After spending millions of dollars to help elect green-friendly candidates to Congress, environmental groups are looking forward to the 110th Congress when they can stop playing defense and start playing offense. Together, the groups played a significant role in the defeat of a number of candidates, particularly Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.), the chairman of the House Resources Committee.

Even as the environmental groups become larger and more diverse, the amount of money and, more importantly, staff and volunteers that can be sent out to help on campaigns has grown as well. Particularly helpful to politicians are the strengths they bring to the organization, their ability to organize and train volunteers, manage press events around environmental issues to maximize free publicity, and tap into their larger organization for ideas, support, and reports that can be tailored to their needs. Each election cycle has seen a more advanced group of advocates. Considering most environmental groups tend to oppose mining interests, the long-term result of the election for the industry could be more restrictive environmental laws, longer and more burdensome review processes, larger monetary penalties for regulatory violations, easier access to the courts for parties seeking to stop development or projects, along with a host of other policies supported by environmental groups.

An interesting example is the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which annually publishes a list of Senators and Representatives they deem unfriendly to the environment aptly named The Dirty Dozen. All but three on the 2006 list lost re-election or lost their races for a higher office. Two Representatives on the list had already resigned, or were under indictment and expected to resign. In the top five races for the LCV, over $200,000 was spent in its campaign against Congressman Pombo, another $173,500 for Montana Senate candidate John Tester (D) who was facing Sen. Conrad Burns (R), $151,600 against House Interior and Environment Appropriations Committee Chairman Charles Taylor (R- N.C.), $138,000 for candidate Patricia Madrid against Rep. Heather Wilson (R- N.M.), and $83,500 for Sen. Maria Cantwell (D) in Oregon. The LCV won four of its top five targeted races, with the lone exception being Congresswoman Wilson. In the top five races, the LCV alone spent upwards of $600,000, while the Sierra Club spent upwards of $500,000 in its top five races. These numbers do not reflect the large number of "foot soldiers" attracted to the campaigns through the environmental groups.

Eco-groups now predict a much more friendly Congress, as they look to the new leadership of various committees. Replacing global-warming skeptic Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) as chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will be Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), where she has already made it abundantly clear that global warming will be a top priority. The House Resources Committee will be headed by either Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) or Ed Markey (D-Mass.), both of whom are considerably greener than the deposed Chairman Pombo. However, environmental groups realize that opposing legislation is much different than building coalitions and passing bills through both the House and Senate and convincing a Republican president to sign them.

Knowing this, eco-strategists are not expecting big legislative victories out of the 110th Congress, but are expecting to expose and halt perceived anti-environmental initiatives the administration is pursuing. Comprehensive Clean Water Act reauthorization is virtually impossible for Democrats to pass, just as it was for Republicans due to the complexities of the law, but Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.), as chairman of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee is in a perfect position to push his legislation that would simply remove the term "navigable" from the Clean Water Act. Democrats are also perfectly positioned to prevent the administration from engaging in any regulatory change that would roll back existing protections by preventing them from spending money to issue a rule or guidance by attaching riders to the annual spending bills. Now, instead of working to defeat appropriation riders the Republicans proposed, they are switching places and will make the Republicans and business interests play defense, a position that does not see many victories and cannot be planned but a few days before votes occur. This will make it extremely tough for the industry to fight off onerous riders and amendments. However, considering the vast majority of aggregate operations are on private property, most of the high-profile environmental riders deal with federal lands and will not affect the industry.

While environmental groups saw a number of big victories in the House and Senate, they did suffer a notable defeat at the hands of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The Sierra Club agreed to pay a $28,000 fine to settle charges it had paid for a brochure that expressly advocated the election or defeat of candidates in the 2004 presidential and senate races from its corporate account. Campaign finance laws prohibit independent expenditures expressly advocating for or against candidates for federal office from being paid for out of a corporate account. The FEC has clearly ruled that express advocacy goes beyond the traditionally accepted words of "vote for" or "vote against". While this ruling will not stop environmental groups from supporting like-minded candidates, it may limit their collaboration; however, those limits will only be discovered during the next election cycle.

The direct impact of a more eco-friendly Congress on the aggregate industry is not entirely ominous. While there are a number of policy differences between environmental groups and the industry, NSSGA has worked diligently to find areas of mutual agreement with environmental groups and will continue to look for additional areas where we can work together. As a matter of fact, stone, sand and gravel are key components to many green building initiatives touted by some environmental groups. Further, NSSGA has worked over the years in a bipartisan fashion to advance the interests of the industry and count many Democrats as friends of the industry. Of particular interest is Rep. Oberstar who is devoted to improving the transportation system of the nation. While NSSGA may disagree on some policy issues, there are many more issues where the industry will agree with the chairman. During the 110th Congress, NSSGA and its industry partners will have to work hard to make sure the industry's case is clear and convincing, work in a bipartisan manner, all the while watching for potentially problematic amendments and policy riders in hopes of heading them off.