logo
Some in GOP Push to Save Biden Programs in ‘Big Beautiful Bill'

Some in GOP Push to Save Biden Programs in ‘Big Beautiful Bill'

Yahoo2 days ago

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, far right, accompanied by other Republican Senators, speaks to reporters following a weekly GOP policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC, on June 3, 2025. Credit - Andrew Harnik—Getty Images
This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME's politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox.
It's been three years since Democrats passed the Inflation Reduction Act without the support of any Republicans. That includes the 14 House Republicans who signed a letter last month asking GOP leadership to please tweak plans to kill the IRA's clean-energy incentives in the mega-bill they are shepherding for Donald Trump.
While much of the talk in Washington right now is about pitfalls aplenty in Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill, the rollback of Biden-era clean-energy efforts is getting scant attention. Yet many voters are likely to notice the fallout from those changes, particularly in swing districts that will decide control of the House next year.
Take the districts those 14 House Republicans represent. Thirteen of them voted for the House bill (Rep. Andrew Garbarino of New York missed the vote) despite provisions that could mean the loss of $40 billion in investment and 43,000 jobs in their districts collectively, according to a report from the nonpartisan Rhodium Group, which publishes quarterly updates on green jobs. Nationally, the rollbacks threaten 830,000 jobs connected to clean-energy projects.
Despite the economic downsides, GOP leaders are moving ahead with a tax-and-spending bill that would wind down tax credits for cleaner cars like electric vehicles by the end of this year, scrap incentives for battery makers by 2028, and levy a new annual fee on drivers who opt into lower-emission vehicles (purportedly to replace lost gasoline taxes). At the same time, clean-energy manufacturers would see their tax credits go dark by 2031, and lower-emissions energy projects like wind, nuclear, and solar would lose their incentives in 2032. Across the country, job-creating projects currently in development would no longer make economic sense.
While Elon Musk, the billionaire former White House budget adviser, is complaining about the bill's price tag—calling it 'a disgusting abomination'—less-MAGA conversant Republicans are quietly raising their own parochial worries.
The numbers are real. For instance, in Rep. Jen Kiggans' Virginia district, which is based in the Hampton Roads region, about $11.3 billion in funding is at risk. That means about 2,005 jobs, an estimate based on announced projects that were not yet online as of March 31, the end of the first quarter of the year.
Kiggans has been out front urging changes to the work her fellow Republicans have been doing, organizing the letter to colleagues asking they tweak their repeal language to give more flexibility on projects. 'We appreciate the Ways and Means Committee putting America first by investing in American energy dominance, but the last thing any of us want is to provoke an energy crisis or cause higher energy bills for working families,' they wrote on May 14.
These lawmakers have already seen the upside from the three-year-old incentives. In Rep. Mark Amodei's Nevada district, constituents were expecting a total of $15.2 billion in clean-energy investments, but $7.6 billion of that is pending and now at risk. In Rep. Dan Newhouse's Washington district, the expected $5.4 billion in clean investments could be $4.5 billion less under the new proposal. And the list goes on for district after district, from coast to coast.
The full House passed Trump's tax cuts on May 22, and the White House is pushing the Senate to follow suit before the July 4 holiday. But Senate Republicans have signaled that they're going to shave off some of the parts of the House version they don't love, and there are plenty of signs that it's in more trouble than Trump appreciates. The sticking points drawing the most heat include work requirements and deep cuts to Medicaid, and the expected addition of trillions to the national debt.
Democrats, for their part, are laying the groundwork to see Republicans blamed for any downsides, including an economic hit from the US opting out of a green energy boom.
'The clean-energy credits that were part of the Inflation Reduction Act actually have had a significant benefit in terms of economic activity all across the country, particularly in red states and congressional districts represented by Republicans,' Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on Tuesday during his weekly session with Hill reporters. 'Standing up a clean-energy economy lowers energy costs, helps to protect the environment, and combats the climate crisis with the fierce urgency of now that is necessary, while at the same period of time creating jobs and generating economic activity. Republicans decided that they want to detonate these clean-energy credits.'
So far, it's been a message that has started to reach some corners of Washington, which only now is starting to grasp what all was in Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill. The more lawmakers are looking, the more they're realizing their quest to unspool parts of the Biden legacy is threatening policies that might have been called 'pro-business' by some Trump allies—if only those ideas had originated with Republicans.
Make sense of what matters in Washington. Sign up for the D.C. Brief newsletter.
Write to Philip Elliott at philip.elliott@time.com.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Michigan House Republicans sue the secretary of state over election training materials

time25 minutes ago

Michigan House Republicans sue the secretary of state over election training materials

KALAMAZOO, Mich. -- Michigan Republicans are suing the battleground state's top elections executive over access to election training materials. The lawsuit filed Thursday is the latest escalation in a brewing dispute that began when the GOP took majority control of the state's House of Representatives last year. Since winning control of the chamber in the 2024 election, statehouse Republicans have repeatedly scrutinized the state's election processes and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat who is running for governor in 2026. The conflict comes as some state Republicans echo past false claims of election fraud in Michigan, which was a prime target of President Donald Trump and his backers after his 2020 election loss. Republicans on the chamber's Oversight Committee subpoenaed Benson in April, seeking access to training materials for local clerks and staff who administer elections, including access to the Bureau of Elections' online learning portal. Benson's office released some requested materials in response to the subpoena, but not all, citing cybersecurity and physical security concerns related to administering elections and the voting process. The office has said it needs to review the online portal for 'sensitive information" and make redactions. 'Since the beginning of this saga, Secretary Benson has asked lawmakers to let a court review their request for sensitive election information that, in the wrong hands, would compromise the security of our election machines, ballots and officials,' Michigan Department of State spokesperson Cheri Hardmon said in a statement Thursday. House Republicans say the goal of reviewing the material is to ensure clerks are trained in accordance with Michigan law. The House voted along party lines in May to hold Benson in contempt for not completely complying with the subpoena. The request for training materials originally came from GOP state Rep. Rachelle Smit, who has pushed false claims that the 2020 election was stolen. Smit is the chair of the House elections committee, which was renamed to the Elections Integrity Committee with the new Republican majority. 'Secretary Benson has proven she is unwilling to comply with our subpoena and Michigan law,' Rep. Smit said in a statement Thursday. 'She's skirted the rules and done whatever she could to avoid public scrutiny. It's become overwhelmingly clear that she will never release the training materials we're looking for without direction from a court." The lawsuit asks the Michigan Court of Claims to intervene and compel Benson to comply with the subpoena. 'The public interest is best served if the constitutional order of the State of Michigan is preserved and the Legislature can properly perform its duty to regulate the manner of elections in the state and, if deemed necessary, enact election laws for the benefit of Michigan residents,' the lawsuit says. Benson gained national attention for defending the results of the 2020 election in the face of Trump's attempts to undercut the outcome nationwide and in Michigan. Multiple audits — including one conducted by the then-Republican-controlled Michigan Senate — concluded former President Joe Biden won the state in 2020 and that there was no widespread or systemic fraud. Benson has remained a subject of GOP scrutiny this year. A Republican state representative introduced three articles of impeachment against Benson on Tuesday, and several of the accusations continue to cast doubts on the results of the 2020 election. With Democrats in control of the state Senate, it's unlikely the impeachment articles will result in a conviction.

From bromance to bitter feud — a timeline of Trump and Musk's relationship
From bromance to bitter feud — a timeline of Trump and Musk's relationship

CNBC

time30 minutes ago

  • CNBC

From bromance to bitter feud — a timeline of Trump and Musk's relationship

The bromance is over. An extraordinary social media feud between U.S. President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk Thursday showcased the public fracturing of their once-close relationship. Here's a rundown of how Trump and Musk got here: Musk publicly endorses Trump following an assassination attempt at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. Musk posts on social media platform X: "I fully endorse President Trump and hope for his rapid recovery." In August, Musk held a conversation with Trump on X. The glitchy livestream got off to an inauspicious start, with technical difficulties delaying the event for almost an hour. Trump and Musk congratulated each other in a wide-ranging chat, covering topics such as then-Vice President Kamala Harris, how Trump handled the assassination attempt and climate change. Musk later suggests he's "willing to serve" in government. The Tesla CEO posted an image of himself on X as a representative of DOGE, an acronym for the Department of Government Efficiency. In early October, Musk appears at a Trump rally in Pennsylvania, where Trump survived the earlier assassination attempt. Wearing a cap with the "Make America Great Again" slogan of the Trump campaign, Musk said Trump was the only candidate "to preserve democracy in America." Public displays of alignment continue, reinforcing Musk's growing proximity to Trump's political comeback. After Trump's re-election, Musk is appointed to lead DOGE alongside former GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy. The department is formed via executive order with a mission to slash federal spending and bureaucracy. "Together, these two wonderful Americans will pave the way for my Administration to dismantle Government Bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure Federal Agencies," Trump said in a statement at the time. Ramaswamy would later leave his role as co-lead of DOGE to pursue elected office. Maye Musk, Elon's mother, later comments that the two "just seem to be having fun." Two weeks after his election victory, Trump attended a SpaceX "Starship" rocket launch in Texas alongside Musk. At Trump's inauguration, Musk receives lavish praise from the president: "We have a new star. A star is born. Elon!" Musk joins Trump's CEO calls, alongside leaders from Amazon, Google, Meta, and others. Musk begins overseeing aggressive cost-cutting at government agencies. DOGE forces through return-to-office mandates and eliminates some remote-first government programs. Musk's DOGE team faces backlash after overreaching into agencies like the U.S. Institute of Peace. In early March, Trump tells members of the Cabinet that they are in charge of the respective agencies and departments they oversee — not Musk. The tech mogul later posts on X that the meeting was "very productive." Trump turns the White House lawn into a Tesla showroom and defends Musk as the electric vehicle maker incurs a global backlash. "He's built this great company, and he shouldn't be penalized because he's a patriot," Trump said at the time. The president also described the cars as "beautiful" and said he would buy one. Musk pledges to "significantly" reduce his involvement in DOGE over the coming weeks. Reports emerge of Musk being distracted and over-stretched, fueling concerns among Tesla and SpaceX investors. At the time of Tesla's first-quarter earnings in April — which missed expectations — the EV maker's shares were down more than 40% over the year so far. In an interview with CBS News, Musk publicly criticizes Trump's signature tax and spending bill, saying it counters the work he's been doing to reduce wasteful government spending. "I was, like, disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not just decrease it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing," he said. Trump responded to the critique by saying he wasn't happy with certain aspects of the bill, "but I'm thrilled by other aspects of it. That's the way they go." One day after airing his criticism of Trump's bill, Musk leaves the White House. He thanks the president for the opportunity to run DOGE. Trump holds a farewell event for Musk, commending his work in government but says he is "not really leaving" and will occasionally return to the White House because DOGE is his "baby." Musk lashes out further at Trump's spending bill, calling it a "disgusting abomination" that will explode federal budget deficits. "Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it," Musk said on X. The criticism quickly escalates into an all-out online brawl between Trump and Musk, with the pair trading barbs over the course of several hours. The U.S. president threatened to pull back billions of dollars in government contracts for Musk's companies, while the Tesla CEO suggested Trump could not have won the election without him. "Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore," Trump said.

What Trump ordering an investigation into Biden's actions might mean legally and politically

time34 minutes ago

What Trump ordering an investigation into Biden's actions might mean legally and politically

WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump has ordered an investigation into pardons and other executive actions issued by his predecessor, Joe Biden — launching an extraordinary effort to show that the Democrat hid his cognitive decline and was otherwise too mentally impaired to do the job. Trump, who turns 79 this month, has long questioned the mental acuity and physical stamina of Biden, and is now directing his administration to use governmental investigative powers to try and back up those assertions. Biden, 82, and now undergoing treatment for prostate cancer, dismissed Trump's actions as 'ridiculous.' Here's a look at what Trump is alleging, what impact it could have, and why the country may never have seen anything like this before. Trump directed his White House counsel and attorney general to begin an investigation into his own allegations that Biden aides hid from the public declining mental acuity in their boss. Trump is also casting doubts on the legitimacy of the Biden White House's use of the autopen to sign pardons and other documents. It marks a significant escalation in Trump's targeting of political adversaries, and could lay the groundwork for arguments by leading Republicans in Congress and around the country that a range of Biden's actions as president were invalid. 'Essentially, whoever used the autopen was the president,' Trump said Thursday. He then went further, suggesting that rogue elements within the Biden administration might have effectively faked the president's signature and governed without his knowledge — especially when it came to pushing policies that appeased the Democratic Party's far-left wing. 'He didn't have much of an idea what was going on,' Trump said, though he also acknowledged that he had no evidence to back up those assertions. A Trump fundraising email released a short time later carried the heading, 'A robot ran the country?' Legal experts are skeptical about that the investigation will do much more than fire up Trump's core supporters. 'I think it's more of a political act than one that will have any legal effect,' said Richard Pildes, a constitutional law scholar at New York University School of Law. He added: 'I think it's designed to continue to fuel a narrative that the administration wants to elevate, but courts are not going to second-guess these sorts of executive actions' undertaken by Biden. Trump has long questioned the legitimacy of pardons his predecessor issued for his family members and other administration officials just before leaving office on Jan. 20, people whom Biden was worried could be targeted by a Trump-led Justice Department. But Trump has more recently suggested Biden was unaware of immigration policies during his own administration, and said Thursday that aides to his predecessor pushed social issues like transgender rights in ways Biden might not have agreed with. It is well-established that a president's executive orders can easily be repealed by a successor issuing new executive actions — something Trump has done repeatedly since retaking the White House. That lets Trump wipe out Biden administration policies without having to prove any were undertaken without Biden's knowledge — though his predecessor's pardons and judicial appointments can't be so easily erased. 'When it comes to completed legal acts like pardons or appointing judges,' Pildes said, a later president 'has no power to overturn those actions.' Autopens are writing tools that allow a person's signature to be affixed automatically to documents. The Justice Department, under Democratic and Republican administrations, has recognized the use of an autopen by presidents to sign legislation and issue pardons for decades — and even Trump himself acknowledges using it. 'Autopens to me are used when thousands of letters come in from young people all over the country and you want to get them back,' Trump said Thursday. Michigan State University law professor Brian Kalt said the 'consensus view is that, as long as the president has directed the use of the autopen in that particular instance, it is valid.' 'The only issue would be if someone else directed the use of the autopen without the President's approval,' Kalt, an expert on pardons, wrote in an email. Yes. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution bestows the president with the power 'to grant Reprieves and Pardons.' 'A president's pardons cannot be revoked. If they could, no pardon would ever be final,' American University politics professor Jeffrey Crouch, author of a book on presidential pardons, said in an email. 'There is no legal obstacle I am aware of to a president using an autopen on a pardon.' Kent Greenfield, a Boston College law professor, said, 'Once you pardon somebody, you can't go back and un-pardon them.' 'If it's done with a president's authority, I don't think it matters whether it's done with an autopen or not,' Greenfield added. 'The president's authority is the president's authority.' Trump's suggestions that Biden's administration effectively functioned without his knowledge on key policy matters go beyond questions about pardons and the president using the autopen. Even there, though, the Supreme Court ruled in 2024 that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution. At the time, Trump celebrated the ruling as a 'BIG WIN' because it extended the delay in the Washington criminal case against him on charges he plotted to overturn his 2020 election loss. Such immunity would likely cover Biden as a former president. It might not extend to Biden administration officials allegedly acting without his knowledge — though Trump himself acknowledged he's not seen evidence of that occurring. Biden has dismissed Trump's investigation as 'nothing more than a mere distraction.' 'Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency. I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn't is ridiculous and false,' he said in a statement. In a word, no. There have been allegations of presidents being impaired and having their administrations controlled by intermediaries more than the public knew — including Edith Wilson, who effectively managed access to her husband, Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, after his serious stroke in 1919. Wilson's critics grumbled about a shadow presidency controlled by his wife, but the matter was never formally investigated by Congress, nor was it a major source of criticism for Wilson's Republican successor, Warren G. Harding. More recently, some questioned whether President John F. Kennedy struggled more than was publicly known at the time with Addison's Disease and debilitating back pains while in office. And there were questions about whether dementia might have affected Ronald Reagan during his second term, before he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's in 1994, five years after he left office.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store