Months into the Democrats’ messy, public internal debates on President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better spending plans — and despite a massive effort by Biden, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speak Nancy Pelosi to seal the deal this week — it is still far from clear whether the factions of the party will work out a way to pass the reconciliation bill, which has already been chiseled down beyond recognition.
In an effort to prevent the bill from being gutted even further, the Congressional Progressive Caucus once again held the line this week, insisting that Speaker Pelosi delay a vote on the separate $550 billion bipartisan infrastructure bill until the Build Back Better budget reconciliation package is ready to move forward in tandem with the larger infrastructure bill. In response to the show of collective power from the group of progressive lawmakers, Pelosi announced late Thursday that she was delaying the vote on the larger bipartisan bill.
But even if the Build Back Better Act does pass, due to the huge scalebacks that conservative Democratic Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema have demanded, what once had the potential to be transformative in the way that signature New Deal and Great Society programs were is now in part reduced to being another public display of the dysfunction of Washington, D.C., in the face of overwhelming challenges, and in the churn of a tsunami of lobbying efforts against the legislation by business groups such as the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable.
Nevertheless, if it does pass, the bill could still meaningfully impact many people’s lives by extending the federal payments to families with children, increasing Pell Grant spending, and allowing for large expansions in the country’s stock of affordable housing. Perhaps the most important aspect of the legislation is that it will cement in place the notion that tackling climate change is a priority federally.
Even the stripped-down version of the bill, which looks likely to come in at about $1.75 trillion in new spending, as opposed to the $3.5 trillion originally envisaged, currently promises to contain upward of $500 billion to fund climate change-related investments, most of it devoted to tax incentives to encourage companies to move toward cleaner energy products. That’s a lot of money, and if used effectively, it has the potential to alter the country’s relationship to fossil fuels and to carbon emissions over the next decade.
But what could have been a moment in which the full force of the federal government was laser-focused on transforming the economy to rapidly and permanently move away from fossil fuels, and on mitigating the effects of global warming, has instead degenerated into a food fight. Yes, there may still be a lot of money unleashed to tackle climate change, but it will be done with ill will, begrudgingly and denuded of vital provisions designed to turbo-charge the restructuring of the economy.
Senator Manchin’s role in all of this has been particularly unsavory, a somewhat compelling masterclass of one man’s shameless exercise of raw, king-making power.
The senator from West Virginia, one of the country’s leading producers of both coal and natural gas, has gone after provisions in the legislation that penalize fossil fuel producers and try to force, at speed, a transition to cleaner energy. He has used his position both as a key swing vote and as chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to push a “my-way-or-the-highway” approach to the legislation.
Manchin opposes penalties for utilities companies that don’t increase the share of low-carbon power that they generate by 4 percentage points each year from 2023 through 2030.
As a result, the $150 billion Clean Electricity Performance Program, which at one point was the centerpiece of the climate proposals, and which both incentivizes the move to clean energy and, more importantly, penalizes those companies that don’t make the move, was stripped from the reconciliation bill before the Senate. What is left are hundreds of billions of dollars of tax credits to companies that move toward renewable energy production and usage — but that will, according to estimates, only get the country about halfway to where it needs to be if it is to meet the goals set in the upcoming COP26 meeting in Scotland.
Manchin also has set himself against the idea of a fee charged to companies that emit methane, a huge contributor to global warming, into the atmosphere. As a result, it’s looking increasingly likely, as Democrats scramble to reach a deal — any deal, at any cost, simply so they can say to voters that they got something done — that the methane fee will, in coming days, end up on the cutting room floor.
Meanwhile, the idea of a carbon border adjustment tax — which progressives have long been pushing as a way to even the playing field between companies that produce goods overseas in lax regulatory environments and U.S.-based companies, which are subjected to more rigorous environmental regulations — hasn’t picked up enough traction. The White House, which feared that taxing products based on the amount of carbon it took to produce them would contribute to higher consumer prices in an already inflationary context, was never enthusiastic about the tax.
The Biden administration made it clear during the summer that it wouldn’t push for the measure. Now, it is also becoming clear that there isn’t enough support in the Democratic caucus in the Senate to include such a plan in the final reconciliation bill. Thus, while the European Union is on the verge of moving ahead with this method of reining in carbon emissions, the U.S. remains on the sidelines.
There is overwhelming pressure on the Democrats to pass a reconciliation bill in the next week so that Biden can sign it before he addresses the COP26 meeting in Glasgow. After all, the all-too-obvious electoral consequences to the Democrats of this key legislation going down in flames are too ghastly even for a mediocre Senate leader such as Schumer to stomach.
But at the same time, it’s not at all clear that the legislation that does ultimately pass will be transformative enough to rescue the Democrats from their self-inflicted malaise, or even start to meet the massive needs of the moment. The climate change compromises are particularly dispiriting — better than nothing but far less ambitious than what is needed to meet the escalating climate crisis that is now so clearly and vividly upon us.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.