaker 1: truth in that they do tend to be very well compensated.
Speaker 1: But those highly compensated workers don't tend to live on
Speaker 1: the fence lines of the factories where they work. His
Speaker 1: reply didn't address the issue. Vice President Giden understood exactly
Speaker 1: what Kristen was talking about. He said, my response is
Speaker 1: that those people who live on what are called fence
Speaker 1: lines are worried by things like the oil slicks they
Speaker 1: see on the car windshields and the illnesses they see
Speaker 1: their neighbors facing. So he said, quote, the fact is
Speaker 1: that is those frontline communities, it's not a matter of
Speaker 1: what you're paying them, it matters how you keep them safe.
Speaker 1: You impose restrictions on the pollutants coming out of the factories.
Speaker 1: That's the position he's going to bring, right I want
Speaker 1: to shift to though, because you know, the e p
Speaker 1: A is not the only agency that has a big
Speaker 1: impact on the environmental policy of the federal government. Let's
Speaker 1: talk about the Department of the Interior. If Biden were to,
Speaker 1: you know, pull this out and become the next president,
Speaker 1: who is on the short list to head up that department?
Speaker 1: And you know why? I guess so there are three
Speaker 1: names that that keep coming up for potential Interior Secretary
Speaker 1: under a Biden administration. One would be Senator Tom Udall,
Speaker 1: who is stepping down after at the end of the year.
Speaker 1: He would would follow along. His family, of course, is
Speaker 1: well known for its conservation His father, well Stuart Udall,
Speaker 1: who served as Interior Secretary under President's Kennedy and Johnson.
Speaker 1: Tom Udall's uncle was Moe Udall, another former senator known
Speaker 1: for his conservation legacy. Ah, I hate, I'm sorry to interrupt,
Speaker 1: but I I have to point out that my childhood
Speaker 1: home in Tucson, Arizona, was a five minute walk from
Speaker 1: Moe Udall Park, So shout out to Arizona. And speaking
Speaker 1: of Tucson, another name we've heard is Representative Rel Grijalva,
Speaker 1: who represents UH Tucson. He's also the chairman of the
Speaker 1: House Natural Resources Committee. You know, they're they're not commenting on,
Speaker 1: you know, what their intentions are if Biden wins. But
Speaker 1: another so, Tom Udall is from New Mexico, also from
Speaker 1: New Mexico. Another name we we hear is and has
Speaker 1: been recommended by environmental groups is deb Hayland, congress woman
Speaker 1: from from New Mexico, and she if she were to
Speaker 1: become Interior Secretary, she would be the first Native American
Speaker 1: Interior secretary we've ever had. And uh so those are
Speaker 1: the three names that that that come up, and all
Speaker 1: of them would would you know, pretty uh soundly shift
Speaker 1: the focus of Trump's from you know, Trump's fossil fuel
Speaker 1: agenda to a more conservation oriented agenda under Biden. Well,
Speaker 1: that was an excellent segue there, Bobby. But I want
Speaker 1: to stick with Bobby and Stephen for just a second
Speaker 1: because I want to talk about again sticking with the
Speaker 1: scenario if Biden, you know, does become president, would we
Speaker 1: just see a continuation of the policies that existed at
Speaker 1: these agencies, the EPA and Interior from the Obama administration.
Speaker 1: You know, would we have Sally Jewel two point zero
Speaker 1: or you know Gena McCarthy two point oh. Let's start
Speaker 1: with Bobby. Do you think that you know that that
Speaker 1: would be the case. I don't think so. Actually, I
Speaker 1: think that they would take a step beyond that. Actually,
Speaker 1: I think that, you know, climate change would become much
Speaker 1: greater focus in my management decisions and and so I
Speaker 1: think that's it's climate change is going to be a
Speaker 1: major focus, much more so than than in the Obama administration.
Speaker 1: But also environmental justice. I think that uh, Native communities
Speaker 1: throughout the West and and and in Alaska will have
Speaker 1: probably a much greater voice in lend land management decisions.
Speaker 1: And uh, you know you're going to see you know,
Speaker 1: more public plans protected. And I think that, you know,
Speaker 1: it's it really is going to sort of build upon
Speaker 1: the Obama administration's legacy, but will also you know, rolling back,
Speaker 1: you know, the the deregulation efforts that the Trump administration
Speaker 1: has taken over the last four years. Stephen, you know,
Speaker 1: it seems like Bobby is saying that, you know, we
Speaker 1: won't have as Sally Jewel two point zero, Well, we
Speaker 1: have a Gena McCarthy two point oho at the e
Speaker 1: p A. If Biden becomes president. Well, Jena McCarthy was
Speaker 1: really aggressive, and I think that you know, the broad
Speaker 1: course that the Democratic Party wants to chart for the
Speaker 1: e p A really hasn't changed that much. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's the same basic agenda on clean air, clean water,
Speaker 1: renewable energy, sustainability on down the list. So the goals
Speaker 1: are broadly the same. But if anything's different now, it's
Speaker 1: that there is a greater sense of urgency. In part
Speaker 1: because Joe Biden made environmental issues such a big part
Speaker 1: of his campaign. There's to be pressure on him to
Speaker 1: follow through on those promises. And of course we are
Speaker 1: running at a time to do something about the effects
Speaker 1: of climate change globally, and there is a growing awareness
Speaker 1: of that. And then you add to that the fact
Speaker 1: that they've got the Biden administration is going to have
Speaker 1: so much work to do if they want to undo
Speaker 1: the rules the Trump EPA put in place. So even
Speaker 1: if the agenda hasn't really changed, the urgency I think
Speaker 1: is greater now. They're going to need to staff up
Speaker 1: quickly and be really efficient and effective and professional to
Speaker 1: get things done quickly. Pat I wanted to ask you
Speaker 1: about another one of the sort of signature environmental issues
Speaker 1: that we've been covering a lot. It's not climate change.
Speaker 1: It's p FASSU, the toxic nonstick chemical that has been
Speaker 1: sing or being found in a lot of water ways
Speaker 1: and water sources across the country. If President you know,
Speaker 1: if President Trump loses his reelection bid and we get
Speaker 1: a new administration, do you see a radically different approach
Speaker 1: to regulating p fas. Do you see the federal government
Speaker 1: taking a much bigger role, or do you see that
Speaker 1: we have this state by state approach continuing on? Well,
Speaker 1: a couple of things. First, p FAST isn't one chemical,
Speaker 1: It's a huge group of chemicals. Yes, that's right. We
Speaker 1: are very diverse in the ways that they may affect people,
Speaker 1: may affect the environment. And I think we need to
Speaker 1: look at both scenarios. There's so much uncertainty in the
Speaker 1: election at this point. So if I look at a
Speaker 1: second Trump administed straation, what I would foresee happening is
Speaker 1: some regulatory action on a couple of the pfas ones
Speaker 1: known as PFOA and p FAST, some sort of limits
Speaker 1: on those nationally. P four was the one in Dark Waters.
Speaker 1: In the Dark Waters movie, p FOSS three m phased
Speaker 1: out in the early two thousands, so almost two decades ago,
Speaker 1: and PPA quickly did a backstep of regulations so that
Speaker 1: it's very hard for any other company to make or
Speaker 1: import them into the United States that p foss line.
Speaker 1: So I see him taking action on drinking water because
Speaker 1: so many states are regulating it in so many different ways.
Speaker 1: It's a real conundrum for industries. So it's just crying
Speaker 1: out for a national approach, and I think his adminised
Speaker 1: stration will take that. Whether it will take specific action
Speaker 1: on other p fasts or beyond drinking water is, according
Speaker 1: to the people I spook to, far more of an
Speaker 1: open question. He's far more likely to continue researching the chemicals.
Speaker 1: The Biden administration would be expected to act more quickly
Speaker 1: on more p fasts, definitely issuing drinking water regulations, possibly
Speaker 1: on hazardous waste. Hazardous waste just has so many implications.
Speaker 1: It might not come as fast as some of his
Speaker 1: supporters would like, and his actions may not be as
Speaker 1: comprehensive as some of his supporters would like because they
Speaker 1: are such a big group and hundreds of them are
Speaker 1: really important to many, many different industries. So a Biden
Speaker 1: administration is likely to rely on the science, and the
Speaker 1: science may not support a class based you know, every
Speaker 1: thing with the name Pete Bass attached to it gets
Speaker 1: thrown out the door. That's a good point. Pat also
Speaker 1: made another good point, which is that the election outcome
Speaker 1: is far from certain. Uh. President Trump could uh definitely
Speaker 1: still win another four years. So Bobby and Steven I
Speaker 1: wanted to talk with you guys about what the your
Speaker 1: agencies that you cover will look like, you know, if
Speaker 1: we have another, you know, four years of Trump. Bobby,
Speaker 1: let's start with you. UH will the current Secretary of
Speaker 1: the Interior, UH, David Bernhardt? Will he stay on? And
Speaker 1: if not, who do you think would repla him? Ultimately?
Speaker 1: I we don't know yet. There's just not haven't been
Speaker 1: able to get anybody on the record to talk to
Speaker 1: me about UH Bernhard's intentions, So we don't know, and
Speaker 1: it's not entirely clear who's going to replace him, you know,
Speaker 1: I think if if he decides to step down. So
Speaker 1: it's just too early to say, uh, but I think,
Speaker 1: you know, if whether he stays on or not, we're
Speaker 1: going to continue to see sort of a doubling down
Speaker 1: on the deregulatory agenda. In a second Trump term in
Speaker 1: the Interior Department, We're going to see you know, even
Speaker 1: more expanded oil and gas development or leasing and uh,
Speaker 1: you know, and there are gonna be some things I
Speaker 1: you know, I would expect that some of the things
Speaker 1: that that have sort of been off the table so far,
Speaker 1: such as public lands disposal and that sort of thing,
Speaker 1: you know, reducing the size of even more national monuments
Speaker 1: and and uh, you know, various things. I think we're
Speaker 1: I think we're going to see a little bit more
Speaker 1: of a focus on that. I think that's more of
Speaker 1: a possibility. And so you know, again it's just doubling down.
Speaker 1: I think a few other things we might we might
Speaker 1: see are you know, uh, continued implementation of its National
Speaker 1: Environmental Policy Act rules, uh, with less and less credence
Speaker 1: given to the public's voice, less transparency about federal lands decisions.
Speaker 1: Those are those are the rules that determine you know,
Speaker 1: all the documents and studies that the federal government has
Speaker 1: to do before it makes a move that could affect
Speaker 1: the environment. Right and you know, a lot of environmental
Speaker 1: groups have challenged decisions, uh, you know, land management decisions
Speaker 1: and whatnot in court, and courts have said that you know,
Speaker 1: these these decisions have have violated NEPA and various other
Speaker 1: laws depending on the case. But you know, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: industry tells me that this is going to be a chance,
Speaker 1: you know, a second Trump term is going to give
Speaker 1: the the Trump administration a chance to fully defend itself
Speaker 1: in court and to you know, expand upon the you know,
Speaker 1: the fossil fuels or energy dominant's agenda as it says,
Speaker 1: in a second Trump term. And finally, Steven, let's finish
Speaker 1: with you. If the president wins reelection, Andrew Wheeler, I
Speaker 1: would imagine would stay on at EPA. But the question
Speaker 1: is for how long would he stay on for? I
Speaker 1: mean another four full year term. Uh uh, that would
Speaker 1: you know? I guess it's impossible to say at this point.
Speaker 1: But what's his future looking like and what would be
Speaker 1: the future of the e p A under you know,
Speaker 1: another Trump administration. Wheeler has recently said he wants to
Speaker 1: stay on, and I get the feeling that President Trump
Speaker 1: is happy with his performance. He has done a good
Speaker 1: job of executing the Trump agenda. So there's no indication
Speaker 1: that he's going anywhere, at least not not anytime soon.
Speaker 1: If the president does win reelection. So if that, if
Speaker 1: that happens, what's the EPA's next big policy push. Andrew
Speaker 1: Wheeler has said recently that in the next four years,
Speaker 1: the EPA is going to focus on what he calls
Speaker 1: community driven environmentalism, by which he means breaking down the
Speaker 1: silos when the agency looks at air, land, and water
Speaker 1: issues in communities. He wants to address things like brownfields, grants,
Speaker 1: and environmental justice issues, air quality issues all at the
Speaker 1: same time in a holistic way, and he says this
Speaker 1: is going to be helpful to frontline, low income communities
Speaker 1: of color. He's also said that he wants EPA to
Speaker 1: help states permit projects faster because the new bottlenecks are
Speaker 1: going to be at the state level. Now that, as
Speaker 1: Bobby just said, you know, NITA reform is on the books.
Speaker 1: So when the EPA is renewing state delegated programs, according
Speaker 1: to Wheeler, they're going to look not just out of
Speaker 1: state's enforcement statistics, but also they're permitting programs. And whether
Speaker 1: that means the e PA will actually revoke permitting authority
Speaker 1: from states that take too long to issue permits, that
Speaker 1: remains to be seen. But we do know that this
Speaker 1: administration believes in federalism. And then the final thing I'll
Speaker 1: mention is that the the e PA is going to
Speaker 1: do a separate science transparency rule for each statute. This
Speaker 1: is the rulemaking that's still in the works that I mean.
Speaker 1: I won't go into all the details, but basically, environmentalists
Speaker 1: don't like this idea because they think it's a way
Speaker 1: of handcuffing future e p A administrations from you know,
Speaker 1: finalizing rules. Wheeler has said that this is all about transparency,
Speaker 1: and he says that if there's a separate science transparency
Speaker 1: rule for each of v p A statutes, that's going
Speaker 1: to mean there's less of a chance for litigation. It's
Speaker 1: another thing that the e PA will work to finish
Speaker 1: if Trump wins reelection. They do have a lot of
Speaker 1: work to do here because these are separate rulemakings. And
Speaker 1: they're also going to do the same thing with cost
Speaker 1: benefit rules, creating a separate one for each of their statutes.
Speaker 1: So those are I think some of the big agenda
Speaker 1: items if Trump wins reelection. Even just to add to that,
Speaker 1: I've heard that that science rule is one of the
Speaker 1: first things Biden would toss that gives you an idea
Speaker 1: of sort of the potential outcomes here depending on what
Speaker 1: we find out or you know, what we learn when
Speaker 1: we know who the next president will be, and two
Speaker 1: weeks from today will be back here on Parts Revillion.
Speaker 1: We're going to take next week off for Veterans Day,
Speaker 1: but if we do know who the president is at
Speaker 1: that point, we will be sure to let you know.
Speaker 1: If you want more environmental news, check us out on Twitter.
Speaker 1: We use a pretty easy to remember handle. It's at Environment.
Speaker 1: Just that at Environment, and I'm at David B. Schultz
Speaker 1: if you want to discuss anything with me today. This
Speaker 1: episode of Parts Rebellion was produced by myself and Josh Block.
Speaker 1: Parts Rebellion was created by Jessica Coombs and Rachel Daegel.
Speaker 1: The music for today's episode is a message by Jizarre
Speaker 1: and Smoking Monkey by Tom Hillock and Nicholas Baskovich that
Speaker 1: were used under a Creative Commons license. Thank you everyone
Speaker 1: for listening, and thank you to you three for joining
Speaker 1: me on this post election morning. Hi. I'm Laura Carlson,
Speaker 1: and I'm dropping into your feed to tell you about Prognosis,
Speaker 1: a new daily show from Bloomberg. Monday through Friday. We'll
Speaker 1: spend a few minutes with you every afternoon to help
Speaker 1: you understand life in the time of COVID nineteen. The
Speaker 1: show was available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen.
Speaker 1: So come back every afternoon for our coverage and stay safe.