
GOP megabill could undermine US energy production, Republicans warn
Republicans want to expand power production to shore up the grid and support the growth of data centers — but their own megabill risks doing the exact opposite.
That's the message lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, industry executives and former Republican officials delivered on stage at the POLITICO Energy Summit on Tuesday.
The reconciliation bill that passed the House last month seeks to gut clean energy tax credits enacted by Democrats in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, particularly for wind and solar — two of the fastest-growing sources on the grid. President Donald Trump has derided those subsidies as the 'Green New Scam,' and congressional Republicans have said the two technologies must stand on their own after decades of support.
But the speedy sunset of the investment and production tax credits under the House bill would hurt companies that have made investments based on the IRA, several of the Summit speakers said.
The House-passed bill is not 'fair to businesses in the way that we're phasing [the credits] out,' said Utah Republican Sen. John Curtis. 'Investors have invested billions of dollars based on the rules of the road, and you have employees who have set careers based on these things.'
Energy companies have warned the bill could lead to the cancellation of hundreds of major electricity generation projects, just as the nation's utilities prepare for a surge in power demand from new AI data centers.
John Ketchum, chair and CEO of NextEra, the nation's biggest owner of natural gas-fired power plants and the world's leading generator of electricity from wind and solar power, said he agrees with the Trump administration's declaration of an energy emergency — but warned renewables cannot be taken 'off the table.'
'We cannot afford to do that. If we do that, we will lose the AI race, and we will bring this economic expansion in the United States to a screeching halt,' Ketchum said. That's because a new fleet of natural gas power plants won't be ready until 2032, he added, and nuclear power will take even longer.
And former Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chair Neil Chatterjee, who served under the first Trump administration, said fossil fuels must be complemented by renewables and emerging technologies like geothermal and nuclear — as well as energy efficiency efforts.
'We can't possibly win the AI race and keep energy reliable and affordable with only fossil fuels,' Chatterjee said. 'We need every available electron.'
But the backing for renewables drew pushback from Jarrod Agen, the executive director of Trump's newly created National Energy Dominance Council, who said he was 'very happy' with the bill the House produced.
Wind and solar are 'intermittent' sources, he said, that 'can't stand on their own feet.'
While the administration believes that nuclear energy will ultimately be the 'perfect source,' fossil fuels and coal are the most reliable and secure sources today, Agen said.
Here are some other takeaways from Tuesday's event:
Curtis, who has urged his Senate colleagues for months to preserve the IRA credits, specifically called for the bill to set a phase-out date for the clean energy tax credits based on when developers start construction of new projects, rather than on when a project begins producing electricity, as the House bill does. The House language discourages new investment because construction timelines are often uncertain, he said.
'Changing it to say something about the date [construction] started would be a really significant difference and not really hurt the intent of what Republicans are trying to do on this bill,' Curtis said.
That echoed comments from Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), the top Democrat on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, who also urged changes to the bill's prohibition on foreign involvement in projects, which he said is 'completely unworkable in its current form.'
Even Jennifer Granholm, who oversaw much of the growth spurred by the credits as the Biden administration's energy secretary, told the summit the bill could be 'workable' if the Senate fixes those two provisions, as well as restores rules that allow companies to buy and sell the tax credits.
Former FERC leaders bemoaned President Donald Trump's treatment of the agency, with Chatterjee warning the moves could turn the independent regulator into the 'EPA,' which has whipsawed between administrations.
Trump requested that former Democratic Chair Willie Phillips depart the commission, and last week declined to renominate current Republican Chair Mark Christie for a second term. His administration has moved to exert more power over other independent agencies as well.
'If the White House exerts control over the agency and they have to clear everything through OIRA and through OMB, then effectively the role of FERC chairman is no longer as head of an independent agency, it's basically a staff position,' Chatterjee told the audience.
The energy world is still processing the falling-out between Trump and his former 'first buddy,' clean energy and electric vehicle entrepreneur Elon Musk.
House Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) told the summit that Musk never brought up objections to the Republican megabill during a breakfast just hours after the House passed the measure.
'He talked about AI, he talked about all this stuff that [was] energy,' Guthrie said. 'Never mentioned the bill. And the bill had just been voted.'
Granholm signaled that clean energy advocates could welcome Musk back into the fold, calling his electric vehicle company Tesla 'amazing' while noting the 'later part of his journey has been more challenging.'
Pressed on Musk's support for clean energy, Agen, the White House official, said: 'The President is in charge.'
Granholm acknowledged that Democrats should have done a better job on the campaign trail last year selling their vision of job creation from the clean energy transition.
But the party going forward also needs to hone its messaging on 'keeping costs low by using the cheapest form of energy,' which is renewables, Granholm said.
Heinrich, too, forecast that Republicans' fossil fuel push would drive up energy prices — and provide a political opening to Democrats.
'We're in a constrained supply environment and an increased demand environment,' he said. 'People's electricity bills all over the country are going to go up. What I can guarantee you is in the next election and the election after that Republicans are going to own increased energy prices.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Factbox-Breakdown of U.S. tariffs on China since Trump's first term
BEIJING (Reuters) -Billions of dollars of Chinese goods have been impacted by additional U.S. tariffs since 2018, initially under the first Donald Trump presidency and later under the Biden administration. Returning to the White House this year, Trump has imposed even more duties on China. The U.S. tariffs range from those imposed under Section 301 of its trade act due to what Washington claims are unfair Chinese trade practices, to duties under Section 232 levied for national security reasons. This year, Trump has imposed another 20% levies on all Chinese goods, saying Beijing has not done enough to stop the flow of fentanyl into the United States. So-called reciprocal tariffs, under which the U.S. will match duties imposed by other countries, have also been levied in a bid to rebalance trade flows. Below are the U.S. tariffs on China effective as of June 12, 2025: Tariff Rate Products Effective date Reciprocal 10% All Paused for 90 days until Aug 10, 2025 Fentanyl 20% All Mar 4, 2025 Section Up to List 1: Pharmaceuticals, July 6, 2018 301 25% iron and steel, aluminium, vehicles and aircraft, medical or surgical instruments and apparatus and more. List 2: Vehicles, Aug 23, 2018 railway or tramway locomotives, aircraft and their parts, medical or surgical instruments and apparatus and more. List 3: Prepared May 10, 2019 foodstuffs, beverages, mineral products, fertilizers, wood products, textiles, precious and base metals, vehicles, aircraft, vessels, machinery and mechanical appliances and more. List 4A: Prepared Feb 14, 2020 foodstuffs, beverages, mineral products, fertilizers, footwear, wood products, ceramic products, glass, textiles, precious and base metals, machinery and mechanical appliances, vehicles, aircraft, vessels, art, antiques and more. In September 2019, the U.S. imposed 15% tariffs on more than $120 billion of Chinese goods under Section 301, which it then halved to 7.5% less than six months later. The 25% U.S. tariffs on $250 billion of Chinese goods under the earlier List 1-3 remain unchanged. In September 2024, the U.S. Trade Representative under the Biden administration announced additional tariffs of 25-100% on 14 product groups following a four-year review of the Section 301 tariff actions. The levies were imposed on strategic Chinese sectors or sectors where the United States has made significant domestic investments. Additional tariffs on goods under Section 301: Effective date EVs 100% Sep 27, 2024 Solar cells, syringes and 50% needles Non-lithium-ion battery parts, 25% lithium-ion electrical vehicle batteries, other critical minerals, ship-to-shore cranes, steel and aluminium products, facemasks Semiconductors 50% Jan 1, 2025 Lithium-ion non-electrical 25% Jan 1, 2026 vehicle batteries, medical gloves, natural graphite, permanent magnets In addition to the above duties, the first Trump administration in 2018 imposed a range of tariffs under Section 232 aimed at restricting goods deemed a threat to national security, including all aluminium and steel imports, shutting most Chinese suppliers out of the U.S. market. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


Newsweek
19 minutes ago
- Newsweek
How Project 2025 Compares With Trump's Los Angeles Response
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump's response to protests in Los Angeles is in keeping with suggestions put forth in Project 2025, a political commentator has said. Allison Gill, who worked at the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, said on Wajahat Ali's the Left Hook Substack that the president's military response was "spelled out in Project 2025," a conservative policy dossier. She did not specify how. Newsweek has contacted the Heritage Foundation and Gill for comment by email. The Context Protests against immigration enforcement began in Los Angeles on Friday and have continued, with some isolated incidents of violence and looting. In response, Trump announced the deployment of 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to restore order, without California Governor Gavin Newsom's consent. While the president has said the move was necessary to prevent the city from "burning to the ground" amid protests and riots, officials in California have accused Trump of exacerbating the situation in an "unprecedented power grab." A police officer firing a soft round near the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown Los Angeles on June 8. A police officer firing a soft round near the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown Los Angeles on June 8. AP Photo/Eric Thayer What To Know Gill, who served Trump a lawsuit in 2023 accusing him of conspiring to fire her from the Veterans Affairs Department during his first presidency, said sending in the Marines was "propaganda" because the protests were not severe enough to require them. Though she said Project 2025 predicted the president's response to the protests, she did not elaborate on how. Project 2025 is a 900-page document of policy proposals published by the Heritage Foundation think tank. It advocates limited government, border security and tough immigration laws among other conservative measures. The policy proposals have proved divisive, and the president's critics and supporters alike have debated their influence on him. While Project 2025 does not mention the Insurrection Act, a November 2023 report from The Washington Post, citing internal communications and a person involved in the conversations, said the Project 2025 group had drafted executive orders that would use the Insurrection Act to deploy the military domestically. Gill told Ali that she warned people of Trump's potential use of the military to curb protests before the presidential election. "We did everything that we could in leading up to the election in 2024 to tell everyone as loud as we can, they are planning to do this," she said, adding: "Saying he's going to call this an invasion. He's going to call this an insurrection. And he's going to use that to invoke emergency powers so that he can unleash the military on United States citizens and perhaps even suspend habeas corpus so that he can detain his political enemies without due process." "This is scary," Gill, who hosts the Mueller, She Wrote podcast, continued. "This is full-on fascism, full-on authoritarianism." "This is a test case for authoritarianism," Ali added. Before the 2024 presidential election, Democrats accused Trump of planning to implement Project 2025 if he won. While Trump initially called parts of the plan "ridiculous and abysmal," he told Time after his electoral victory that he disagreed with parts of it, but not all of it. He has since appointed a number of people linked to Project 2025 to White House positions. In an October interview with Fox News' Sunday Morning Futures, Trump indicated that he would use the National Guard or the military if there were disruptions from "radical left lunatics" on Election Day. What Does Project 2025 Say? Project 2025 advocates for improved defense infrastructure and for the Department of Homeland Security to "thoroughly enforce immigration laws." The document added that DHS should "provide states and localities with a limited federal emergency response and preparedness." However, it did not say whether this would occur in the context of protests. What Trump's Advisers Have Said Trump's advisers have previously spoken about the use of National Guard troops in other contexts. According to a February 2024 report in The Atlantic, Stephen Miller, now the White House deputy chief of staff, said that Trump—if returned to office—would take National Guard troops from sympathetic Republican-controlled states and use them in Democratic-run states whose governors refused to cooperate with their mass deportation policy. What People Are Saying President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social on Saturday: "If Governor Gavin Newscum, of California, and Mayor Karen Bass, of Los Angeles, can't do their jobs, which everyone knows they can't, then the Federal Government will step in and solve the problem, RIOTS & LOOTERS, the way it should be solved!!!" Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Sunday: "We will always protect the constitutional right for Angelenos to peacefully protest. However, violence, destruction and vandalism will not be tolerated in our city and those responsible will be held fully accountable." What Happens Next The anti-ICE protests, which have spread to other cities, are likely to continue. Newsom has called on the Trump administration to remove federal troops from Los Angeles.


CNBC
25 minutes ago
- CNBC
U.S. uncertainty is handing Europe a huge opportunity
Europe is being urged to capitalize on the volatility of the Trump administration, as shifts in capital and private market flows suggest U.S. exceptionalism is waning and losing out to a resurgent Europe. The numbers tell part of the story, with Europe's Stoxx 600 up over 8% compared to a 5% jump for the S&P 500 since Nov. 1, 2024, just days ahead of the U.S. election. Bank of America said in a report dated June 5 that U.S. equities had seen outflows of $7.5 billion over the previous three weeks, while European stocks benefited from inflows of $2.6 billion over the same period. Earlier this year, meanwhile, data from Morningstar showed that investors withdrew 2.8 billion euros ($3.2 billion) from U.S. equity ETFs in the month to the middle of March, while shifting 14.6 billion euros into European ETFs. Goldman Sachs International Co-CEO Anthony Gutman told CNBC that the convergence in U.S. and European growth rates came about quickly this year and was a big factor prompting investors to shift money toward Europe. "In January, sentiment felt very strong in the U.S., it felt somewhat more muted in Europe. You roll the clock forward and now the picture has changed fairly dramatically, that's to the benefit of Europe in many cases. Europe is getting more capital inflows and there is more optimism in Europe," Gutman told CNBC's Annette Weisbach Wednesday on the sidelines of the Goldman Sachs European Financials Conference in Berlin. Meanwhile, in private markets, talk of the breakdown of U.S. exceptionalism dominated the Super Return forum in Berlin last week. Carlyle Group's Managing Director Mark Jenkins told CNBC that, "in Europe, we've seen a lot of great opportunity and think we can pick up greater returns here relative to the risk you're taking in the U.S." This sentiment was echoed by private equity giant Permira, which holds private equity funds and credit vehicles representing around 60 billion euros worth of capital under management. "If you look at Europe at the moment, firstly, capital is cheaper, if you look at the trend of where euro rates are going versus dollar rates are going, you can fund and finance things cheaper here. Secondly, valuations are cheaper, you can buy great companies for less," Permira Executive Chairman Kurt Björklund told CNBC's "Squawk Box Europe" on Tuesday. "Thirdly the innovation cycle is growing exponentially in Europe … there is an enormous number of highly innovative companies that are growing in a disruptive and global way," he added. All eyes are now on the potential for an EU-U.S. trade deal — which is proving trickier to pin down than with some other countries, including the U.K. Referencing the complexity of the behemoth that is the European Union, Siemens Energy Chairman Joe Kaeser told CNBC that the EU is "politically not ready to strike these types of deals." The White House hinted on Wednesday that a July 9 deadline for a deal may be movable, however, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent saying: "It is highly likely that for those countries that are negotiating — or trading blocs, in the case of the EU — who are negotiating in good faith, we will roll the date forward to continue the good faith negotiation." French President Emmanuel Macron also struck an optimistic tone, telling CNBC's Karen Tso on Wednesday: "I'm sure that we will find, at the end of the day, a good solution." Unicredit CEO Andrea Orcel stressed that the opportunity for Europe's continued revival lies in its own hands, however. He explained that the 27-member European Union could galvanize amid the fracturing of Europe's relationship with the U.S., but warned that investors can also be fickle. The expectation is that "there will be convergence, there will be a banking union, there will be a capital markets union. There will be a lot of spend on infrastructure, on defense... That's exciting for the market, therefore money flowing in," Orcel told CNBC Wednesday. "But if, little by little, investors realize that this is lip service, but it doesn't really happen. Money will flow back in a nanosecond, and you will see [that] very quickly." Europe is faced with a "phenomenal opportunity," he added. "We have every reason to be ... on par with the U.S., but it's our fault if we don't do it."