By Edmund L. Andrews
WASHINGTON – He just turned 81, his voice has become frail and his hands often shake uncontrollably. In recent weeks, he has walked with crutches because of leg pains. But make no mistake: Representative John D. Dingell of Michigan has not mellowed.
As chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, first elected to Congress in 1955 when Dwight D. Eisenhower was president, Mr. Dingell has probably fought more fights, intimidated more adversaries and pushed through more legislation than any other Democrat in the House.
But House Democratic leaders, hoping to pass an “energy independence” bill this month, have had to delay taking the measure to the floor for weeks. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her allies want a hefty increase in fuel-economy requirements for cars, light trucks and S.U.V.’s, but they are finding that it is not easy to maneuver around Mr. Dingell, who wants a smaller increase that would be less painful for Detroit automakers.
The power struggle pits a towering committee chairman, long accustomed to running his own show, against the first female House speaker, who has her own ambitious agenda.
When Ms. Pelosi, of California, created a new committee on energy independence and global warming in January, Mr. Dingell attacked it as a potential encroachment on his turf. Though she assured him the new panel would have no legislative authority, he remarked that it would be an “embarassment” and “as useful as feathers on a fish.”
Behind the scenes, Mr. Dingell fumes that Ms. Pelosi and other comparatively young House leaders are trying to dictate his schedule and his priorities. He grumbles about colleagues who are too “ideological,” too impatient and too unrealistic about the costs of slowing global warming. He implies that Ms. Pelosi cares more about being “green” in California than about blue-collar workers in Michigan.
“I’ve had conflicts with speakers before,” he said in a lunchtime interview, as he wolfed down a peanut-butter sandwich in an antechamber next to his committee’s hearing room. “This is not the first time.”
Were younger House leaders trying to push him aside?
“Let them try; let them try,” he replied. “They won’t be able to do it.”
The first big showdown will be the pending energy bill, which House leaders originally hoped to pass soon after July 4. Mr. Dingell’s committee has approved a measure that omits any change in fuel-economy requirements. Ms. Pelosi and many other Democrats want to add a tough requirement, much like one the Senate passed in June, as an amendment on the House floor.
But they are loath to try until they are sure they have enough votes to win. If they cannot muster the votes, House Democrats figure they can adopt the Senate measure during a House-Senate conference. But even that is dicey: Mr. Dingell is likely to be the senior House Democrat in that conference.
Despite the open conflict, environmentalists say Mr. Dingell can be either a crucial ally or an implacable foe – and no one knows which he will be this time.
“This is a completely different place now, and I don’t think John gets that,” said Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia.
MoveOn.org, the liberal political activist group, recently ran radio advertisements in Mr. Dingell’s district accusing him of being a “dinosaur” – a “dingellsaurus” – on environmental issues.
Last month, Mr. Dingell infuriated Ms. Pelosi and many Democrats on his own committee by drafting an energy bill that would have blocked California and other states from passing their own restrictions on carbon-dioxide emissions from automobiles.
After an outcry from many Democrats and a sharp no from Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Dingell postponed what he called the “more controversial” issues until his committee took up a global warming bill in the fall.
Gone was any requirement for higher mileage in cars and S.U.V.’s, which Ms. Pelosi wanted. Gone was any prohibition against states setting their own emission rules for cars, which Mr. Dingell wanted. Gone were all the subsidies for coal-based diesel fuels, which Democrats from coal-producing states wanted. What is left is a comparatively bland bill that would impose higher efficiency standards for electrical appliances, machinery and buildings, increase loan guarantees for companies producing renewable fuels and provide research money for new energy technology.
By contrast, the Senate last month approved energy legislation that would increase average mileage standards to 35 miles per gallon for cars and S.U.V.’s alike by 2020. Cars now must average 27.5 miles per gallon, and light trucks and S.U.V.’s need to get 21.6.
Even environmentalists say Mr. Dingell is a masterful legislator who has helped pass landmark environmental laws like the Endangered Species Act and the Superfund program to clean up toxic waste sites.
“I use him as a sterling example of an effective legislator,” said Philip Sharp, a former Democratic representative from Indiana who served for years on Mr. Dingell’s committee and is now head of Resources for the Future, an environmental policy research group.And despite his own misgivings about rules that might hurt automakers, Mr. Dingell was instrumental in a major expansion of the Clean Air Act in 1990 to reduce pollution that causes acid rain. “I’ve gotten more legislation passed on conservation and the environment than anybody else in this place,” Mr. Dingell boasted. “I know how to build legislation from the center.”
He also knows how to keep his adversaries off balance.
In a nod to his environmental critics, Mr. Dingell vowed to come up with a major bill in the fall to reduce heat-trapping gases 60 percent to 80 percent over the next four decades. But a few days later, he declared that his legislation would include a steep “carbon tax” on fuels that emit carbon dioxide – an approach that many Democratic leaders view as political suicide – in part to highlight the unpopular cost of slowing global warming.
Three weeks ago, Mr. Dingell took pains to look collaborative as he stood next to Ms. Pelosi at a news conference to promote a package of “energy independence” measures drafted by almost a dozen separate committees. “Let me say how proud I am to work with you and work under your leadership,” Mr. Dingell said. “I do want to congratulate you, Madame Speaker, on the work that you are doing.”
But where Ms. Pelosi says global warming is her top domestic priority, Mr. Dingell as recently as December expressed doubt about the scientific consensus on global warming. He has not seen “An Inconvenient Truth,” the Oscar-winning documentary on global warming starring former Vice President Al Gore.
Today, Mr. Dingell says he is convinced that global warming is an urgent problem, but doubts that most people understand the enormous costs involved in addressing it.
“First of all, I think the scientific question has been resolved,” he said in an interview. “Second of all, I think the political question has been resolved. Our problem now is to write the best legislation we can.”
Beyond tactical calculations and nose-counting, Mr. Dingell almost certainly has his eye on bargaining for other kinds of Congressional support for automakers. General Motors, Ford and Chrysler have all pleaded for help in reducing health care and pension costs for employees and retirees – a cost that has been estimated at about $1,000 per vehicle and is not borne by car companies in most other countries.
Mr. Dingell is cagey about what he truly wants to accomplish. “We’ll see to it that we produce the rules that are needed,” he said. “We’ll see to it that it doesn’t cost jobs and doesn’t hurt the economy. We’ll see to it that we don’t throw away jobs or our industrial leadership.”
But when pressed to name his own personal wish list, he balked.
“Do I know what the hell is in this bill?” he retorted when pressed about his goals. “No, I don’t know. The process will produce it. I’m going to lead so they can come up with sound policy.”
Loading...