Update from Washington, D.C.
House Advances Impeachment Resolution; Senate to Vote on First Appropriations Package
October 31, 2019
On Thursday, October 31, the House of Representatives approved a resolution formalizing the rules for the impeachment inquiry into President Trump. Advanced on a near party-line vote of 232-196, the resolution sets the stage for the next phase of the Democratic-led investigation into the president’s dealings with Ukraine.
While the House Intelligence, Oversight, and Foreign Affairs Committees have been holding a series of closed-door interviews with current and former administration officials, House Democrats now intend to conduct several public hearings. Following the hearings, and as outlined in the resolution, the House Intelligence Committee will be charged with writing a report setting forth its findings; in turn, the House Judiciary Committee will be responsible for reporting any potential articles of impeachment or other recommendations to the full House of Representatives.
Across Capitol Hill, senators at press time were slated to pass their first fiscal year 2020 appropriations measure. The legislation (HR 3055) includes the text of the Commerce-Justice-Science, Transportation-HUD, Interior-Environment, and Agriculture-FDA spending bills. Following the vote, members of the Senate are expected to proceed to a second appropriations package that covers the Departments of Defense, Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education.
Although the House has passed all of its fiscal year 2020 spending bills, and despite this week’s progress in the Senate, the top appropriators in both chambers of Congress indicated this week that a Continuing Resolution (CR) that runs into the calendar year will likely be needed. The current CR is set to expire on November 21.
The notion that a longer-term stopgap funding bill will be necessary is a reflection of several dynamics, including the fact that House and Senate lawmakers have been unable to negotiate final allocations for the 12 annual appropriations measures. In addition, the ongoing House impeachment inquiry – and a looming trial phase in the Senate – adds uncertainty to the congressional agenda and only further complicates efforts to pass a final budget.
Infrastructure Updates
This week, the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee approved legislation (HR 1497) that would reauthorize the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF). Last reauthorized by Congress in 1987, lawmakers have continued to appropriate dollars for the SRF on an annual basis. In fact, the fund remains the primary source of federal support for important wastewater infrastructure projects at the state and local level.
In addition to renewing the SRF, HR 1497 would authorize federal funding for other key water infrastructure programs and projects, including funding for sewer overflow and stormwater reuse grants, as well as funding for alternative water source projects.
It should be noted that during committee markup, members added to HR 1497 the text of a bill (HR 1764) that would extend the maximum term for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. Under current law, NPDES permit terms are limited to five years, which does not accurately reflect the construction schedules for major public water and wastewater treatment projects. HR 1764 is sponsored by Congressman John Garamendi (D-CA) and has been endorsed by Republican and Democratic members of the state’s congressional delegation.
Finally, Congressman Garamendi – with the support of CSAC – recently secured the support of every Democratic member of the California congressional delegation for his Transportation Emergency Relief Funds Availability Act (HR 3193). The legislation would provide states and local transportation agencies with up to six years to utilize Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Emergency Relief (ER) program funding to repair or reconstruct federal-aid routes that have been damaged as a result of a disaster.
Under current FHWA regulations, states and localities have two years to advance ER projects to the construction obligation stage. If a project sponsor is unable to meet the deadline, the FHWA may provide the sponsor with additional time if “suitable justification” (i.e. the need for extensive environmental evaluation, pending litigation, and/or complex right-of-way acquisition) is furnished to the agency.
It should be noted that under previous administrations, FHWA routinely granted Caltrans and local transportation agencies with one-year (or consecutive one-year) time extensions for projects that could not be advanced to the construction stage due to extenuating circumstances. Earlier this year, however, the FHWA denied time-extension requests for a significant number of pre-2017 ER projects in California. The decision not to grant the extensions means project sponsors will be unable to be reimbursed for any otherwise eligible costs incurred after October 1 of last year. Additionally, those projects that were not granted an extension are subject to an FHWA Order that requires sponsors to repay the federal government any preliminary engineering costs if the project ultimately cannot be completed with local funds.
USDA Releases Proposed Rules Governing Hemp
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) this week unveiled its highly anticipated proposed rules governing the new hemp program authorized by the 2018 Farm Bill (PL 115-334). The so-called Domestic Hemp Production Program will provide the regulatory framework for hemp production in the United States. Among other things, it covers the requirements for where the crop can be grown, Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) testing standards, the disposal process for crops that don’t meet federal standards, and licensing protocols.
The publication of the proposed rule in the Federal Register on October 31 starts the clock on a 60-day public comment period, which will give stakeholders an opportunity to weigh in on the proposal. It should be noted that while the new regulation provides federal standards for the program, states – with USDA approval – will maintain primary regulatory authority over hemp production. In fact, once the rule is finalized, USDA will have 60 days to make a determination on state plan applications. However, agency officials have also signaled that the Trump administration could approve state plans during the comment period. More information on the rule, including an overview of the program and frequently asked questions, can be found here.
While a number of lawmakers are pleased with the new hemp program, key members of Congress have continued to urge the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to develop new rules providing for the lawful marketing of hemp-derived cannabidiol (CBD) products. Despite the Farm Bill provisions legalizing hemp, the FDA currently classifies all products containing CBD to be unsafe. As such, the agency would need to create an alternative regulatory framework for CBD to be legally marketed as a food item or dietary supplement, a process the agency estimates could take between three to five years. Given the expected surge in hemp farming and the widespread availability of CBD products, a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers is urging agency officials to issue enforcement discretion guidelines to provide farmers, retailers, and consumers with more legal certainty in the short-term.