Bipartisan bills that aim to improve the government’s response to cybersecurity attacks on the electric grid advanced out of a House Energy and Commerce panel Wednesday. The action was the latest sign of heightened awareness on Capitol Hill that malicious hackers might be able to turn out the lights.
Four pieces of legislation — all focused on putting into statute coordination within the Department of Energy to prevent cyber attacks on the grid and other energy infrastructure — were advanced by the Energy Subcommittee by voice votes. The votes showed unusual unity on the often-partisan panel.
That divide was apparent, however, in the subcommittee vote on a measure to speed up the export of liquified natural gas from small-scale export facilities. That bill advanced along party lines, 19-14, as Democrats criticized the legislation as harmful to the environment. They also complained that the bill was an earmark for a Florida-based export project, the only pending facility that would meet the requirements.
Recent high profile attempts by foreign actors, including groups linked with Russia, to probe nuclear facilities and pipeline control systems across the country since 2016 have raised awareness of committee members of the evolving cyber threat.
“As we’ve learned in classified briefings, and recently through the testimonies of Secretary Perry and our FERC Commissioners, cyber-attacks are a real and growing threat,” said Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., the chairman of the subcommittee, in a statement.
One of the security bills would codify a recent departmental reorganization announced by Energy Secretary Rick Perry in his fiscal 2019 budget request that creates a new assistant secretary position devoted to cybersecurity issues. The bill would ensure position remains part of department leadership in future administrations.
Two of the cyber bills would establish voluntary programs to encourage the private sector and the Energy Department to share research and cybersecurity implementation plans. The fourth bill requires the department to adopt pipeline and LNG export facility cybersecurity plans.
“The four bipartisan cybersecurity bills before us today will enhance the Department of Energy’s efforts to strengthen the cybersecurity of our nation’s electricity grid and pipeline network,” said Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-N.J., the top Democrat of the full committee. “It is critical that we ensure our nation’s energy infrastructure is sufficiently protected from cyber threats.”
The bipartisan vibe evaporated with the small-scale LNG export bill. That legislation would streamline the approval process for small-scale facilities that support exports to the Caribbean, Central America and South America, defined as those that ship no more than 140 million cubic feet per day.
Republican backers argued the measure would ensure speedy gas exports to Western Hemisphere nations, which they said would provide a steady energy supply that would burn cleaner compared to other fossil fuel sources — a benefit to carbon reduction goals.
“This should not be a partisan issue . . . neither side of the aisle can deny that American small-scale LNG exports provides geopolitical, economic and environmental benefits,” said bill sponsor Rep. Bill Johnson, R-Ohio.
Democrats complained that the bill’s requirements would essentially only apply to one facility owned by Houston-based Eagle LNG Partners Jacksonville LLC, according to the Congressional Research Service. That “sounds suspiciously like the kind of legislative earmark” Congress did away with, Pallone said.
Democrats also said that by sidestepping some permits the bill would undermine environmental protections, more so than a separate Energy Department effort to hasten the pace of the permit reviews.
“In my opinion, that rule is already problematic, but this bill is even worse for the environment than the proposed rule,” Pallone said.
Republicans promised to address Democrats’ concerns, but it remains to be seen how far that effort will extend.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday that he would not be making floor time for legislation designed to shield Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III from firing.
McConnell’s determination that the action is not needed is apparently regardless of what happens in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
“I don’t think he should fire Mueller, and I don’t think he’s going to,” the Kentucky Republican said. “So, this is a piece of legislation that’s not necessary in my judgement.”
“I’m the one who decides what we take to the floor. That’s my responsibility as the majority leader. We’ll not be having this on the floor of the Senate,” McConnell said during a Fox News interview.
Watch: The Status of Legislation to Protect Robert Mueller
The Judiciary Committee has a bipartisan bill on its agenda for Thursday’s markup, which may be held over for a week before consideration. Republicans and Democrats alike have expressed concern that President Donald Trump may seek to fire Mueller or Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
The measure being considered by the Senate committee is a hybrid of combines two separate proposals, each backed by Republicans and Democrats.
Get breaking news alerts and more from Roll Call on your iPhone or your Android.
ALLENTOWN, Pa. — At a recent Democratic candidate forum here in Pennsylvania’s 7th District, five hopefuls raised their hands to show their support for abortion rights. One candidate kept his hand down.
North Hampton County District Attorney John Morganelli said after the event that he supports abortion under certain circumstances, but described himself as “a pro-life Democrat like Sen. Bob Casey.”
The question for Morganelli is whether the Democratic Party still has room for candidates like him.
“I don’t know,” he said after the Thursday night forum. “I guess we’ll find out.”
Ahead of the May 15 primary, the intraparty contest in the newly drawn district comes at a time when Democrats are divided over whether to embrace moderate candidates or those who are stridently progressive.
And that debate is playing out in a seat that became more competitive for Democrats, first after Republican incumbent Charlie Dent decided against running for an eighth term, and then when the state Supreme Court imposed a new congressional map for midterms. Watch: How the Open Seats Are (or Aren’t) Creating Opportunities in the House
As district attorney and a failed candidate for statewide office, Morganelli has the advantage of high name recognition, operatives watching the race said. But his primary rivals argue it will take more than that to win.
“Name ID is good if it’s very favorable,” said Democrat Greg Edwards after the candidate forum hosted by NextGen America, a progressive group backed by billionaire Tom Steyer that aims to mobilize young voters.
Edwards, the founder and senior pastor of Resurrected Life Community Church in Allentown, said his own endorsements, fundraising and robust field operation make him the strongest candidate in the race.
He led his Democratic opponents in total cash on hand at the end of March, with $237,000 in the bank, according to Federal Election Commission documents. Morganelli had $191,000, while former Allentown City Solicitor Susan Wild had $105,000.
Edwards has also been endorsed by national groups such as the Service Employees International Union, and sitting lawmakers including Pennsylvania Democratic Rep. Dwight Evans.
He made national headlines over a tussle with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
The Washington Post reported last month that the DCCC asked local leaders if Edwards, who is African-American, and Wild, the only woman in the race, would consider running for the state Senate. The DCCC noted it did not ask the two to drop out, but was gauging potential options after the new district lines were drawn.
While Edwards noted that he is the only candidate of color in the primary, he stopped short of calling the DCCC’s actions racially motivated.
“I don’t know why they did it,” he said. “At least for me, it says that the Democratic Party may have a bit of an identity crisis and not understand where it’s strongest base lies.”
Edwards said he is building a diverse coalition of progressives, young people, African-Americans, Hispanic voters and people in the LGTBQ community.
Many Edwards supporters packed the Thursday night forum, including Marisa Ziegler, who was with her wife, Andrea. Both are volunteering for Edwards’ campaign.
“He’s the most progressive candidate, in my opinion,” said Marissa Ziegler, who identified herself as very liberal.
Wild said she is courting a similar group of voters to support her campaign, including women.
Operatives have described Morganelli, Wild and Edwards as the three front-runners. The other Democrats in the race include retired social services worker David Clark, college professor Roger Ruggles, and Rick Daugherty, an executive director of a community center who twice unsuccessfully challenged Dent.
Wild has been endorsed by EMILY’s List, although the group’s independent expenditure arm has not yet spent in the primary. She and most of the other Democrats have taken progressive positions like supporting universal health care and banning assault weapons.
“I really believe that we are going to have … not just a blue wave, but a progressive blue wave this year,” Wild said. “And I want to be part of that.”
But she said she could appeal to moderates by emphasizing her ability to compromise and be “the grown-up in the room.”
Both Wild and Edwards said they can overcome Morganelli’s name recognition by outworking him on the campaign trail.
But one Pennsylvania Democratic consultant noted that it’s not clear if the other candidates have enough resources to simultaneously boost their own name ID and highlight Morganelli’s positions that could hurt him in a primary, such as his November 2016 appeal to President-elect Donald Trump, expressing interest in working for him.
One issue that clearly divided the candidates Thursday night was immigration.
Morganelli is known for his hard-line stances on illegal immigration. The liberal crowd groaned when he said he would not support so-called sanctuary cities. He quickly gave up trying to explain his position, saying later that he did not want to fight with the audience.
The topic could play a key role in the primary, especially in the increasingly diverse district. Lehigh County has the highest percentage of Hispanic residents in the state — roughly 23 percent, an increase of more than 4 points from 2010 — according to estimates from the Pennsylvania State Data Center.
Edwards suggested the issue could boost turnout in the primary among voters who are “fearful” of a candidate who does not support sanctuary cities, or jurisdictions that do not comply with federal immigration law.
“I mean, they’re literally voting for their lives and their families,” he said.
A boost in turnout could shake up the primary, especially with such a crowded field. (Pennsylvania does not have runoffs.) Strategists suggested a candidate could win the primary with about one-third of the vote.
The winner of the Democratic primary will face either Dean Browning, a former Lehigh County commissioner, or Marty Nothstein, who currently serves on the county commission. Nothstein is well-known in the district for winning a gold medal in cycling in the 2000 Olympics.
The candidates and voters at Thursday’s Democratic forum were optimistic about flipping the seat, which Dent has held since 2005. The new lines shifted the district from one that Trump took by 8 points to one that Hillary Clinton would have carried by 1 point. Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales rates the race Tilts Democratic.
But the Pennsylvania Democratic consultant was concerned about Morganelli’s prospects if he wins the primary. He’s already lost two races for state attorney general — falling in the Democratic primary in 2016 and in the general election in 2008.
“Every time John Morganelli’s run for higher office, it’s ended in failure,” the consultant said. “That does not inspire tremendous confidence.”
Even though liberal voters like Marisa and Andrea Ziegler won’t support Morganelli in the primary, they said they would support him if he is the nominee.
But, Andrea Ziegler said, it would be “through gritted teeth.”
Watch: Democrats Have At Least 20 House Takeover Opportunities in These 4 States
President Donald Trump set wildly opposite expectations in one sentence for his possible summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, including that it could never happen.
He first said his one-on-one meeting with Kim could happen “very soon,” before saying he expects negotiations will allow an “early June” summit to take place. But the president then moved up the possible date to “before that” before backpedaling.
“It’s possible things won’t go well and we won’t have the meetings and we’ll just continue to go on this very strong path we have taken,” Trump told reporters as he welcomed Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to his South Florida resort for their own summit.
Trump said his administration has had talks with the North Korean government at "very high levels." He also noted five locations are under consideration; none are inside the United States.
The Trump-Abe meetings come as experts warn the United States and Japan have drifted apart on issues like North Korea and trade since Trump feted Abe at the White House followed by a joint trip to his Florida compound last February.
The U.S. president did not shy away from a sense the two days of talks and swanky meals are about, in large part, mending fences. “Japan and ourselves are locked and we are very unified on the subject of North Korea,” Trump said.
Trump contradicted his staff even during the brief remarks. A senior administration official told reporters Friday the two leaders would not play golf like they did last year at his nearby resort.
“We’re going to sneak out tomorrow,” he said, “and play a round of golf, if possible.”