Clean Power Plan; state implementation plan; General Assembly approval. (SB21)

Introduced By

Sen. Ben Chafin (R-Lebanon) with support from co-patron Sen. Bill Carrico (R-Grayson)

Progress

Introduced
Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law

Description

Clean Power Plan; state implementation plan; General Assembly approval. Requires the Department of Environmental Quality to receive approval from the General Assembly for a state implementation plan to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants prior to submitting the plan to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for approval. Read the Bill »

Outcome

Bill Has Failed

History

DateAction
12/07/2015Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/13/16 16101688D
12/07/2015Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources
01/21/2016Reported from Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources with substitite (8-Y 7-N) (see vote tally)
01/21/2016Committee substitute printed 16104660D-S1
01/25/2016Impact statement from DPB (SB21S1)
01/25/2016Constitutional reading dispensed (39-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
01/26/2016Read second time
01/26/2016Reading of substitute waived
01/26/2016Committee substitute agreed to 16104660D-S1
01/26/2016Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute SB21S1
01/27/2016Passed by for the day
01/28/2016Motion to rerefer to committee agreed to
01/28/2016Rereferred to Finance
02/02/2016Reported from Finance (9-Y 4-N) (see vote tally)
02/03/2016Read third time and passed Senate (21-Y 19-N) (see vote tally)
02/05/2016Placed on Calendar
02/05/2016Read first time
02/05/2016Referred to Committee on Commerce and Labor
02/18/2016Reported from Commerce and Labor (14-Y 6-N) (see vote tally)
02/19/2016Read second time
02/22/2016Read third time
02/22/2016Passed House (64-Y 34-N 2-A)
02/22/2016VOTE: PASSAGE (64-Y 34-N 2-A) (see vote tally)
02/23/2016Enrolled
02/23/2016Bill text as passed Senate and House (SB21ER)
02/23/2016Signed by President
02/23/2016Signed by Speaker
02/23/2016Enrolled Bill Communicated to Governor on 2/23/16
02/23/2016G Governor's Action Deadline Midnight, March 1, 2016
02/24/2016Impact statement from DPB (SB21ER)
03/01/2016G Vetoed by Governor
03/03/2016Requires 27 affirmative votes to overide veto
03/03/2016Senate sustained Governor's veto (21-Y 19-N) (see vote tally)
03/03/2016Requires 27 affirmative votes to override veto

Video

This bill was discussed on the floor of the General Assembly. Below is all of the video that we have of that discussion, 1 clip in all, totaling 13 minutes.

Transcript

This is a transcript of the video clips in which this bill is discussed.

SENATOR FROM RUSSELL COUNTY, SENATOR CHAFIN. MR. PRESIDENT, I MOVE THAT THE BILL PASS IN THE ENROLLED FORM NOTWITHSTANDING THE OBJECTIONS OF THE GOVERNOR. THANK YOU. IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT, SENATOR. SPEAKING TO THE BILL. THE SENATOR HAS THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, SIR. THIS IS THE CLEAN POWER PLAN BILL AND THIS BILL, I'LL REMIND YOU, GIVES EACH OF US A VOICE CONCERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE EPA. IT ALLOWS US TO REVIEW THE WORK OF THE DEQ AND THE SCC AND REQUIRES THAT ALL THE WORK -- THAT ALL WHO WORK ON THE PLAN MAKE SOME COMMON SENSE JUDGMENT CALLS ABOUT THINGS LIKE ENERGY PRICE INCREASES ON LOWER AND MIDDLE INCOME FAMILIES, DIRECT AND INDIRECT EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS AND JOB LOSSES, IMPACTS ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND THE OVERALL COMPETITIVE POSITION OF THE COMMONWEALTH WITH ITS NEIGHBORING STATES. I WONDER IF ANY OF YOU CAN TELL ME WHY WE WOULDN'T WANT TO CONSIDER THOSE THINGS? WHY? WHY WOULD WE NOT WANT TO USE COMMON SENSE AND CONSIDER THOSE THINGS? SO -- I MEAN, WE NOO THAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS EAGER TO PARTNER WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA'S EPA. WE KNOW THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS EVEN SAID THAT HE INTENDED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CARBON RULES, EVEN THOUGH THEY'VE BEEN STOPPED IN THEIR TRACKS BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT WHO IS CONSIDERING AN APPEAL AS TO WHETHER THEY'RE CONSTITUTIONAL, AND WE KNOW THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS SAID THAT HE INTENDED TO PARTNER -- MOVE FORWARD AND PARTNER WITH THE STATES OF NEW YORK, CALIFORNIA, WASHINGTON STATE, AND COLORADO. AND, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE WHAT WE HAVE IN COMMON WITH THOSE STATES, BUT I THINK THE -- I THINK THE GOVERNOR HAS IDENTIFIED THAT FOR US. SO I SAY TO YOU, AS A BODY, LET'S NOT BE LIKE LEMONS AND JUMP IN THE SEA. WHY DO WE WANT TO DO THAT? WHY DO WE WANT TO BE LIKE A BUNCH OF LEMONS AND JUMP IN THE SEA WHEN THIS THING IS UNDER APPEAL AND THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT MAY VERY WELL OVERTURN IT ALL. WHY IN THE WORLD DO WE WANT TO GO FORWARD AT THIS MOMENT? I WANT YOU TO SAY THAT WORD? WHY? (IN UNISON) WHY! I HOPE YOU'LL MUSTER THE COURAGE FOR VOTE FOR THIS FINE PIECE OF WORK, THIS BILL, AND PUT UP ENOUGH VOTES TO OVERTURN IT. WOULD THE GENTLEMAN YIELD FOR A QUESTION, MR. PRESIDENT? (IN UNISON) WHY? I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION TO ASK HIM. DOES HE AGREE WITH ALL SUPREME COURT RULINGS? MR. PRESIDENT, I CAN ANSWER THE SENATOR FROM FAIRFAX AND I CAN SAW THAT I DO NOT PERSONALLY AGREE WITH ALL SUPREME COURT DECISIONS. I DIDN'T THINK HE DID. THE SENATOR FROM FAIRFAX COUNTY, SENATOR MORRISON. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I RISE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION WHY. THE SENATOR HAS THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. YOU KNOW, WHEN IT COULD'S TO NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL, IT MIGHT BE OKAY FOR US TO, OUN, STICK OUR NOSE INTO THE BUSINESS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO CLEAN AIR, WHEN IT COMES TO REDUCING THE CARBON, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE IMPACT ON OUR CLIMATE AND SEE LEVEL RISE -- EXCUSE ME, I FLENT RECURRENT FLOODING, THAT THOSE ISSUES ARE TOO IMPORTANT. THIS IS ABOUT SCIENCE, NOT FLICKS. WHEN WE -- POLITICS. WHEN WE MEET AS A BODY HERE, WE TEND TO GET INTO COMPROMISE, WE TEND TO GET INTO TRYING TO BALANCE REGIONAL STWS AND WHAT HAVE YOU AND THE COMMONWEALTH NEEDS TO SPEAK WITH ONE VOICE HERE FOR ALL THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA. WE HAVE TO PRODUCE A CLEAN POWER PLAN. IT HAS TO BE BASED ON SCIENCE AND IT HAS TO BE LEGAL AND I THINK THIS BILL, THIS BILL HAS HUGE CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEMS, SEPARATION OF THE EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AND SO I WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULD SUSTAIN GOVERNOR'S VETO AND I THINK ONE VERY WISE MAN ONCE TOLD ME, HE WAS THE BEST COUNTY EXECUTIVE WE EVER HAD IN FAIRFAX, HE SAID THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH CAN TELL ME TO PAINS THE BARN, BUT -- PAINT THE BARN, BUT SHE SHOULDN'T BE TELLING ME WHERE TO BUY THE PAINT. WE HAVE A CLEAN POWER PLAN THAT WE HAVE TO PUT TOGETHER, IT'S THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH'S JOBS, THEFT SCIENTISTS TO DO IT. LET'S SUSTAIN THE VETO. THE SENIOR SENATOR FROM HENRICO, SENATOR McEACH SCHIN. I RISE FOR A PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY. THE SENATOR HAS THE FLOOR. IT'S TYPE FOR OUR ANNUAL REVIEW OF THOUSAND VOTE. WOULD YOU INFORM -- HOW TO VOTE. WOULD YOU INFORM THE BODY OF HOW YOU STWEND TO FOES THE QUESTION ON THIS ISSUE. IF THE SENATE WISHES TO SUSTAIN THE GOVERNOR'S VETO, YOU WOULD VOTE NO. IF YOU WANT TO SUPPORT THE BILL AS IT WAS ENROLLED, YOU WOULD VOTE YES. AND THERE NEEDS TO BE 27 YESES TO OVERVIED THE GOVERNOR'S VETO. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THE SENATOR FROM JAMES CITY COUNTY, SENATOR NORMENT. RISE AND SPEAK TO THE MOTION. THE SENATOR HAS THE FLOOR. FIRST OF ALL, I ASK MYSELF, WHY AM I SPEAKING. I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE. [ LAUGHTER ] SECONDLY, UNDERSTANDING YOUR EXPLANATION OF HOW TO VOTE, I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THAT YOU WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THAT WOULD BE 127 OF US, SO THAT -- 27 OF US SO WE COULD SPEAK WITH A UNIFIED VOICE, NOT A 21-19 VOICE, NOT UNIFIED. BUT SPEAKING OF THE WHYS, I HAVEN'T BEEN AROUND AS LONG AS FATHER TIME AS SOMETIMES WE REFER TO SENATOR SASLAW, BUT AS I LOOK AT THE GOVERNOR'S MESSAGE ON THIS, I WOULD PARTICULARLY -- [ LAUGHTER ] THEY WOKE UP. I WAS PARTICULARLY ATTRACTED AS TO ANOTHER WHY, AND IT WAS THE LAST LINE IN HIS VETO MESSAGE WHICH APPEARED TO NOT BE SO MUCH AS A CONSTITUTIONAL EXPLANATION, BUT I CANNOT IN GOOD CONSCIENCE SIGN A BILL THAT WOULD VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION OF VIRGINIA, AND I SAID, WHY ARE WE EDITORIALIZING IN THE VETO COMMENTS? SO 27 VOTES WOULD BE MOST APPRECIATIVE. THANK YOU, SENATOR. THE SENIOR SENATOR FROM LOUDOUN, SENATOR BLACK. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. SPEAKING TO THE MEASURE. THE SENATOR HAS THE FLOOR. WHY? I JUST HAVE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE MOST ENDURING AND MASSIVE INVESTMENTS THAT OUR NATION HAS MADE IS IN ITS POWER PLANTS. THESE ARE A HUGE, HUGE INVESTMENT THAT LASTS FOR GENERATIONS AND THE IDEA OF SUDDENLY MOTHBALLING A MASSIVE PORTION OF OUR INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY AND DUKE IT ON THE FLIMSIEST OF EVIDENCE IS REALLY NOT A WISE DECISION, AND I THINK THIS BILL CERTAINLY GIVES US THE OPTION OF TAKING THE TIME TO FIND OUT WHAT WILL THE COURTS SAY AND THEN WE CAN MAKE THE DECISION AT THAT POINT. BUT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TAKE PRECIPITOUS ACTION AND I THINK THAT -- I THINK THAT WE SHOULD NOT SUSTAIN THE GOVERNOR'S VETO. THANK YOU, SENATOR. THE SENATOR FROM ROANOKE CITY, SENATOR EDWARDS. MR. PRESIDENT, VOTING SUPPORTING, I GUESS IT WOULD BE THE GOVERNOR'S VETO, VOTING RED IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, MR. PRESIDENT, FEDERAL LAW REQUIRES THE GOVERNOR TO COME UP WITH A PLAN TO COMPLY WITH THE FEDERAL CLEAN POWER ACT AND -- A CLEAN POWER PLAN UNDER FEDERAL LAW, AND THE GOVERNOR, OF COURSE, HAS DELEGATED THAT IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. MR. PRESIDENT, WHAT THIS BILL WOULD DO WOULD DIVEST OR PROHIBIT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY FROM SUBMITTING ANY PLAN AT ALL THAT'S VIRGINIA SPECIFIC, WHICH IS IN OUR INTERESTS STOFR A VIRGINIA SPECIFIC PLAN. AND TO DO SO WOULD BE TO VIOLATE FEDERAL LAW, AND TO DIVEST THE GOVERNOR OF THE AUTHORITY THAT HE'S BEEN DELEGATED FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. SO MR. PRESIDENT, THIS WOULD UNDERCUT THE WHOLE IDEA OF HAVING A VIRGINIA SPECIFIC PLAN UNDER THE CLEAN POWER -- TO COME UP WITH A CLEAN POWER PLAN UNDER FEDERAL LAW. IT WOULD DENY THE RIGHT OF DEQ TO HAVE A VIRGINIA-SPECIFIC PLAN AND I THINK IT'S IN OUR INTERESTS, THE INTERESTS THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, TO HAVE A VIRGINIA SPECIFIC PLAN AND ONLY DEQ CAN DO THIS. THIS 140-BODY GENERAL ASSEMBLY COULDN'T POSSIBLY DO THIS. WHAT THIS WOULD DO IS SIMPLY POLITICIZE WHAT IT REALLY SHOULD BE LEFT TO THE EXPERTS IN THE -- USING SCIENCE AND THE TECHNIQUES AND UNDERSTANDINGS OF MODERN SCIENCE TO COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT COMPLIES WITH THE FEDERAL LAW, SO MR. PRESIDENT, THE GOVERNOR IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THIS WOULD VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION OF VIRGINIA, I DID VEST HIM OF AUTHORITY HE'S BEEN DAEGTED BY THE -- DELEGATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND TAKE AWAY FROM THOSE THAT ARE IN THE BEST POSITION TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS AND PUT IT IN THE HANDS OF AN UNWIELDY 140-BODY THAT CAN CANNOT POSSIBLY COME UP WITH THE KINDS OF DETAILED PLANS THAT ARE REQUIRED. IT WOULD POLITICIZE THE PROCESS UNDULY AND MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD LOPE WE VOTE RED IN THIS CASE. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THANK YOU, SENATOR. THE SENATOR FROM BUCKINGHAM, SENATOR GARRETT. MR. PRESIDENT, I APOLOGIZE AND I'LL BE BRIEF. IT MAKES MY SKIN CRAWL WHEN I LARRY ABOUT POWER DELEGATED FOR THE GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. I WOULD COMMEND THE BODY TO STUDY JEWS BRIEFLY FEDERALISM AND -- JUST BRIEFLY FEDERALISM AND UNDERSTAND WHERE POWER COMES FROM AND WHO IT GOES TO. INSTEAD, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE AWAY THE POWER THAT WE HAVE TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS HOW THIS WORKS AND I WOULD ASK THAT THE SENATOR FROM RUSSELL YIELD BRIEFLY FOR A QUESTION. I'M SORRY, WHICH SENATOR? RUSSELL COUNTY. THANK YOU. WOULD THE SENATOR FROM RUSSELL COUNTY YIELD? I YIELD. HE YIELD MANY, SENATOR. I ASK THE SENATOR WHAT ECONOMIC IMPACTS MIGHT FLOW FROM ADOPTION OF THIS -- OR FROM A FAILURE TO OVERRIDE THIS BILL IN PLANNING DISTRICTS ONE, TWO, AND THREE? COULD YOU EXPLAIN IT TO US BECAUSE I DON'T LIVE THERE. MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD SAY THAT THE -- THOSE PLANNING DISTRICTS ARE CURRENTLY HAVING A DISPROPORTIONATE LOSS OF ECONOMIC EARNINGS AS A RESULT OF THE WAR THAT IS CURRENTLY AGAINST COAL AS A RESULT OF THE MARKET FORCES AGAINST COAL, AND OTHER ENERGY FORMS. AND I WOULD SAY THAT THE LOSSES OF IN THE -- NOT IN THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, BUT IN THE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT WILL RESULT.

Del. Bill Howell (R-Fredericksburg): THANK YOU, SENATOR. THE QUESTION IS SHALL THE BILL PASS IN THE ENROLLED FORM, NOTWITHSTANDING THE OBJECTIONS OF THE GOVERNOR. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES AYE, THOSE OPPOSED NO. ARE THE SENATORS READY TO VOTE? HAVE ALL THE SENATORS VOTED? DO ANY SENATORS DESIRE TO CHANGE THEIR VOTE? THE CLERK WILL CLOSE THE ROLL.

Duplicate Bills

The following bills are identical to this one: HB2 and SB482.