Regulatory and Legal Reform

The Environmental Protection Agency has received tens of thousands of comments—including some from the NAM—on two proposed tailpipe rules for vehicles, setting up what could be “months of heated debate over the future of U.S. transportation,” E&E News’ CLIMATEWIRE (subscription) reports.

What’s going on: In April, the agency set forth two draft regulations—one for cars and another for trucks—which would “set strict enough limits on tailpipe pollution that manufacturers would be compelled to more quickly shift their production away from vehicles that run on fossil fuels and toward those that are powered by batteries, fuel cells and other … systems.”

• The regulations would apply to cars and trucks manufactured starting in model year 2027.

Why it’s important: The proposed mandates depend on a steep, imminent spike in the construction and availability of electric-vehicle charging stations, the NAM told the EPA this month in response to the truck proposal.

• The national electric transmission infrastructure would have to grow some 57% by 2035 to reach the EPA’s goals regarding light-, medium- and heavy-duty trucks, according to the Department of Energy’s draft National Transmission Needs Study from February 2023, NAM Vice President of Energy and Resources Policy Brandon Farris said.
• “[A]t the historical pace of approximately 1% annual growth for these projects, the transmission system would require more than half a century to achieve the goals the administration hopes to achieve in little more than a decade,” he continued.

What should be done: The draft rules should be revised so that they are technology-neutral, Farris added, “allowing market forces to determine which technologies work best for specific sectors.”

• The rules should also “recognize the realities and limitations of current infrastructure, even as manufacturers urge administration officials and congressional leaders to prioritize policies that would strengthen transmission systems and infrastructure, including critical permitting reforms,” Farris concluded.

What’s next: The EPA expects to receive upward of 100,000 comments on the proposed laws and said that processing them all will likely “take weeks.”

• The public comment period for the draft cars rule ends July 5.

The Protecting the Right to Organize Act would “devastate workplaces” if enacted, the NAM told the Senate this week.

• Today the legislation heads to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions for a markup session.

What’s going on: The PRO Act—introduced in February by Rep. Robert C. Scott (D-VA) purportedly to expand labor protections—would do significant harm to manufacturers, NAM Director of Labor and Employment Policy Brian Walsh told Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Ranking Member Bill Cassidy (R-LA) Tuesday.

What it would do: The PRO Act contains “proposals that would constitute the most radical rewrite of our nation’s employment laws in nearly 100 years,” including:

• Removal of the right to a secret ballot in union elections and the institution of “card check”
• Elimination of right-to-work statutes in the 27 states in which they are law;
• Forced payment of union dues even by nonunion-supporting employees; and
• A ban on employers talking to their workers about unions without the involvement of a union representative.

What should be done: Walsh urged committee members “to oppose this misguided attempt to fundamentally restructure American workplaces” and instead put their support behind measures that truly support employees.

• “We look forward to opportunities to continue working with members of the [c]ommittee … on legislation such as the Employee Rights Act (S. 1201) to advance productive solutions that meet the needs of today’s workers,” he said. ​​​​​​​

The NAM is standing up for manufacturers in courtrooms nationwide. Funded by voluntary contributions from NAM members, the NAM Legal Center is the leading voice for manufacturers in the courts, promoting manufacturing interests by reining in regulatory overreach, protecting vital manufacturing priorities and litigating on behalf of manufacturers across the United States.

As part of that work, the Legal Center brings the powerful voice of manufacturing into ongoing cases and helps shape the legal environment for the entire sector. That’s where the Legal Center’s Amicus Program comes in.

What it does: The Legal Center’s Amicus Program is focused on supporting NAM members in their litigation—whether they are pushing back against harmful rules that are impacting their operations or defending themselves in lawsuits with broader implications for the manufacturing sector.

The wins: The Amicus Program has achieved a series of critical wins for manufacturers in recent months, including the following:

• Save Jobs USA v. DHS: The Legal Center helped turn back an anti-immigration challenge in the District of Columbia, thus preserving the ability of H-4 visa-holders to work in the U.S. The victory protected manufacturing employees and their families, along with employers and the health of the overall economy.
• Brown v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corporation: The Legal Center successfully pushed back against an effort to invent a new type of legal claim for so-called “medical monitoring” that would have forced the company to compensate individuals with no current injuries. The victory protected manufacturers from unpredictable and potentially unbounded liability in New Hampshire and avoided setting a dangerous precedent that other states might follow.
• PhRMA v. Williams: The Legal Center effectively blocked an attempt by the state of Minnesota to force manufacturers to provide their products for free in a lawsuit against an insulin manufacturer. By helping defeat this effort, the NAM helped protect property rights for businesses in every sector.
• CRA v. City of Berkeley: The Legal Center stood with manufacturers in Berkeley, California, who faced a backdoor ban on gas appliances in new construction. The victory averted a regulatory patchwork and safeguarded appliance manufacturers.

The last word: “The breadth of the subject matter shows how expansive and effective the Legal Center is,” said Michael Tilghman of the NAM Legal Center. “Our national Amicus Program is addressing issues before federal and state courts ranging from government overreach to high-skilled immigration and product liability—and manufacturers can be confident that we have their backs.”

Contact us: As a member-driven program, the Legal Center pursues cases that are important to NAM members, whether they’re a party in the case or the case will have an important impact on manufacturing. To share potential opportunities for our involvement, email Tilghman at [email protected].  

The NAM is standing up for manufacturers in courtrooms nationwide. Funded by voluntary contributions from NAM members, the NAM Legal Center is the leading voice for manufacturers in the courts, promoting manufacturing interests by reining in regulatory overreach, protecting vital manufacturing priorities and litigating on behalf of manufacturers across the United States.

As part of that work, the Legal Center brings the powerful voice of manufacturing into ongoing cases and helps shape the legal environment for the entire sector. That’s where the Legal Center’s Amicus Program comes in.

What it does: The Legal Center’s Amicus Program is focused on supporting NAM members in their litigation—whether they are pushing back against harmful rules that are impacting their operations or defending themselves in lawsuits with broader implications for the manufacturing sector.

The wins: The Amicus Program has achieved a series of critical wins for manufacturers in recent months, including the following:

• Save Jobs USA v. DHS: The Legal Center helped turn back an anti-immigration challenge in the District of Columbia, thus preserving the ability of H-4 visa-holders to work in the U.S. The victory protected manufacturing employees and their families, along with employers and the health of the overall economy.
• Brown v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corporation: The Legal Center successfully pushed back against an effort to invent a new type of legal claim for so-called “medical monitoring” that would have forced the company to compensate individuals with no current injuries. The victory protected manufacturers from unpredictable and potentially unbounded liability in New Hampshire and avoided setting a dangerous precedent that other states might follow.
• PhRMA v. Williams: The Legal Center effectively blocked an attempt by the state of Minnesota to force manufacturers to provide their products for free in a lawsuit against an insulin manufacturer. By helping defeat this effort, the NAM helped protect property rights for businesses in every sector.
• CRA v. City of Berkeley: The Legal Center stood with manufacturers in Berkeley, California, who faced a backdoor ban on gas appliances in new construction. The victory averted a regulatory patchwork and safeguarded appliance manufacturers.

The last word: “The breadth of the subject matter shows how expansive and effective the Legal Center is,” said Michael Tilghman of the NAM Legal Center. “Our national Amicus Program is addressing issues before federal and state courts ranging from government overreach to high-skilled immigration and product liability—and manufacturers can be confident that we have their backs.”

Contact us: As a member-driven program, the Legal Center pursues cases that are important to NAM members, whether they’re a party in the case or the case will have an important impact on manufacturing. To share potential opportunities for our involvement, email Tilghman at [email protected].

Manufacturers are becoming increasingly concerned about the unprecedented number of unbalanced, unworkable regulations being handed down by federal agencies, according to the NAM’s Q2 2023 Manufacturers’ Outlook Survey.

• Sixty-five percent reported that if regulatory burdens were reduced, they would purchase more equipment; more than 46% said they would pay their workers more.
• Over sixty-three percent said they spend more than 2,000 hours complying with federal regulations.

Also notable: Other key conclusions from the quarterly analysis, which was conducted from May 18 to June 1, 2023, include:

• Sixty-seven percent of manufacturers reported being positive about their company’s outlook, a decrease of more than 11% since Q1 (74.7%) and the lowest in nearly three years.
• Seventy-five percent of manufacturers polled said comprehensive permitting reform would help their businesses, allowing them to hire more employees, expand their operations and/or boost wages.

Persistent challenges: As they have in the past three surveys, manufacturers this quarter again cited attracting top talent as their number-one workforce challenge (74.4%).

• The next biggest hurdles reported were a weaker U.S. economy (55.7%), rising health care or insurance costs (53.1%), an unfavorable business climate (52.1%), increased raw materials costs (50.8%) and supply chain challenges (44.9%).

The last word: “Congress and the administration have taken bold steps to support manufacturing in the United States,” NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons said.

• “But the positive effects of tax reform, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the CHIPS and Science Act are being undermined by the growing regulatory burden. The unrelenting barrage of regulations threatens to undermine manufacturers’ competitiveness. If the administration’s regulatory onslaught continues, its manufacturing agenda will fail. Unfortunately, we are seeing the signs of exactly that happening.”

The Save Our Gas Stoves Act—which is expected to pass the House in the near future, though it has been temporarily blocked due to an argument over the debt ceiling—would prevent the Department of Energy from moving forward with its overly stringent efficiency threshold for gas stoves.

That would be a win for reining in DOE overreach, but work remains in the fight against a regulatory onslaught by the agency. The NAM and its association partners are leading the way.

What’s going on: Since January, the DOE has undertaken an unprecedented slew of regulations aimed at home appliances—and if implemented, these measures would yield little in the way of energy savings for consumers and result in appliances that cost more.

• They would pile on the costs for manufacturers, too—more than $2.5 billion, according to the DOE’s own estimates, in a package of standards that could go into effect as early as 2027.
• “There are currently nine open rules [from the DOE] on appliance products that have very little energy savings for the consumer while they have really significant cost to the industry,” said Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers Vice President of Communications and Marketing Jill Notini, whose organization isurging consumers to call on Congress to support the Save Our Gas Stoves Act.

The background: Under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, the DOE is required to review appliance-efficiency standards every six years—but it’s not required to tighten them, Notini said, adding that the last time reviews were done for gas cooking appliances, the agency opted against making any changes.

Higher costs for all: These new DOE standards would significantly raise production costs for manufacturers while reducing features, performance and affordability for consumers, according to AHAM calculations based on DOE data.

• Consumers would save just $1.51 a year in energy costs, or 12.5 cents a month.

Too tight: It’s no surprise, then, that the proposed standards are so stringent as to make almost all on-the-market gas ranges noncompliant, Notini said.

• According to the DOE’s own technical analysis, 96% of gas cooking appliances would fail to meet the proposed efficiency threshold.
• The standards would have a significant effect on consumers, too. Redesigned gas stoves would only be able to have a single high-input burner, increasing the amount of time it would take to boil water or cook a meal, Notini said.

Washing machines: Another recently proposed DOE regulation requires that washing machines use almost 25% less water and cooler water temperatures, a restriction that would also hit consumers hard.

• The point-of-purchase price tag for washing machines would increase $150 per washer—while saving consumers just $7.85 a year, according to the DOE.
• Inflation has become a major concern for consumers across income segments, but particularly among low- to middle-income households, which will see the biggest impact from the proposed standard, Notini pointed out.

The last word: “Manufacturers rely on regulatory clarity and certainty. Unfortunately, DOE’s proposals only add to the regulatory onslaught manufacturers are currently facing,” said NAM Director of Energy and Resources Policy Chris Morris.

• “The NAM remains committed to working with all federal agencies, including the DOE, to ensure that rules and regulations are practical and feasible and do not harm manufacturers.”

Washington, D.C. – The National Association of Manufacturers released its Manufacturers’ Outlook Survey for the second quarter of 2023, which reveals manufacturers’ mounting concerns over the onslaught of unbalanced federal regulations and the threat that poses to sustaining manufacturing investment, job creation and wage growth.

“Congress and the administration have taken bold steps to support manufacturing in the United States. But the positive effects of tax reform, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the CHIPS and Science Act are being undermined by the growing regulatory burden. The unrelenting barrage of regulations threatens to undermine manufacturers’ competitiveness. If the administration’s regulatory onslaught continues, its manufacturing agenda will fail. Unfortunately, we are seeing the signs of exactly that happening,” said NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons.

Currently, the NAM is engaged actively on nearly 100 regulations that have been proposed or announced by 30 different agencies.

Key Survey Findings:

• Only 67% of manufacturers are positive about their own company’s outlook. This is down from 74.7% in Q1, making it the lowest since Q3 2020, and before the pandemic, the lowest since Q3 2019.
• If the regulatory burden on manufacturers decreased, 65% of manufacturers would purchase more capital equipment, and more than 46% would increase compensation.
• More than 63% of manufacturers report spending more than 2,000 hours per year complying with federal regulations.
• If Congress were to enact comprehensive permitting reform, simplifying and speeding up the approval process for new projects, 75.1% of manufacturers say it would be helpful, allowing their company to hire more workers, expand business and/or increase wages and benefits.
• The top challenges facing manufacturers include attracting and retaining a quality workforce (74.4%), weaker domestic economy (55.7%), rising health care/insurance costs (53.1%), unfavorable business climate (52.1%), increased raw material costs (50.8%) and supply chain challenges (44.9%).

You can learn more at the NAM’s online regulatory action center here.

The NAM releases these results to the public each quarter. Further information on the survey is available here.

-NAM-

The National Association of Manufacturers is the largest manufacturing association in the United States, representing small and large manufacturers in every industrial sector and in all 50 states. Manufacturing employs nearly 13 million men and women, contributes $2.90 trillion to the U.S. economy annually and accounts for 55% of private-sector research and development. The NAM is the powerful voice of the manufacturing community and the leading advocate for a policy agenda that helps manufacturers compete in the global economy and create jobs across the United States. For more information about the NAM or to follow us on Twitter and Facebook, please visit www.nam.org

The Save Our Gas Stoves Act—which is expected to pass the House in the near future, though it has been temporarily blocked due to an argument over the debt ceiling—would prevent the Department of Energy from moving forward with its overly stringent efficiency threshold for gas stoves.

That would be a win for reining in DOE overreach, but work remains in the fight against a regulatory onslaught by the agency. The NAM and its association partners are leading the way.

What’s going on: Since January, the DOE has undertaken an unprecedented slew of regulations aimed at home appliances—and if implemented, these measures would yield little in the way of energy savings for consumers and result in appliances that cost more.

• They would pile on the costs for manufacturers, too—more than $2.5 billion, according to the DOE’s own estimates, in a package of standards that could go into effect as early as 2027.
• “There are currently nine open rules [from the DOE] on appliance products that have very little energy savings for the consumer while they have really significant cost to the industry,” said Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers Vice President of Communications and Marketing Jill Notini, whose organization is urging consumers to call on Congress to support the Save Our Gas Stoves Act.

The background: Under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, the DOE is required to review appliance-efficiency standards every six years—but it’s not required to tighten them, Notini said, adding that the last time reviews were done for gas cooking appliances, the agency opted against making any changes.

Higher costs for all: These new DOE standards would significantly raise production costs for manufacturers while reducing features, performance and affordability for consumers, according to AHAM calculations based on DOE data.

• Consumers would save just $1.51 a year in energy costs, or 12.5 cents a month.

Too tight: It’s no surprise, then, that the proposed standards are so stringent as to make almost all on-the-market gas ranges noncompliant, Notini said.

• According to the DOE’s own technical analysis, 96% of gas cooking appliances would fail to meet the proposed efficiency threshold.
• The standards would have a significant effect on consumers, too. Redesigned gas stoves would only be able to have a single high-input burner, increasing the amount of time it would take to boil water or cook a meal, Notini said.

Washing machines: Another recently proposed DOE regulation requires that washing machines use almost 25% less water and cooler water temperatures, a restriction that would also hit consumers hard.

• The point-of-purchase price tag for washing machines would increase $150 per washer—while saving consumers just $7.85 a year, according to the DOE.
• Inflation has become a major concern for consumers across income segments, but particularly among low- to middle-income households, which will see the biggest impact from the proposed standard, Notini pointed out.

The last word: “Manufacturers rely on regulatory clarity and certainty. Unfortunately, DOE’s proposals only add to the regulatory onslaught manufacturers are currently facing,” said NAM Director of Energy and Resources Policy Chris Morris.

• “The NAM remains committed to working with all federal agencies, including the DOE, to ensure that rules and regulations are practical and feasible and do not harm manufacturers.”

As banks tighten their lending standards in response to turmoil in the industry, it’s small businesses that are suffering, according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription).

What’s going on: “Some entrepreneurs are finding it more difficult to get a new loan or have had existing credit lines cut. Others report stricter terms, higher borrowing costs, longer waits and tougher questions from their bankers.”

Not your imagination: Close to half of all banks reported having tightened their lending standards in the past three months, according to a Federal Reserve Board survey cited by the Journal.

• “The median interest rate for a variable-rate, small-business term loan was 7.44% in the fourth quarter, the last period for which data is available, up 3.42 percentage points from a year earlier, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. Banks have continued to raise rates this year in response to Federal Reserve rate increases,” one source told the newspaper.

​​​​​​​Why it’s important: More stringent loan rules are forcing smaller companies—which tend to borrow from small banks—to put off or cancel expansions and consider bringing in equity investors.

• “‘The alternative to borrowing from your local small bank is another form of financing that is going to be notably more expensive,’ said Goldman Sachs chief U.S. economist David Mericle.”
• Some banks are telling small businesses to seek Small Business Administration loans, which “carry a government guarantee” but tend to have higher interest rates than their conventional counterparts.

The last word: “Manufacturers—particularly small and medium-sized firms—are closely following developments related to access to credit, with an eye on the tightening of lending standards that were occurring even before the recent banking crisis,” said NAM Chief Economist Chad Moutray.

• “Businesses need credit to be able to expand their operations, and any pullback in that access could have consequences.” ​​​​​​​

Advanced nuclear reactors got some good news Wednesday when a measure to speed their development and deployment passed the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, according to E&E News’ GREENWIRE.

What’s going on: “The ‘Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act,’ S. 1111, passed 16-3, with Chair Tom Carper (D-Del.) and ranking member Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) leading the effort to revitalize American leadership on nuclear energy.”

What it would mean: Through a series of awards, the bill would encourage companies to develop advanced-reactor technology. In addition, it would seek approval easing for reactor projects on brownfield sites, land that is underused or has been abandoned because of industrial waste.

• “The proposal would also give the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the nation’s chief nuclear regulator, additional authorities to increase hiring. Lawmakers say current staffing is not enough to effectively deal with the high number of applications for new reactors.”
• And it would supplement “early licensing work” to deploy the reactors more quickly “at critical national security infrastructure sites.”