Michael Brochstein/Sipa USA via AP Images
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) speaks at a hearing of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, September 28, 2023.
The Revolving Door Project, a Prospect partner, scrutinizes the executive branch and presidential power. Follow them at therevolvingdoorproject.org.
Housed in the Department of Energy but nonetheless an independent agency, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC, pronounced “furk”) governs the interstate transmission of fracked gas and electricity. FERC determines what factors to consider when reviewing new natural gas pipelines and liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). FERC’s authority to approve or deny this infrastructure makes the agency a key partner in the push to address the climate crisis and aid in the green-energy transition.
Unfortunately, FERC has been embroiled in partisan gridlock for months following chair Richard Glick’s departure from the Commission in January. Glick, a Democrat, was forced to vacate his position after Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) sabotaged his renomination, due to Glick’s attempts to integrate climate and environmental justice into FERC’s decision-making processes. This has saddled FERC with a 2-2 split of Democrats and Republicans since the beginning of the year, hobbling its effectiveness.
Of course, Manchin has tried to undermine the Biden administration’s climate agenda at every turn; as chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, he has placed several blockades on climate-related nominees and policies.
So, when reports revealed last week that Sen. Manchin was finally willing to support a candidate to replace Glick at FERC, there was mild hope that the agency could once again be equipped to perform its crucial role in the climate fight. However, this optimism quickly dissipated.
Manchin’s rumored choice for the position is David Rosner, a FERC energy industry analyst currently detailed to Manchin’s own Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Although Rosner’s confirmation would provide Democrats with the partisan majority needed to implement their agenda (assuming he is in fact a Democrat), he is neither the climate champion Biden should nominate nor the one the public deserves at this critical juncture in climate action.
Read more from the Revolving Door Project
Prior to his time staffing the Senate, Rosner worked on the energy team at the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC), which presents itself as an independent source of objective research. But investigative journalist Ken Silverstein found that BPC functionally operates as an advocate for “policies that benefit its donors,” including such notorious fossil fuel interests as ExxonMobil, the American Petroleum Institute, the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, and more.
BPC uses its professed objectivity to launder the reputations of these donors, and to tout the industry’s preferred (false) climate “solutions” to sustain their own profits at the continued cost of the planet. For example, in 2022, BPC held an event that concluded that the oil and gas industry had a crucial role to play as a large-scale provider of clean energy in the green-energy transition. BPC has also voiced effusive support for technologies such as carbon capture and carbon storage, despite the IPCC’s warnings that such technologies are not only unproven, but would ultimately prolong the use of oil and gas.
Rosner himself also has a long record of personally peddling industry talking points. In 2013, Rosner was the lead author on BPC’s technical comments supporting an Energy Department study that justified the expansion of LNG exports. The study downplayed risks that exports would “lower wages and employment in the U.S., while enriching energy companies by billions of dollars, including their overseas investors,” and “require a big increase in fracking to supply LNG tankers, leaving communities across the country with costly environmental damage and health threats.”
Biden should play hardball in ensuring the implementation of his policy priorities across the executive branch.
In 2014, as the notoriously fossil fuel–friendly Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) took the reins of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Rosner penned a blog post outlining BPC’s hopes for her chairmanship. It included a call to reconsider the “country’s geopolitical posture in light of the boom in unconventional oil and natural gas production.” In September of that year, before Rosner left BPC, he co-authored a report that set the stage for the ultimate repeal of the crude oil export ban, a catastrophic legacy of the Obama era.
FERC could be a crucial partner in the green transition, but it won’t be if it’s staffed solely by folks as complicit in climate catastrophe as Manchin himself. Rosner’s commitment to oil and gas interests will not deliver on Biden’s professed climate promises. Manchin may see himself as the monarch of Washington, but there’s no reason for Biden to continue playing along. At a certain point, the question must be asked: Why is one senator who represents the interests of less than 0.6 percent of the U.S. population unilaterally dictating climate policy for the entire country?
Biden has a choice other than accepting Manchin’s demands to individually staff an agency he does not lead. Biden could allow Republican James Danly’s currently expired seat to become vacant in January 2024, in just a few months. At that point, FERC will return to a Democratic majority, one that would last for the rest of Biden’s first term. Democrat Allison Clements will have to vacate her seat in January 2025, and the Commission would then lose its quorum altogether. But Manchin might not be a senator by then.
To be clear, the Revolving Door Project maintains that staffing independent agencies is crucial to the basic functionality of the federal government. Yet the specifics of the people who staff the federal government are a key determinant of whether the executive branch uses its broad authorities to do good. Given FERC’s mandate and authorities, the agency has tremendous potential to aid in desperately needed action to address climate change. Unfortunately, it also has tremendous potential to do harm to those same interests, should it become a Big Oil–funded rubber stamp for new fossil fuel infrastructure.
As a continuous and vigorous advocate for the responsible staffing of the independent agencies, RDP would normally recommend pairing the anticipated Republican nominee (Danly) with the anticipated Democratic nominee (Rosner). Yet, given Rosner’s concerning record—and Danly’s heinous one—the reality is that a mediocre FERC may still be better for the climate than one thoroughly dominated by oil and gas shills. And a FERC with a Democratic majority is better than the FERC that has been deadlocked for the better part of a year.
A FERC left without new nominees will admittedly still not be a perfect one. Current FERC acting chair Willie Phillips’s record, for example, is itself defined by a gross allegiance to corporate utilities at the cost of the climate and the public interest. However, Phillips is also willing to at least acknowledge FERC’s need to contend with issues of environmental justice and equity in its decision-making, and has previously highlighted flaws in FERC’s decision-making processes. At the end of the day, one Democrat flirting with fossil fuels at FERC is better than two. Of a slate of bad options, this may well be the best.
As David Segal, Eleanor Eagan, and Jeff Hauser wrote in 2020, Republicans have long used their own nomination playbook to ensure that their agenda is secure across the independent agencies, regardless of standards of tradition or decorum. Biden should follow their lead, and finally play hardball in ensuring the implementation of his policy priorities across the executive branch.
President Biden has long been held hostage by Manchin’s corrupt climate policy, but he doesn’t have to be. Biden should refuse to play Manchin’s confirmations game, and instead allow the Democrats already on the board to do the best they can with the majority they will have in 2024, and then allow the board’s quorum to lapse in 2025. A new Senate (and hopefully, a second-term Biden administration) would then dictate FERC’s future course. Instead of being a continuous victim of Manchin’s demands, this would allow the Biden administration to attempt to deliver on its climate promises.
