Despite having one of the highest membership rates of any caucus on Capitol Hill, the roughly 100-person House Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition has kept a low profile over the years, leaving its imprint on legislation without the accompanying sharp elbows and chest-thumping.
Now the leaders of a new outside group hope they might be able to raise the caucus’ profile — while also increasing its output and clout in policymaking.
Fifteen years since SEEC’s founding, this spring saw the establishment of the SEEC Institute, a nonpartisan nonprofit designed to solicit donations to fund research, travel and professional development opportunities for caucus lawmakers and their staff.
It’s not unusual for caucuses to have these sorts of foundations, often called institutes, to educate, empower and support congressional offices.
But Max Frankel, the executive director and one of just two full-time employees of the SEEC Institute so far, has more sweeping ambitions, describing a vision for an organization that can and will stand out in a town saturated with environmental advocacy groups and think tanks.
“One of the things I think about a lot is, what is SEEC Institute’s unique value add? Why does SEEC Institute exist? What can we do that no one else can do?” said Frankel, who used to work for one of the caucus’ three co-chairs, Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.). “I think it’s really important for SEEC to justify why it’s an important piece of the solution to the climate challenge.”
The institute comes at a pivotal moment for Democrats who make up the organization: Based on the outcome of the November elections, they could find themselves pushing new climate legislation — or fighting environmental rule rollbacks under President Donald Trump.
Ultimately, Frankel’s elevator pitch is that “SEEC’s job is to think about what is going on the floor next Tuesday — vote recommendations and certain amendments,” while “the SEEC Institute is thinking about Q3 2025 — we’re thinking on a different time scale.”
“What’s coming down the pike? What can we be ready for, but also what do we want to come our way?” he added. “And how do we prime the pump for opportunities for good, viable environmental policy?”
In the near term, the SEEC Institute is preparing to unveil its first two research projects in the coming months, both made possible through contracts with outside firms.
One, to be rolled out in October from Novi Strategies — the firm led by Tim Profeta, a senior fellow at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment and Sustainability — will “look at the programs in the Inflation Reduction Act that blend private and public capital,” said Frankel.
“Which ones are working, which ones are not working? Are there features of the ones that work that are missing from the ones that don’t work?”
Because the government is “midstream in getting IRA money out the door,” Frankel continued, “how are we doing and how can we do it better? There could be statutory changes but also things that agencies can implement.”
The other research project, due out “closer to January,” from David Gardiner and Associates, will seek to “empirically justify” climate recommendations for a tax bill next year, when the 2017 cuts are due to expire — “not just ‘here are the most politically advantageous options,’ but ‘here’s what the math, what the data have shown, are going to be the most successful in meeting our goals.'”
Frankel is also looking toward a splashy event this December, a major “solutions summit” that will bring together lawmakers, administration officials, Cabinet secretaries, business leaders and environmental advocates.
He’s optimistic the summit will get big names thanks to the 10 individuals who have already been named to what will be a 15-member board of directors.
It includes sitting House Democrats, Obama-era Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, and former SEEC staffers committed to the institute’s success.
“We have these relationships that others don’t have,” said Frankel of the SEEC Institute board, “and what we want to do in this summit is bring that to bear in a way that is useful and fruitful.”
From ‘Green Dogs’ to SEEC
The Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition grew out of conversations among then-Reps. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.), Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) and fellow Democrats in the summer of 2008, against the backdrop of the onset of the Great Recession.
They called themselves the “Green Dogs” — a riff on the name of the group of conservative Democrats known as “Blue Dogs.”
“They got together and they said, ‘You know what would make for a good economic recovery investment? Building a clean energy economy,’” recalled Sam Ricketts, co-founder of S2 Strategies and then an Inslee aide who is now a member of the SEEC Institute board.
By the time President Barack Obama was sworn into office in January 2009, the group had officially launched with 36 members under the name SEEC, with Inslee and Israel as the co-chairs and Ricketts the inaugural executive director.
And with Congress rushing to pass a massive economic stimulus package, SEEC already had the contours of a plan it could share with the key negotiators.
The caucus succeeded in steering that final bill toward including a series of clean energy tax incentives, along with billions of dollars in loan guarantees for renewable energy production, transmission projects and advanced battery technology.
From there they provided input into the House Democrats’ signature climate bill that came to be known as “cap and trade,” which never passed the Senate.
Eventually, Israel and Inslee left Congress, with Inslee going on to become governor of Washington. The current co-chairs are Quigley and Reps. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.) and Doris Matsui (D-Calif.).
While never overly focused on getting press or making headlines, SEEC members have continued to remain active on the issues they care about.
They inserted themselves into discussions over what provisions would become part of the IRA. More recently, SEEC provided the infrastructure for Reps. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) and Mike Levin (D-Calif.) to draft H.R. 6747, the ‘‘Clean Electricity and Transmission Acceleration Act,” the congressional permitting proposal focused on transmission that currently has the largest number of Democratic co-sponsors.
Another constant for SEEC is that it has always provided a home for Democrats who are, in increasing numbers, wanting to get engaged in climate and energy policymaking.
“I would say four or five years ago there was this new class of members of Congress interested in climate and clean energy, many of whom ran on those issues — and you were told even a decade ago not to come near those issues — and here they were, running and winning on those issues,” said Clinton Britt, president of Grove Climate Group and president of the SEEC Institute board who previously served as Tonko’s chief of staff.
“And they come to Congress,” Britt continued, “and they don’t get their ‘A’ committee assignment, so they join SEEC, which has led to this movement now, where there are 100 members.”
‘The next level’
With the SEEC Institute’s establishment, the House caucus could see an amplification of both its brand and influence.
“I think we have been effective in the current format, but there’s no denying that, in stretching to an institute, there will be a higher focus for us, and I think that profile is good because this is an issue of urgency and it’s an issue of essential outcome,” said Tonko.
And the resources the institute can offer will only make SEEC’s presence stronger, said Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), former chair of the now-disbanded House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis who is serving on the SEEC Institute’s board.
“I saw what a select committee can do when you have experts and scientists outside the committee structure here in Congress — this would really take this to the next level,” she said.
Frankel, the SEEC Institute’s executive director, said he understood the foundation would be getting off the ground in earnest at a pivotal political moment for climate and energy policy. He said the institute would, in many ways, tailor its activity to meet that moment, whatever it looks like.
“We planned the summit for Dec. 3 for a reason,” he explained. “We will have, God willing, some clarity on the results of the election by then, and certainly it will influence the conversation and the items on the agenda.”
If Trump wins, Frankel continued, “the federal government [won’t be] interested in acting proactively on these issues, so states will have to step into the void. The focus of our summit, in that scenario, would be on governors and mayors and leaders.”
On the other hand, if Vice President Kamala Harris becomes president, “the focus will certainly be more on federal action, what Congress can do and what the administration can do with executive action.”
If Democrats win control of the White House, House and Senate, SEEC and the SEEC Institute would be primed to play aggressively in conversations about what another budget reconciliation bill might look like.
But Frankel said divided government is just as likely a scenario — and there, too, the SEEC Institute would rise to the occasion.
“Climate change is the worst issue to work on because no matter what you do, it’s not enough,” he added, “but it’s the best issue to work on, too, because everything you do is progress. And so we don’t have the luxury of stopping: This is a hair-on-fire issue, and I think the SEEC Institute’s job is to light people’s hair on fire and then point them in the right direction.”
