Election distractions, negotiations, and a slim Democratic majority in the Michigan House have kept a suite of polluter-pay bills in committee limbo, according to environmental advocates and one of the bill’s sponsors.
Michigan Democrats introduced the bills a year ago, but they haven’t made much progress since.
The bills aren’t necessarily stuck; they're just subject to a long negotiating process, State Senator Jeff Irwin (D-Ann Arbor) said.
“We're just trying to arrange all of the best expertise because this is a complicated area,” he said. “And there are billions and billions of dollars at stake. And so we want to make sure we get it right.” Irwin co-sponsored the package with eight other Democrats.
The need for wide buy-in is to be expected for a bill package as significant as this one, said Charlotte Jameson, the chief policy officer of the Michigan Environmental Council.
“I think it can be summarized as ‘politics,’” she said. “If they were enacted, [the bills] would have a really big impact on industry here in Michigan.”
Polluter-pay laws hold businesses financially liable for contamination they cause. The bill package introduced last October consists of six House bills and six equivalent Senate bills. Each bill addresses different aspects of Michigan’s environmental and health regulations to extend industry liability and costs.
The bills as introduced go too far and will limit economic development, according to a statement by the Michigan Chamber of Commerce released last year.
With Michigan’s push for economic growth over the past few years, there may be a “real hesitancy” among lawmakers to support legislation that appears to hinder it, Jameson said.
But Jameson and other advocates say Michigan needs to tighten its liability laws, in part because of the state’s history as an industrial center.
“Michigan has a huge manufacturing history. That's how we put the world on wheels,” said David Lossing, the government relations director for the Huron River Watershed Council. “And so we're going to have a lot of contaminated sites. But we also need to hold those who did that accountable for their actions.”
The watershed council has been lobbying dozens of lawmakers from both parties across the watershed to support the bills. Democrats enjoy a slim majority in the state House, but having Republican support for the bill would still help, Jameson said.
“Anytime you can get something to be bipartisan, your chances are way better because the margins are so tight,” she said. “So anytime we're depending on getting all the Democrats to vote for something because we don't have any Republican support, it's going to be that much harder to get it done.”
It’s too early to tell how support will shake out between the two major parties, Irwin said. He is hopeful more GOP lawmakers will support the bills.
The watershed council has been providing maps to each legislator whose district is in the watershed, showing all the contaminated sites present based on data from the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, said Lossing.
“Their constituents are living next to contaminated locations and they may not even know it,” he said.
It’s unclear when the bills could start moving. The upcoming election has lots of legislators distracted, Irwin said. Jameson hopes the bills will make progress after November 5.
