Energy Is Where Big Labor Meets Big Business

The tangled world of energy politics can certainly lead to some strange bedfellows.

We already knew many of the big and small businesses that back organizations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce were by and large strongly opposed to the Environmental Protection Agency’s plan to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

Now, those big businesses have a new ally: Big labor. The Wall Street Journal reports that the Obama administration is catching heat from labor organizations. Those loyal allies of Democrats are warning that regulations aimed at limiting emissions from such sources as coal-fired electric plants could cost thousands of jobs and hand Republicans a powerful weapon in the 2012 elections.

"If the EPA issues regulations that cost jobs in Pennsylvania and Ohio, the Republicans will blast the President with it over and over," Stewart Acuff, chief of staff to the president of the Utility Workers Union of America, tells Stephen Power of the Journal. "Not just the President. Every Democratic [lawmaker] from those states."

The EPA has moved to regulate greenhouse gases after finding that they were a threat to public health under the Clean Air Act. The agency was ordered by the Supreme Court during the George W. Bush administration to decide whether greenhouse gases were a threat, but a decision was put off until Obama took office.

Both the Bush administration and the Obama administration had said Congress was the proper place to decide on such regulation.

But the specter of higher energy costs for consumers and businesses as a result was enough to stymie efforts to get a new law through the U.S. Senate during either administration.

With that failure, the EPA decided to go ahead with its own regulation targeting utility companies. The United States gets about half of its electricity from plants burning coal, which emits the most carbon dioxide—the leading greenhouse gas—of any of the fossil fuels. Coal is also the cheapest of the fossil fuels.

The EPA’s decision to regulate has sparked a Republican backlash in the House of Representatives, where a subcommittee has passed a sure-to-be-vetoed measure restricting the EPA from implementing its plan.

Supporters of the regulation, either by Congress or the EPA, have long argued that climate change is an emergency that requires U.S. leadership to cut the gases most scientists believe are causing global warming.

They have also argued that while regulation would lead to higher energy prices in the short-term, they would also bring about new jobs over the long-term by encouraging the development of alternative energy like solar or wind.

But with the price of oil rising and casting doubt on an economic recovery, and an election in 2012 in which jobs are likely to be the top issue, the question unions are asking is a sensible one: Can the Democrats survive a short-term rise in electricity costs, and potential lost jobs along with it, for long-term investment in clean energy?

---

Get more business intelligence from Portfolio.com:

• RISE Up: Before entrepreneurs flocked to Austin for SXSW, another event brought thousands of others interested in starting or growing their own businesses to the Texas capital and tech mecca.
• The Startup Stimulus: Embarking on a startup doesn't have to be lonely. In Silicon Valley, support and advice is all around if you know where to look and if you're willing to pay.
• How to Connect With Japan: Often the most difficult thing to do in the aftermath of a natural disaster is getting in touch with loved ones, business associates, and employees. Some resources on how to find people amid the chaos in Japan.

---

Kent Bernhard Jr. is News Editor of Portfolio.com