LANSING, Mich. (Michigan News Source) – Fourteen Democrat Senators have introduced a bill so that it’s easier for the state of Michigan to adopt or promulgate rules that are stricter than current federal standards by repealing a bill that was signed into law by Michigan legislators in 2018.

MORE NEWS: Travel and Turkey: Planning Ahead Should Be on Everyone’s Plate This Thanksgiving

The new legislation, Senate Bill 14, aims to repeal the 2018 law signed by Republican Governor Rick Snyder which amended the Administrative Procedures act to prohibit a state agency from “adopting or promulgating a rule, except an emergency rule, that was more stringent than an applicable federally mandated standard, unless the agency director determined that there was a clear and convincing need to exceed the Federal standard.”

Senate Bill 14, which was introduced in January of this year, was referred to the Committee on Energy and Environment. Senator Sean McCann (D-Kalamazoo), the bill’s sponsor and chairman of the committee, said in testimony last week, “With Michigan’s aggressive economic development push into electrifying transportation and the factories and suppliers that contribute to the finished product, it will be even more important than ever to be able to rapidly adjust our environmental standards to ensure the continued good health of the Great Lakes water shed.”

McCann said at the hearing, “Currently, under this (2018) law, Michigan can only exceed federal regulation in an emergency or if a state agency director finds a clear and convincing need – a process that can take time that many environmental and public health hazards cannot afford.”

He continued, “This legislation would remove this requirement and let the state of Michigan decide for itself what’s best for protecting our vital environment, natural resources, public health and more. Environmental policy should not be ‘cookie cutter’ or set by the lowest common denominator. Every state has unique needs and state, the Great Lakes state, is certainly no exception. These kinds of federal guidelines are inherently meant to be the lowest standards states must meet.”

McCann said that the legislation would allow Michigan to set “higher standards to protect our drinking water, natural resources and public health” in order to address concerns swiftly.

Charlotte Jameson, chief policy officer of the Michigan Environmental Council, testified at the committee hearing, supporting the bill. She said the organization is a coalition of more than 90 member organizations across the state and a “leading advocacy organization for policies that protect Michigan’s land, air and water.” She said they had opposed the 2018 legislation and support Senate Bill 14 that would “repeal this clumsy and harmful law.”

MORE NEWS: Branching Out: Michigan’s Tree Grant Grows Greener Than Ever

Jameson went on to say, “The Great Lakes State should not rely on a one-size-fits-all standard that only provides minimum protections for land, air, water, and public health” and said that the 2018 legislation has created a “chilling effect on our regulatory agencies’ extended and already very very very lengthy rulemaking process and deferred the power to make critical decisions about the protection of our natural resources and public health to the federal government.”

State Senator John Damoose (R-Harbor Springs) told Jameson that he saw the “chilling effect” she described as a “good thing” and said rule promulgation should only be used when it’s “absolutely needed.” He questioned the new process and how things would be different when there is already legislation in place to allow more stringent laws during emergency rules with director approval.

Jameson replied that there is an ideological difference between them and she said, “We see regulatory agencies and rule-making as a critical function of the government” and a “key tool in the toolbox to protect our residents.”

Jameson explained that right now, agencies can promulgate rules under their emergency powers but under the current law, the agencies currently have to prove a “clear and convincing” need for the more stringent rules and go through the formal rulemaking process. She said that it’s not an agreed-upon thing and an agency could say “this is our clear and convincing need and this is why we need it.” She went out to point out, “That doesn’t mean that folks are going to agree with that statement or that statement would hold up in court. Our point is that it opens up rules to more opportunities to challenge them in the legal setting.”

Jameson also responded to a question about how environmental issues relate to health issues and said, “The great majority of our environmental regulations are public health regulations. That’s what it’s about. It’s about protecting people and so essentially when we are limiting our regulator abilities to adopt those protections, we are tying the hands of our regulators to protect public health.”

A representative from the Sierra Club also spoke at the hearing. He said, “On behalf of our 150,000 Sierra Club members and supporters in Michigan, we support Senate Bill 14. He said the new law is a first step to “restore Michigan’s role as a national leader in environmental protection” and as “the Great Lakes state, we have a mandate to go further and farther to protect one-fifth of the world’s surface water.”

On the other side of the debate is the Michigan Manufacturers Association (MMA), who is one of many who stands in opposition to Senate Bill 146 including groups like the Michigan Farm Bureau, The Home Builders Association of Michigan, The Mackinac Center for Public Policy, Granger, The Michigan Retailers Association, The Michigan Chamber, The Small Business Association of Michigan and Landfill Management Company.

Caroline Liethen, director of Environmental and Regulatory Policy of the MMA testified at the committee. She said that the MMA represents 1,700 companies located in every corner of the state, including small, medium and large manufacturers and that they represent Michigan’s largest economic sector generating nearly 20% of the state’s GDP or approximately $95.5 billion dollars.

Liethen says that through their advocacy, MMA and their members share a common goal of being good neighbors to the communities where they live and work. Opposing Senate Bill 146, Liethen said, “Manufacturing is different than other sectors of the economy in that we don’t compete with companies down the street or county over – we compete with the lowest priced location anywhere in the world. At a minimum, we need to be able to compete based on price with companies in other states. Michigan companies will not survive, or will move to a location where they can compete on price.”

Liethen went on to say, “State government must be a partner in creating a business climate that allows companies to compete effectively from Michigan…The cost of meeting federal standards is essentially equal for businesses in every state in the nation so no state has a competitive cost advantage over any other state. By exceeding federal standards in Michigan, the cost of doing business here, is by definition, higher than operating in others.”

The Committee on Energy and Environment is made up of nine Democrats and five Republicans and they meet Thursdays at 1:30 p.m.