Coalition for Responsible reg

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">no links</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" /><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Obama's green agenda under attack from group linked to chemical industry</b></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>
</b></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Connection to<b> Solvay chemicals </b>suggests opposition to action on global warming is spreading from 'big oil' to 'big chemical'</span></div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent</div><div>@suzyji</div><div>
</div><div>Wednesday 21 April 2010 11.57 </div><div>
</div><div>A secretive group linked to a leading European chemical company has joined the campaign to defeat Barack Obama's green agenda, taking the fight beyond the traditional players – the big oil and coal firms – the Guardian has learned.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>The previously unknown Coalition for Responsible Regulation Inc (CRR)</b> is at the forefront of a strategy to strip the Obama administration of its powers to regulate greenhouse gas emissions should Congress fail to act on climate change.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The group, which refuses to disclose its complete membership and which does not have a website, has joined more than a dozen states and a host of industry groups in 17 legal challenges to the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency.</span></div><div>
</div><div>The connection to the chemical firm Solvay suggests opposition to action on global warming, once spearheaded by big oil, is spreading to other industries that will also be affected by proposals to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Several of the petitioners against the EPA are household names, such Peabody Energy Corp, America's biggest coal mining company, and the Chamber of Commerce, which has led opposition to Obama's climate agenda. They also include prominent rightwing thinktanks.</b></div><div>
</div><div>But some of those launching legal challenges against the EPA have appeared as if from nowhere – such as the CRR.</div><div>
</div><div>Court documents filed in Texas identify Richard Hogan, chief executive of Solvay's wholly owned US subsidiary, as one of three directors of the CRR, the lead petitioner on the legal challenge to the EPA's authority to act on greenhouse gas emissions. The filings give Solvay's Houston office as Hogan's address. The coalition was apparently created to block Obama's efforts to deal with climate change.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The filings with the Texas authorities reveal the coalition was founded on 10 November last year – a day after the EPA announced its scientists had determined that greenhouse gases were a public danger. The group filed its challenge to the EPA on 23 December.</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>Eric Groten</b>, an attorney for the coalition, said it plans to file at least three more legal challenges against the EPA, which could tie up the agency in paperwork.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Such challenges to the EPA have intensified since last November when the agency signalled it was preparing to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, a measure widely seen as a backstop in case Congress failed to pass climate change legislation.</div><div>
</div><div>At least 15 state legislatures are now considering motions casting doubt on climate science or seeking to overturn the EPA's authority to regulate emissions. Republicans in Congress have filed separate resolutions to set aside the EPA's finding about the dangers of greenhouse gases, and the Senate may reportedly seek to strip the EPA of powers in a climate bill expected to be rolled out next week.</div><div>
</div><div>Court documents identify the CCR as a non-profit membership corporation "for the purpose of promoting social welfare, particularly to ensure that the clean air act is properly applied to greenhouse gases. Its members include business and trade associations engaged in activities that would likely be subject to regulation under the clean air act."</div><div>
</div><div>The court documents list six companies and trade associations representing mining and beef interests among its members – but not Solvay.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Groten said there were more members – individual as well as corporate. He refused to identify members beyond those listed on the court petition, but compared the group to the Sierra Club, the popular grassroots conservation network. "Those who want to support its objectives contribute financially to it," he said.</span></div><div>
</div><div>Carrying the analogy further, Groten said membership was determined by donation. "One becomes a member of the organisation just as one becomes a member of the Sierra Club by donated money to it."</div><div>
</div><div>Solvay Chemical's connection to the legal challenges seems at odds with the company's stated commitment to sustainable development on its website. "We commit ourselves to take into account, in a way that is comprehensive and integrated in all our activities, the triple demand of economic, societal and environmental sustainability," the statement says.Mark Wheeler, communications director for Solvay in America, denied the company was a member of CCR.</div><div>
</div><div>Kert Davies, research director for Greenpeace, said<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> Brussels-based Solvay produces sulphur hexafluoride (or SF6), used for industrial cleaning, but also an extremely potent greenhouse gas. Each kilogram of SF6 produces an atmospheric warming effect equivalent to nearly 24,000kg of carbon dioxide. The EPA proposed last year to begin regulating SF6.</span></div><div>
</div><div>The secrecy enveloping the CRR is typical of the efforts to block regulation of greenhouse gases, according to Greenpeace, which has spent years tracking the behind-the-scenes efforts by oil companies such as Exxon and Koch Industries to deny the science of climate change.</div><div>
</div><div>Also among the EPA's opponents this time around is the<b> Alliance for Natural Climate Change Science. That organisation appears to exist only as a Fort Worth post office box on the original court filings, which list Alexis Hathaway and William Orr as contacts.</b></div><div>
</div><div>Orr, a Colorado businessman, was convicted in 2008 on several counts of defrauding public funds and private investors for a project purporting to produce an alternative fuel that received a $3.6 million grant from Congress.</div><div>
</div><div>However, subsequent filings link the legal challenge to Bonner Cohen, a fellow of the Committe for Constructive Tomorrow, a well-known climate sceptic group. "[Orr] is no longer affiliated with the organisation," Cohen said.</div><div>
</div><div>Oxfam's Kert Davies said the link between the CRR and Solvay could be an indicator that the opposition to climate change regulation is spreading to new sectors of the economy. "The industrial bloc is powerfully organised and rich. They have all the tools and all the lawyers and they are going to do all they can to stop carbon regulation," he said."It is going to take a generation to really regulate greenhouse gas emissions in this country, just as it has taken a generation to get action on other pollutants."</div><div>
</div><div>Analysis: Why target the EPA?</div><div>The EPA has become a prime target for politicians and industries seeking to slow down or block moves to curb greenhouse gas emissions in America. The fiercest opponents of the EPA accuse the agency of trying to put in place a top-down regulatory regime that would stifle economic growth and monitor every puff of human breath for carbon dioxide. But the Obama administration says the EPA has no choice but to put in place a regulatory regime, should Congress fail to pass a climate change law. The supreme court ruled two years ago that the agency had a duty and authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. So the EPA could open itself up to a whole slew of new court challenges if it does not act on climate change.</div><div>=</div><div><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/coalition-for-responsible-regulation/">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/coalition-for-responsible-regulation/</a></div><div><b>
</b></div><div><div><b>Fossil Fuels v. EPA: Europeans Join the Fray</b></div><div>
</div><div>James Thornton | Posted 10.29.2011 | Green</div><div>Read More: Europe, Coalition for Responsible Regulation, U.S. Court of Appeals, Climate Change, Green Jobs, Fossil Fuels, Epa, Green News</div><div>James Thornton</div><div>Because Congress has failed to act, U.S. climate policies are now often determined in court. The Court of Appeals in Washington is deciding on greenhouse gas regulation.</div><div>
</div><div>Read Whole Story</div><div>
</div><div><b>Chamber Of Commerce Raising Money To Fund Lawsuits Against Regulation, Reform</b></div><div>
</div><div>The Center For Public Integrity | Peter H. Stone | Posted 05.25.2011 | Politics</div><div>Read More: Congress, Lobbying, Chamber of Commerce, Lawsuits, Epa, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Big Business, Regulation, Unemployment, Courts, Business Lobby, Cfpb, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Greenhouse Gases, Sec, Bruce Josten, Politics News</div><div>
</div><div>Even as it plowed tens of millions of dollars into ads this year to help mostly Republicans notch Congressional victories, the U.S. Chamber of Commerc...</div><div>
</div><div>Read Whole Story
<a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/2010/12/01/2282/chamber-seeks-cash-insurers-financial-firms-new-effort">https://www.publicintegrity.org/<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">2010</span>/12/01/2282/chamber-seeks-cash-insurers-financial-firms-new-effort</a>

<div class="body-copy-inner" itemprop="articleBody"><p><b>Even as it plowed tens of millions of dollars into ads this year to help mostly Republicans notch Congressional victories, the <a href="http://www.uschamber.com/" target="new" title="U.S. Chamber of Commerce">U.S. Chamber of Commerce</a>

was initiating a new effort to raise millions more from energy, health

insurance, financial services, and other firms to fund a new

anti-regulatory campaign.</b></p><p><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The latest initiative includes such top

business priorities as fighting the regulation of greenhouse gases by

the Environmental Protection Agency; curbing the power of the recently

created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; and trying to ease the

implementation costs of the new health care reforms for insurers and

businesses. The Chamber has created a regulatory advocacy unit run by

its top lobbyist, Bruce Josten, to shepherd the program.</span></p><p>The

Chamber’s message appears to be working: at least a handful of

companies, including some in the energy sector, have opened their

wallets wider in the past few months, say K Street fundraising sources

familiar with the Chamber’s latest solicitations.</p><p>Several oil

giants, including Chevron Corp., ConocoPhillips Corp. and Exxon Mobil

Corp., have been solicited by the Chamber for funding for the new drive,

and at least one of them has agreed to write a six-figure check,

according to two energy lobbyists who requested anonymity. The new funds

are being donated on top of the annual dues that the companies pay to

the Chamber.</p><p>Since the Nov. 2 election, a pair of top Chamber

executives, David Chavern and David Hirschmann, have made fundraising

pitches to several New York financial powers, including at least three

large private equity firms — The Blackstone Group, KKR and Texas Pacific

Group — other financial lobbyists said. It seems likely that some will

donate funds for the anti-regulatory drive, they added.</p><p>Also targeted are several major health insurers that last year kicked in much of the $86 million that was funneled through <a href="http://ahip.org/" target="new" title="America’s Health Insurance Plans">America’s Health Insurance Plans</a>

to the Chamber. That money was spent on a huge but unsuccessful

advertising effort to kill health care legislation. A health industry

source says that he’s not certain how the new Chamber pitch is going

with that sector.</p><p>Josten told the Center that “it’s natural you’re

going to solicit people who have expressed and supported your previous

efforts.” Josten said that the effort is “getting some receptivity,”

noting that the threat of new regulations “is not lost on the business

world.”</p><p>The Chamber’s fresh initiative will include beefed-up

lobbying, new advertising, online projects and litigation to thwart

regulations it opposes. “We’ll look for opportunities to challenge

regulations,” Josten explained. Some of these challenges are going to be

“legislative, some are going to be regulatory and some will be in the

courts.”</p><h4>Donohue says job creation threatened</h4><p>In a speech

to his board of directors on Nov. 17, Chamber Chairman Tom Donohue

publicly unveiled the new campaign, excoriating what he called a

“tsunami of regulations of unprecedented force” that he said represent

the “biggest single threat to job creation.”</p><p>Donohue’s speech

broadly referenced costly new regulatory burdens for business stemming

from reform legislation enacted by Congress in the last year, as well as

new regulatory threats from the Environmental Protection Agency. “There

are thousands of new and questionable rulemakings in the pipeline,” he

said.</p><p>As part of the new effort, Josten said the Chamber plans to

hire a regulatory economist who can “draft comments on the impacts of

new regulations” in hopes of persuading federal agencies to scuttle or

curb planned regulations. The Chamber plans to reach out broadly in

search of political and business allies, he said. “We’re building a

network of interested parties that we’ll need,” Josten said, adding that

it “takes years to write regulations.”</p><p>The campaign’s ad

component, which is being coordinated by Tom Collamore, the senior vice

president for communications, began in November in inside-the-Beltway

publications like <i>Politico</i> and <i>National Journal</i>. The ads

focus on what the Chamber sees as an expanding regulatory threat to U.S.

jobs and economic growth. A first ad features a road sign with

confusing arrows pointing in different directions that encircle the

words, “This Way to Jobs.” The Chamber also sent members of Congress,

governors and state and local chambers a new board game of the same

name.</p><p>As the campaign picks up speed, the Chamber will focus on

both paid advertising and press coverage, Collamore said. “We’ll be

looking to beef up our online presence.” A new Chamber website, <a href="http://www.thiswaytojobs.com/" target="new" title="www.thiswaytojobs.com">www.thiswaytojobs.com</a>, is designed to increase awareness of the regulatory landscape, he added.</p><p>Donohue’s

mid-November speech warned of alleged threats from “183 new agencies,

commissions, panels and other bodies” created by the recently enacted

health care law. The Dodd-Frank financial reform law includes “320

required rulemakings, another 220 suggested rulemakings and over 170

reports and studies,” he added.</p><p>The Chamber is not opposed to all

federal regulations, he said, asserting that the new effort is not

designed to “weaken the regulation of business.” But Donohue added that

“we cannot allow this nation to move from a government of the people to a

government of regulators.”</p><h4>More lawsuits coming</h4><p>The

Chamber’s new anti regulatory drive will include “even greater activism”

by the group’s litigation machinery, Donohue told the board. The

Chamber uses one legal arm, the <a href="http://www.instituteforlegalreform.com/" target="new" title="Institute for Legal Reform">Institute for Legal Reform</a>, for state court battles, and its <a href="http://www.uschamber.com/issues/accomplishments/national-chamber-litigation-center" target="new" title="National Chamber Litigation Center">National Chamber Litigation Center</a> for federal cases.</p><p>In August, the Chamber’s litigation center and another advocacy group, the <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>Coalition for Responsible Regulation</b></span>, <a href="http://secure.uschamber.com/NR/rdonlyres/ekgevkmolaxsiviowsbvs62w3qirz4xsrgqdxgao6kgnioswi7x3ytw5rr25ndgqzz3ey4simjb3twei6x7wa7o64te/CoalitionforResponsibleRegulationetal.v.EPA.pdf" target="new" title="sued the EPA">sued the EPA</a> and asked a federal appeals court to review a climate change “endangerment finding” the agency issued late last year. <a href="http://www.eenews.net/assets/2010/08/16/document_gw_01.pdf" target="new" title="That finding">That finding</a>

is the basis for the agency to regulate greenhouse gases as threats to

human health and safety. The EPA regulations affect cars and light duty

trucks as well as power plants, refineries, and factories. The Chamber’s

lawsuit questions whether the Clean Air Act can be used to regulate

greenhouse gases.</p><p>Further, the Chamber’s litigation center in July

joined other groups and Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu in asking the

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold a ruling that ended the Obama

administration’s drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico. The court

ruled in favor of that request, but a second, narrower moratorium was

quickly imposed by the Interior Department and remained in place until

the Obama administration lifted it in October.</p><p>The Chamber also

plans to intensify pressure on regulators as they write rules carrying

out the sweeping financial services and health care reforms that were

enacted by Congress. Last month, in response to a proposed rule that

would give shareholders more rights to nominate candidates to company

boards through proxy access, the<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> Chamber’s litigation center and the

Business Roundtable <a href="http://www.uschamber.com/press/releases/2010/september/us-chamber-joins-business-roundtable-lawsuit-challenging-securities-an" target="new" title="sued the Securities and Exchange Commission">sued the Securities and Exchange Commission</a>.</span></p><p>The

rule, which the Chamber fears would give too much power to unions and

activist groups, has been put on hold and didn’t go into effect this

month as planned. Oral arguments in the lawsuit are likely early next

year. The Chamber’s accused the SEC of failing to adequately evaluate

the rule’s impacts on “efficiency, competition and capital formation.”</p><p>The

Chamber will also be continuing its advocacy for some of the top

priorities of the private-equity industry — including firms it is now

soliciting for funds to fuel the anti-regulatory initiative. Some of the

larger private-equity firms worry that under the Dodd-Frank reform law,

they could be designated as posing systemic risks if they should fail,

which would trigger tougher regulation and more capital requirements. At

least two of the big equity firms, Blackstone Group and KKR, have been

Chamber members for some time.</p><h4>Consumer bureau is top priority</h4><p>Arguably

the top priority on the Chamber’s financial agenda is to limit the

scope of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, being set up by

Harvard law professor Elizabeth Warren. The Chamber’s <a href="http://secure.uschamber.com/ccmc/default" target="new" title="Center for Capital Market Competitiveness">Center for Capital Market Competitiveness</a>,

run by David Hirschmann, recently warned financial firms that the

agency has “nearly unprecedented powers,” citing its budget of “more

than $500 million in the first year alone.”</p><p>To spotlight its

efforts and discourage “any efforts to politicize the allocation of

credit,” the Chamber has launched a website tracking the new bureau — <a href="http://www.cfpbspotlight.com/" title="www.cfpbspotlight.com">www.cfpbspotlight.com</a>. The Chamber, Josten said, will “be supportive of efforts to make the (bureau) accountable to Congress.”</p><p>On

health care, the Chamber has pushed aggressively for one of the top

priorities of health insurers: a broad interpretation of new rules that

require health insurers to spend a specific minimum percent of customer

premiums on a variety of health care services, or provide rebates to

customers. The requirement, which begins in 2011, is one that many

insurers have worried could be burdensome and expensive.</p><p>The

Department of Health and Human Services recently issued a rule that

gives health insurers some leeway on implementation and allows states to

seek exemptions from the 2011 start date, which four have already done.

But the Chamber still worries that the fixed percentages in the rules

are too high</p><p>The new formulas, which require some insurers to use

85 percent of their premiums for health care services and others to pay

80 percent of premiums, depending on the markets they cover, are too

onerous, Josten said. “We’d support Congressional attempts to change the

numbers,” he said, predicting that some bipartisan support could emerge

on the issue.</p><p>Josten said the Chamber has already begun fighting a

provision of the health care law that requires any company buying goods

or services worth $600 or more a year to file with the Internal Revenue

Service a 1099 report documenting the purchases. The Chamber has sent

several letters to Capitol Hill (including one this week) attacking the

provision — which has drawn criticism on both sides of the aisle.</p><p>A

health industry source told the Center that the Chamber in the last few

months has approached several large insurers who helped fund the

group’s 2009 ad effort. Among the health insurers that wrote the biggest

checks the last time around were Aetna, Cigna, Humana, United

Healthcare and Wellpoint. It’s not clear how responsive the insurers

have been to the new Chamber solicitations.</p><p>Lobbying veterans said

the Chamber’s expanded anti-regulatory effort could be a useful tool

for corporations to stay out of the spotlight on issues related to their

self-interest. “If the Chamber can run a good publicity and public

affairs drive to give cover to the various industries being regulated,

it would be smart,” says Charlie Black, a key GOP lobbyist who runs the

Prime Policy Group.</p></div>

<div class="calais-tags-wrapper"><h4>More stories about</h4><div class="calais-tags node-2282"><div class="first"><a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Insurance">Insurance</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/111th-United-States-Congress">111th United States Congress</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Presidency-of-Barack-Obama">Presidency of Barack Obama</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Aetna">Aetna</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Health-care-reform">Health care reform</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Financial-institutions">Financial institutions</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/United-States-Chamber-of-Commerce">United States Chamber of Commerce</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Dodd%25E2%2580%2593Frank-Wall-Street-Reform-and-Consumer-Protection-Act">Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Regulation">Regulation</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Climate-change-skepticism-and-denial">Climate change skepticism and denial</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Bruce-Josten">Bruce Josten</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/David-Hirschmann">David Hirschmann</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/lobbyist">lobbyist</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Environmental-Protection-Agency">Environmental Protection Agency</a>, <a href="https://www.publicintegrity.org/news/Consumer-Financial-Protection-Bureau">Consumer Financial Protection Bureau</a></div></div></div>
---
</div><div>
</div><div><b>Obama's Green Agenda under attack from group linked to chemical industry</b></div><div>The Guardian | Suzanne Goldenberg | Posted 05.25.2011 | Green</div><div>
</div><div>Read More: Epa, Solvay Chemical, Oil Industry, Solvay, Obama Green, CRR Obama, EPA Attacks, Epa Greenhouse Gases, Greenhouse Gas Regulation, Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Obama Green Agenda, EPA Regulation, Chemical Industry, Green News</div><div>
</div><div>A secretive group linked to a leading European chemical company has joined the campaign to defeat Barack Obama's green agenda, taking the fight beyond...</div></div><div>=</div><div>http://www.chamberlitigation.com/coalition-responsible-regulation-et-al-v-epa</div><div><font size="3">
</font></div><div><div id="content-header" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h1 class="title" style="margin: 10px 0px 0px; text-transform: uppercase;"><font size="3">COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE REGULATION, ET AL. V. EPA</font></h1></div><div id="main-content" style="min-height: 450px; margin: 0px; width: 570px; float: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div id="content-area"><div id="node-7154" class="node node-case view-mode-full"><div class="node-inner"><div class="content"><div class="field field-name-field-filing-headline field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><h3 class="case-headline" style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; font-weight: normal; padding-bottom: 5px; font-style: italic;">EPA Denial to Reconsider Endangerment Rule</h3></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-filing-description field-type-text-long field-label-above case-content" style="padding-right: 20px; margin-bottom: 30px;"><div class="field-label" style="font-weight: bold; padding-bottom: 5px;">U.S. Chamber's Position: </div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; line-height: 1.4em;">NCLC moved to intervene in the Coalition for Responsible Regulation's (CRR) challenge of EPA's implicit denial of CRR's petition for reconsideration of EPA's endangerment rule. The CRR argues that the EPA's promulgation of the Tailpipe Rule effectively denied the group's February 2010 petition to EPA to reconsider its endangerment rule for greenhouse gases. While NCLC does not challenge the science behind climate change, NCLC argued that parts of CRR's challenge overlap with NCLC's challenges of the Tailpipe Rule and endangerment rule, and that the court should therefore permit NCLC to intervene.</p></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-outcome-content field-type-text-long field-label-above case-content" style="padding-right: 20px; margin-bottom: 30px;"><div class="field-label" style="font-weight: bold; padding-bottom: 5px;">Case Outcome: </div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; line-height: 1.4em;">This case was dismissed in light of other developments in the litigation surrounding the EPA's endangerment rule.</p></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-procedural-history field-type-text-long field-label-above case-content" style="padding-right: 20px; margin-bottom: 30px;"><div class="field-label" style="font-weight: bold; padding-bottom: 5px;">Procedural History: </div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; line-height: 1.4em;">Motion to intervene filed 8/5/10. Case dismissed 8/24/10.</p><div id="block-views-case-details-block-4" class="block block-views first odd" style="padding: 0px; position: relative; background-color: rgb(251, 251, 249);"><div class="block-inner"><div class="content"><div class="view view-case-details view-id-case_details view-display-id-block_4 view-dom-id-3dce43892a2f902176cc87638dfd6b21"><div class="view-content"><div class="views-row views-row-1 views-row-odd views-row-first views-row-last" style="margin-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 2px;"><div class="views-field views-field-field-status" style="padding-top: 5px;"><span class="views-label views-label-field-status" style="font-weight: bold;">Status: </span><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/cases/status/other" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="text-decoration: none;">Other</a></span></div><div class="views-field views-field-field-court" style="padding-top: 5px;"><span class="views-label views-label-field-court" style="font-weight: bold;">Court: </span><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/cases/court/us-court-appeals-district-columbia-circuit" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="text-decoration: none;">U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit</a></span></div><div class="views-field views-field-field-docket-number" style="padding-top: 5px;"><span class="views-label views-label-field-docket-number" style="font-weight: bold;">Docket Number: </span><span class="field-content">10-1165, 10-1171</span></div><div class="views-field views-field-field-issue" style="padding-top: 5px;"><span class="views-label views-label-field-issue" style="font-weight: bold;">Issue: </span><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/cases/issue/energy-environment" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="text-decoration: none;">Energy & Environment</a></span></div><div class="views-field views-field-field-issue-1" style="padding-top: 5px;"><span class="views-label views-label-field-issue-1" style="font-weight: bold;">Sub-Issue: </span><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/cases/issue/energy-environment/greenhouse-gases" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="text-decoration: none;">Greenhouse Gases</a>, <a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/cases/issue/energy-environment/clean-air-act-caa" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="text-decoration: none;">Clean Air Act (CAA)</a>,<a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/cases/issue/energy-environment/endangered-species-act-esa" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="text-decoration: none;">Endangered Species Act (ESA)</a>, <a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/cases/issue/energy-environment/climate-change-litigation" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="text-decoration: none;">Climate Change Litigation</a></span></div><div class="views-field views-field-field-industry" style="padding-top: 5px;"><span class="views-label views-label-field-industry" style="font-weight: bold;">Industry: </span><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/cases/industry/energy-utilities" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="text-decoration: none;">Energy & Utilities</a></span></div><div class="views-field views-field-field-industry-1" style="padding-top: 5px;"><span class="views-label views-label-field-industry-1" style="font-weight: bold;">Sub-Industry:</span><span class="field-content" /></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div id="block-views-related-by-issue-block-1" class="block block-views last even" style="padding: 0px; position: relative; background-color: rgb(251, 251, 249);"><div class="block-inner"><h2 class="block__title block-title title" style="margin: 0px; height: 31px; padding: 8px 0px 0px 24px; text-transform: uppercase; width: 306px; background: url(" sites="sites" all="all" themes="themes" custom="custom" nclc2016="nclc2016" images="images" floath2bullet.gif="floatH2bullet.gif" left="left" center="center" no-repeat="no-repeat" scroll="scroll" transparent="transparent">CASES RELATED BY THIS ISSUE</h2><div class="content"><div class="view view-related-by-issue view-id-related_by_issue view-display-id-block_1 view-dom-id-37b72d3c19564aa2574741f56871a91a"><div class="view-content"><div class="views-row views-row-1 views-row-odd views-row-first"><div class="views-field views-field-title"><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/content/center-biological-diversity-et-al-v-ashe-et-al" style="text-decoration: none;">Center for Biological Diversity, et al. v. Ashe, et al.</a></span></div></div><div class="views-row views-row-2 views-row-even"><div class="views-field views-field-title"><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/chamber-commerce-et-al-v-epa-2015-ozone-naaqs" style="text-decoration: none;">Chamber of Commerce, Murray Energy Corporation, et al. v. EPA (2015 Ozone NAAQS)</a></span></div></div><div class="views-row views-row-3 views-row-odd"><div class="views-field views-field-title"><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/content/state-wyoming-v-department-interior" style="text-decoration: none;">State of Wyoming v. Department of the Interior</a></span></div></div><div class="views-row views-row-4 views-row-even"><div class="views-field views-field-title"><span class="field-content"><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/content/state-texas-et-al-v-epa-regional-haze-rule" style="text-decoration: none;">State of Texas, et al. v. EPA (Regional Haze Rule)</a></span></div></div><div class="views-row views-row-5 views-row-odd views-row-last"><div class="views-field views-field-title"><span class="field-content"><font style="text-decoration: none;"><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/content/transcanada-keystone-pipeline-lp-v-kerry-et-al" style="text-decoration: none;">TransCanada Keystone Pipeline LP v. Kerry, et al.</a></font></span></div><div class="views-field views-field-title"><span class="field-content">
</span></div><div class="views-field views-field-title"><span class="field-content">===
</span>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-thornton/fossil-fuels-v-epa-europe_b_937674.html
<div class="content-list-component mt-paragraph text">

<p>Today I’m writing about <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">one of the most important cases before the U.S. courts this year. Called<b> </b><em><b>Coalition for Responsible Regulation</b> v. EPA</em>,

it is being argued before the federal Court of Appeals in Washington.

It will decide whether the U.S. Government can regulate greenhouse

gases. </span></p></div>

<p>Because Congress has failed to act, U.S. climate policies are now

often determined in court. Although these cases have so far involved

domestic interests, their outcomes affect the rest of the world.</p></div>

<div class="content-list-component mt-paragraph text"><p>Europe, with

the world’s largest market economy, is a leader in addressing climate

change. Injecting a European perspective into U.S. courts could help

convince U.S. judges that climate change is an urgent priority and that

greenhouse gas reductions are compatible with sustainable economic

growth.</p></div>

<div class="content-list-component mt-paragraph text"><p>In 2007, the Supreme Court said in <em>Massachusetts v. EPA</em>

that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the power under the

Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases. This was an epochal ruling.

Because no new climate change legislation will get through Congress any

time soon, this power provides the only route for the federal government

to act against climate change.</p></div>

<p>The EPA has now proposed greenhouse gas rules. Not surprisingly, the

fossil fuel industry (represented by the Coalition for Responsible

Regulation) sued to have the rules struck down. </p></div>

<div class="content-list-component mt-paragraph text"><p>On August 25th, my organization <a data-beacon="{"p":{"mnid":"entry_text","lnid":"citation","mpid":0}}" href="http://www.clientearth.org" target="_hplink">ClientEarth</a>

took the historic step of bringing the European perspective to the U.S.

courts. Supported by Friends of Earth Europe, Birdlife Europe, and

Transport & Environment, we submitted the first ever amicus curiae

(friend of the court) brief by European organisations in a U.S.

environmental case. </p></div>

<div class="content-list-component mt-paragraph text"><p>The key

question in the case is: do greenhouse gas emissions threaten U.S. human

health and welfare? The science clearly points to a ‘yes’. If the court

agrees with the EPA on this answer, the power of the agency to act will

be affirmed. </p></div>

<div class="content-list-component mt-paragraph text"><p>However, the

issues at stake here have truly global implications. Climate change will

have similar impacts in the U.S. and Europe — rising sea levels,

acidified oceans and declines in marine life, altered weather and

related impacts to food production, and health impacts. European

information on and studies of these impacts strongly back up the EPA

endangerment finding. The court’s decision will affect Europe’s

citizens, along with everyone else. We’re submitting our brief to make

sure the courts hear that all people outside of the U.S. have an

interest in the case’s outcome.</p></div>

<div class="content-list-component mt-paragraph text"><p>A second issue

concerns the economic impacts of reducing carbon emissions. While the

EPA has been careful to base its finding in the science of climate

change, rather than the economics, the fossil fuel interests present a

consistent drumbeat of dire economic predictions if greenhouse gases are

regulated. Europe demonstrates that these predictions are false and

overblown. </p></div>

<div class="content-list-component mt-paragraph text"><p>The European

Union began regulating greenhouse gases in 2005 and put in place an

emissions trading system. During this period the average annual growth

rate of EU GDP has been about 1.05% and eco-industries are one of the

most dynamic sectors of the European economy, growing at around 5% per

year. </p></div>

<div class="content-list-component mt-paragraph text"><p>Reducing

greenhouse gases is and will be a source of jobs and economic growth in

the EU and the U.S. We are allies whose differences and similarities

have historically complimented one another.</p></div>

<div class="content-list-component mt-paragraph text"><p>A shared

response to our common experience of climate change will only serve to

make us stronger and more prosperous in the future. And this is what we

are telling the Court of Appeals.</p></div><span class="field-content">==
ggl 7/16

</span>
<div id="rcnt" style="clear:both;position:relative;zoom:1"><div class="col" style="width:0"><div style="visibility: visible;" id="center_col"><div class="med" id="res" role="main"><div data-jibp="h" data-jiis="uc" id="search"><div data-ved="0ahUKEwjMmp3w3-HNAhUTySYKHbEZBOkQGggb"><h2 class="hd">Search Results</h2><div data-async-context="query:Coalition%20for%20Responsible%20Regulation%20Inc%20(CRR)" id="ires"><div id="rso"><div class="srg"><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="29"><h3 class="r"><span class="ogd b w xsm">[PDF]</span><a href="https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/CRR%20petition%20for%20cert.pdf">Coalition for Responsible Regulation [PDF] - Environmental Defense ...</a></h3><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv _SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><cite class="Rm">https://www.edf.org/.../<b>CRR</b>%20petition%20for%20cert....</cite></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="29"><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><div class="crc"><div class="crl" data-async-context="res:0;ri:;site:edf.org" data-async-trigger="cra-0-filled" data-ved="0ahUKEwjMmp3w3-HNAhUTySYKHbEZBOkQ5CsIIzAA">Environmental Defense Fund<span class="Bs" /></div></div></div><span class="st"><span class="f">Apr 19, 2013 - </span>... <em>Inc</em>., <em>Coalition</em> for Re- sponsible <em>Regulation</em>, <em>Inc</em>., Great Northern Project ... Natural Resources, <em>Inc</em>., <em>Coalition for Responsible</em>. <em>Regulation</em>, <em>Inc</em>.</span></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="37"><h3 class="r"><span class="ogd b w xsm">[PDF]</span><a href="https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/7F9EC0498823671D85257ADA00540B48/$file/09-1322-1411145.pdf">Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA - US Court of Appeals</a></h3><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv _SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><cite class="Rm">https://www.cadc.uscourts.go...</cite></div></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="37"><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><div class="crc"><div class="crl" data-async-context="res:1;ri:;site:cadc.uscourts.gov" data-async-trigger="cra-1-filled" data-ved="0ahUKEwjMmp3w3-HNAhUTySYKHbEZBOkQ5CsIKzAB">United States Court of Appeals for the District of Colu...<span class="Bs" /></div></div></div><span class="st"><span class="f">Dec 20, 2012 - </span>Brown &. Williamson Tobacco <em>Corp</em>., 529 U.S. 120 (2000), “similarly misplaced ... opinion explains at length, see <em>Coalition for Responsible Regulation</em>, 684 F.3d at ..... <em>CRR</em> Slp. Op. 62–63 (emphasis added). Massachusetts ...</span></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="45"><h3 class="r"><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/coalition-for-responsible-regulation/">Coalition for Responsible Regulation - Huffington Post</a></h3><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><cite class="Rm">www.huffingtonpost.com/.../<b>coalition-for-responsible</b>-<b>regulation</b>/</cite></div></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="45"><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><div class="crc"><div class="crl" data-async-context="res:2;ri:;site:huffingtonpost.com" data-async-trigger="cra-2-filled" data-ved="0ahUKEwjMmp3w3-HNAhUTySYKHbEZBOkQ5CsIMjAC">The Huffington Post<span class="Bs" /></div></div></div><span class="st">Chamber Of Commerce Raising Money To Fund Lawsuits Against <em>Regulation</em>, Reform. The Center For Public Integrity | Peter H. Stone | Posted 05.25.2011 | ...</span></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="51"><h3 class="r"><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/apr/21/solvay-chemicals-obama-green-agenda">Obama's green agenda under attack from group linked to chemical ...</a></h3><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><cite class="Rm bc">www.theguardian.com › Environment › Climate change</cite></div></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="51"><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><div class="crc"><div class="crl" data-async-context="res:3;ri:;site:theguardian.com" data-async-trigger="cra-3-filled" data-ved="0ahUKEwjMmp3w3-HNAhUTySYKHbEZBOkQ5CsIOTAD">The Guardian<span class="Bs" /></div></div></div><span class="st"><span class="f">Apr 21, 2010 - </span>The previously unknown <em>Coalition for Responsible Regulation Inc</em> (<em>CRR</em>) is at the forefront of a strategy to strip the Obama administration of its ...</span></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="59"><h3 class="r"><span class="ogd b w xsm">[PDF]</span><a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-12/documents/coalitionjudgment2015.pdf">D.C. Circuit Court Amended Judgment (PDF) - US Environmental ...</a></h3><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv _SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><cite class="Rm">https://www.epa.gov/.../<b>coalition</b>judg...</cite></div></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="59"><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><div class="crc"><div class="crl" data-async-context="res:4;ri:;site:epa.gov" data-async-trigger="cra-4-filled" data-ved="0ahUKEwjMmp3w3-HNAhUTySYKHbEZBOkQ5CsIQDAE">United States Environmental Protection Agency<span class="Bs" /></div></div></div><span class="st"><span class="f">Apr 10, 2015 - </span>Upon consideration of the opinion in Utility Air <em>Regulatory</em> Group v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427 (2014); EPA's motion to govern further proceedings ...</span></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="66"><h3 class="r"><a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/coalition-for-responsible-regulation-v-environmental-protection-agency/">Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. Environmental Protection ...</a></h3><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><cite class="Rm">www.scotusblog.com/.../<b>coalition-for-responsible</b>-<b>regulation</b>-v-environ...</cite></div></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="66"><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><div class="crc"><div class="crl" data-async-context="res:5;ri:;site:scotusblog.com" data-async-trigger="cra-5-filled" data-ved="0ahUKEwjMmp3w3-HNAhUTySYKHbEZBOkQ5CsISDAF">SCOTUSblog<span class="Bs" /></div></div></div><span class="st"><span class="f">Oct 15, 2013 - </span>Linked with: Utility Air Regulatory Group v. ... Aug 8 2013, Reply of petitioners <em>Coalition for Responsible Regulation</em>, <em>Inc</em>., et al. filed. (Distributed).</span></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="74"><h3 class="r"><a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8191196">The previously unknown Coalition for Responsible Regulation Inc ...</a></h3><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><cite class="Rm">www.democraticunderground.com/.../duboard.php?az...</cite></div></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="74"><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><div class="crc"><div class="crl" data-async-context="res:6;ri:;site:democraticunderground.com" data-async-trigger="cra-6-filled" data-ved="0ahUKEwjMmp3w3-HNAhUTySYKHbEZBOkQ5CsITzAG">Democratic Underground<span class="Bs" /></div></div></div><div class="f slp">Apr 21, 2010 - 2 posts - ‎2 authors</div><span class="st">The previously unknown <em>Coalition for Responsible Regulation Inc</em> (<em>CRR</em>) ... the EPA have appeared as if from nowhere – such as the CRR.</span></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="81"><h3 class="r"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_greenhouse_gases_under_the_Clean_Air_Act">Regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act - Wikipedia ...</a></h3><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><cite class="Rm">https://en.wikipedia.org/.../<b>Regulation</b>of_greenhouse_gases_under_the_Cl...</cite></div></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="81"><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv _SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><div class="crc"><div class="crl" data-async-context="res:7;ri:;site:en.wikipedia.org" data-async-trigger="cra-7-filled" data-ved="0ahUKEwjMmp3w3-HNAhUTySYKHbEZBOkQ5CsIVzAH">Wikipedia<span class="Bs" /></div></div></div><span class="st">The

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) began regulating

greenhouse ..... With one exception, the responsibility for regulating

emissions from new ..... Gerdau Ameristeel U.S. <em>Inc</em>., <em>Coalition for Responsible Regulation</em>, National ... of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an opinion in <em>CRR</em> v.</span></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="88"><h3 class="r"><span class="ogd b w xsm">[PDF]</span><a href="http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/479230/9393915/1289597063983/1276370+Reply+to+Motion+for+Stay.pdf?token=umaxsqV1LlCGNd3UApSpznGQFj4%3D">in the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit</a></h3><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv _SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><cite class="Rm">static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/479230/.../1276370+Reply+to+Motion+for+Stay.pdf?...</cite></div></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="88"><div class="s"><div><span class="st"><em>CRR</em> Br. <em>Coalition for Responsible Regulation</em>, <em>Inc</em>., Southeastern Legal. Foundation, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Landmark Legal. Foundation, and Ohio ...</span></div></div></div></div><div class="g"><div class="rc" data-hveid="93"><h3 class="r"><a href="http://www.constantinereport.com/chemical-industry-connected-group-joins-attack-on-clean-air-act/">Solvay: Chemical Industry-Connected Group Joins Attack on Clean Air ...</a></h3><div class="s"><div><div class="f kv SWb" style="white-space:nowrap"><cite class="Rm">www.constantinereport.com/chemical-industry-connected-group-joins-attack-on-clea...</cite></div></div></div></div></div><span class="st"><span class="f">Apr 29, 2010 - </span>The previously unknown <em>Coalition for Responsible Regulation Inc</em>. (<em>CRR</em>) is at the forefront of a strategy to strip the Obama administration of its ...</span><span class="field-content">=
</span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div></div></div>