EDITORIAL: Nevada’s House Democrats oppose permitting reform

Politicians of both parties have promised to fix the nation’s broken permitting system. But those promises have not been kept, and the status quo prevails: longer timelines, higher costs and a regulatory maze that makes it nearly impossible to build major projects on schedule.

Last week, the House finally cut through the fog by passing the Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development Act. As Jeff Luse reported for Reason, the legislation is the clearest chance in years to overhaul a system that has spun out of control.

Notably, virtually every House Democrat — including Reps. Dina Titus, Susie Lee and Steven Horsford from Nevada — opted for the current regulatory morass.

The proposal addressed problems with the National Environmental Policy Act, which passed in the 1970s to promote transparency, but has grown into an anchor that drags down public and private investment. Mr. Luse notes that even after Congress streamlined the act in 2021, the average environmental impact statement takes 2.4 years to complete. That number speaks for itself and does not reflect the many reviews that stretch far beyond that already unreasonable timeline.

The SPEED Act tackles these failures head on. It would codify recent Supreme Court guidance, expand the projects that do not require exhaustive review and set real expectations for federal agencies that too often slow-walk approvals. Most important, it puts long-overdue limits on litigation. Mr. Luse highlights the absurdity of the current six-year window for filing a lawsuit under the Environmental Policy Act. Between 2013 and 2022, these lawsuits delayed projects an average of 4.2 years.

While opponents insist the bill would silence communities, Mr. Luse notes that NEPA already includes multiple public hearings and comment periods. Also, the vast majority of lawsuits are not filed by members of the people who live near the projects. According to the Breakthrough Institute, 72 percent of NEPA lawsuits over the past decade came from national nonprofits. Only 16 percent were filed by local communities. The SPEED Act does not shut out the public. It reins in well-funded groups that can afford to stall projects indefinitely.

Some Democrats claim the bill panders to fossil fuel companies, while some Republicans fear it will accelerate renewable projects. As Mr. Luse explains, NEPA bottlenecks have held back wind, solar and transmission lines as often as they have slowed oil and gas. That is why the original SPEED Act won support from green energy groups and traditional energy producers.

Permitting reform is overdue, and lawmakers claim to understand that endless red tape hurts economic growth and environmental progress alike. The SPEED Act is the strongest permitting reform proposal in years. The Senate should approve it.