Congress
Moment of truth nears on green credits, climate cuts
The fate of hundreds of billions’ worth of clean energy tax credits is among the last unresolved big-ticket items Republicans are hashing out before a series of planned committee markups on their big budget bill.
The Agriculture, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means committees are hoping to advance their portions of the party-line tax and spending package next week. Language could begin trickling out as soon as Friday.
But negotiators say haggling is still happening on what to do with renewable energy incentives and other credits from the Democrats’ 2022 climate law, which are benefitting red districts and states across the country. Ways and Means has jurisdiction over those programs.
“I’ve heard from people in Ways and Means there is a lot of disagreement in the room,” said Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.), who has been helping lead the charge to protect at least some of the credits. “It’s one of the things that’s the most contentious in the room.”
Seeking to put a marker down for where Republicans across the conference might be willing to compromise, Garbarino and Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.) have introduced the “Certainty for Our Energy Future Act.” It would phase out solar and wind incentives, disqualify companies tied to foreign adversaries and preserve the ability of businesses to buy and sell certain clean energy credits — a practice known as “transferability.”
Republican Reps. Dan Newhouse of Washington, David Valadao of California and Mark Amodei of Nevada have also signed onto the legislation.
“The goal was to find a place that people could live with,” said a Kiggans aide granted anonymity to speak about internal deliberations. The aide also called it a “starting point” and a “best case scenario” as this group of Republicans and nearly two dozen others go up against hard-liners who want a full repeal of the suite of clean energy tax credits codified by the Inflation Reduction Act, which President Donald Trump likes to call the “Green New Scam.”
Every vote counts for Speaker Mike Johnson as he seeks to pass a hyper-partisan bill through his razor-thin Republican majority, giving members an inordinate amount of power to make demands. A major question, however, is how far Republicans are willing to go in expending political capital to defend the energy incentives.
There are other priorities Republicans are fighting for, too, and they could take precedence — for instance, there’s overlap among the lawmakers who want to protect the tax credits and those who are simultaneously locked in a fierce battle to increase the income tax deduction for state and local taxes.
“I’m much more passionate about SALT; it is a hill I’m willing to stake my entire congressional career on,” said Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.). Asked whether that applied to clean energy incentives, too, he said, “No.”
“I’m interested in them; I don’t think we should throw out the entire IRA,” LaLota said. “There are provisions in it which I think are good for the country, are good for my constituents. But I am all in on SALT.”
Sen. Maria Cantwell, the top Democrat on the Commerce Committee with vast jurisdiction over artificial intelligence policy, outlined six AI safety principles Wednesday morning — tenets she believes should underpin any legislation to stave off the greatest threats posed by the rapidly-evolving technology.
“To manage risks from advanced AI systems we need clear safety standards, continuous testing, and reporting of serious failures,” the Washington Democrat said in a statement. “America can lead the world in AI by building systems that are not only more capable, but safer and more secure.”
Cantwell’s framework would encompass six priority areas: enforceable safety standards for frontier models, continuous testing, disclosure and oversight, public-private partnerships, protection for children and workers and adherence to U.S.-led global standards.
To directly address risks posed by the technology, her framework would have federal experts at the National Institute of Standards and Technology and other agencies establish clear federal rules to address harms, with specialized standards for open-source AI models to reduce risks of catastrophic misuse.
The senator is also recommending that the federal government provide developers with guidance on how to accelerate U.S. leadership on AI without sacrificing basic safety protocols.
On testing, Cantwell argues the government and independent experts should provide constant oversight and “continually scrutinize and stress test covered AI models,” particularly when sensitive information or secure facilities are involved.
She also says AI systems must have built-in safeguards to ensure they halt self-modification that could bypass safety controls. And she states that advanced models should not be released until they have undergone an independent, comprehensive audit — similar to outside auditors examining a company’s financial statements.
Cantwell, a former tech executive, has for years pursued similar priorities. But her new framework comes ahead of a midterm election that could return control of the Senate to Democrats, handing Cantwell back of the Commerce Committee gavel.
It also comes as lawmakers are under pressure to regulate the AI industry but are showing few signs that they will be able to reach consensus, across the aisle or even within their own party.
Senators had hoped for hearings, markups and briefings on AI legislation before leaving Washington until after the November elections, but little progress was made. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the current Commerce Committee chair, has continued to say he intends to hold a markup on AI-related bills but has punted multiple times, saying senators have yet to reach agreement on any bipartisan measure.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) have been trying to cut a deal on legislation to prevent and contain catastrophic risk from runaway AI technology, but bill text has so far failed to materialize.
Cantwell’s approach laid out Wednesday morning would be stricter and more comprehensive than what Thune and Klobuchar are expected to ultimately produce, based on similar legislation they have offered in the past.
Her approach of “constant oversight and vigilance” would also serve as a contrast to that of GOP leaders, who have consistently called for a “light touch” regulatory regime.
Senate Republicans are privately ready for a post-election Supreme Court nomination fight that may never come.
There aren’t too many signs from the two oldest justices — 78-year-old Clarence Thomas and 76-year-old Samuel Alito — that either plans to retire in the coming months and force Republicans to spring into action to fill a vacancy.
But the two men would face a mountain of pressure to step down in the lame-duck period if Democrats retake the Senate, which could essentially shut down confirmations of President Donald Trump’s favored nominees.
Such a retirement announcement would kick off a chaotic sprint on Capitol Hill, giving Republicans just five scheduled session weeks to cobble together 50 votes for a Trump nominee.
Republicans in a position to act said in recent interviews they would certainly try to rapidly confirm any Trump pick.
“We would proceed quickly with such a vacancy,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune.
Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley said “of course” they would. Sen. Thom Tillis, a frequent Trump critic who could single-handedly bottle up a nominee in Judiciary, said he would “absolutely” support a post-election confirmation.
“You’ve got to use your majority position to take that vote,” Tillis said.
Several senators, including Thune, are skeptical a vacancy even happens. Alito told Bloomberg News in an interview published Tuesday he would “stick around” at least until the court’s current term ends early next summer. Thomas hasn’t publicly addressed his retirement in years and has otherwise given no signs of imminent plans to quit.
“I don’t know why you assume there will be one,” said Sen. Susan Collins, another potentially pivotal vote who left the door open to filling any vacancy, pointing to her longstanding position that “as long as it’s not close to a presidential election that we should proceed.”
Still, some lawmakers on both sides of the aisle with battle scars from prior confirmation fights over Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson aren’t ready to entertain the thought of a lame-duck confirmation sprint.
“Oh, gosh,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski. “You’re giving me the chills.”
What else we’re watching:
— INSIDE COONS’ ISRAEL TURNABOUT: Sen. Chris Coons is likely to chair Foreign Relations if Democrats win the Senate, and — in what he describes as a “fairly sharp break” in his thinking — he’s not ruling out sanctions on Israel’s prime minister. The Delaware senator’s evolution matches that of other moderate Democrats in the three years since Hamas’ deadly Oct. 7 attack triggered a military response that Israel’s critics have said amounted to genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.
— TRUMP COLLEGE TAX RULES WORRY DEMS: Democratic lawmakers are worried proposed Trump administration rules targeting diversity initiatives on college campuses could threaten universities’ finances over commonplace activities. “What if a university has Black History Month?” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, who sits on the tax-writing Finance Committee, said in a recent interview. “Is that going to cause them to lose their tax-exempt status?” The IRS regulations proposed Sept. 3 are slated to go into effect next June. Supporters say the rules should be used to prevent schools from considering race in decisions over who they admit, hire and promote, for example.
Jordain Carney, Daniella Cheslow and Brian Faler contributed to this report.
Congress
‘Use your majority’: In the unlikely event of a Supreme Court vacancy, Republicans are ready to act
Senate Republicans are unlikely to get a Supreme Court vacancy this year. They’re privately prepared for one, just in case.
A Democratic midterm triumph would carry massive implications for the final years of President Donald Trump’s presidency, including the prospect that the Senate could essentially shut down confirmations of his favored nominees. That’s a nightmare scenario for Republicans, who have viewed their reshaping of the federal judiciary as a crown jewel of Trump’s legacy.
The two oldest Supreme Court justices — 78-year-old Clarence Thomas and 76-year-old Samuel Alito — are both Republican appointees and reliable Trump allies, and key Senate Republicans said in recent interviews with Blue Light News they would support filling a high-court slot this year if one opens up.
“We would proceed quickly with such a vacancy,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune.
Signs that Republicans will need to spring into action are scarce. Alito told Bloomberg News in an interview published Tuesday that he would “stick around” at least until the court’s current term ends early next summer. Thomas, meanwhile, hasn’t publicly addressed his retirement plans in years and has otherwise given no signs of imminent plans to quit.
But if the GOP loses control of the Senate in the midterms, both men would face a mountain of pressure to consider stepping down, given the stakes. Democrats remain bitter over the Republican blockade of President Barack Obama’s final Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, and could block a fourth Trump justice.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in an interview over the summer that part of his pitch to recruit candidates was “two words that make a huge difference: Supreme Court.” Speaking to reporters last week, Schumer indicated that Democrats would use their majority to block judicial nominees they view as too extreme.
“One of the reasons we need to make sure that we do everything we can to take back the Senate is [to] not let Trump put such horrible justices, MAGA justices, on the Supreme Court and the lower courts,” he said.
A post-Nov. 3 announcement would be the first time since the 1922 retirement of Mahlon Pitney that a Supreme Court justice announced his or her departure in the lame-duck period after a midterm election, according to the Congressional Research Service.
Such an announcement would kick off a chaotic sprint on Capitol Hill, giving Republicans just five scheduled session weeks to cobble together 50 votes for a Trump nominee.
Those in a position to act said recently they would certainly try — and there is recent precedent for doing it quickly: Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed just 38 days after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s September 2020 death.
Like Thune, Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said “of course” Senate Republicans would try to fill a post-election vacancy.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a frequent Trump critic who could single-handedly bottle up a nominee in the Judiciary Committee, said he would “absolutely” support filling an end-of-year vacancy.
“You’ve got to use your majority position to take that vote,” he said.
But Tillis was among many in the GOP who doubt senators will have a slot to fill. “I can’t think of anything other than health,” he said, that would cause a justice to quickly step down.
Thune said that if a justice had plans to retire, “They would have done it already.”
Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, another potentially pivotal vote, also left the door open to a post-election confirmation. The only Senate Republican running this year in a state won by Kamala Harris, Collins pointed to her longstanding position that “as long as it’s not close to a presidential election that we should proceed to consider nominees.”
“I don’t know why you assume there will be one,” she added. “I haven’t heard that will happen.”
Collins knows as well as anyone the perils of taking up high-court nominations in an election year. She cited the too-close-to–Election Day rule in voting against Barrett’s nomination as she stood for reelection in 2020.
But Democrats are still hammering her decision to vote for Brett Kavanaugh a month before the 2018 midterms — even after his nomination was thrown into turmoil by allegations of sexual misconduct and assault which he denied.
Troy Jackson, Collins’ Democratic opponent, posted on X this week that Collins “cannot be trusted with voting on our next Supreme Court Justice.”
The campaign-trail sparring reflects just how partisan and contentious high-court nomination battles have grown, and plenty of senators are hoping to avoid a knock-down-drag-out fight on the heels of a similarly nasty midterm campaign.
In a sign of the battle scars left from the fights over Kavanaugh, Barrett and the most recent Supreme Court confirmee — Ketanji Brown Jackson — some lawmakers said they weren’t ready to even entertain the thought of a lame-duck confirmation sprint.
“Not a hypothetical I’m ready to talk about,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who is expected to lead Democrats on the Judiciary Committee next year.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who would be a closely watched vote, made a quick escape when she was asked about the scenario.
“Oh, gosh,” she said. “You’re giving me the chills.”
Chris Marquette contributed to this report.
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words