logo
GOP "big, beautiful bill" would force USPS to sell its new EV mail trucks

GOP "big, beautiful bill" would force USPS to sell its new EV mail trucks

Yahoo4 days ago

Last September, the U.S. Postal Service debuted its long-awaited — and much litigated — electric vehicle mail delivery truck. Since then, more than 7,200 new zero-emissions vehicles have been distributed to the Postal Service.
But a provision tucked inside the Senate Republican bill to enact President Trump's second-term agenda would force the USPS to sell off the brand new trucks and cancel or significantly amend the contract for the remaining 58,800 that are due to be delivered over the next 10 years.
According to the text of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs portion of the bill released by Kentucky GOP Senator Rand Paul, chair of the committee, all electric vehicles and related infrastructure owned by the Postal Service will be sold and the proceeds will "be deposited into the general fund of the treasury." Selling the EVs would "cut unnecessary costs and focus USPS on delivering mail and not achieving the environmental initiatives pushed by the Biden Administration," according to the bill.
Paul's office didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Peter Pastre, the vice president of government relations and public policy for USPS, wrote a letter to the Senate in June that said the provision to sell the EVs would "make major and damaging changes to the U.S. Postal Service's vehicle fleet program, potentially impacting our ability to deliver to millions of Americans."
The bill is being considered under budget reconciliation rules, which means that Republicans can pass it with a simple majority, instead of meeting the 60-vote threshold that is required to consider most Senate legislation. In order to use this approach, every item in the bill must have a budgetary impact, and the Senate parliamentarian determines whether each provision meets that standard, known as the Byrd Rule.
Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough found that disposing of the USPS EVs is one of several of the bill's provisions violating the Byrd Rule, according to Senate Democrats.
Republicans, who would like to revoke the EVs and their related infrastructure, say this provision could potentially raise money by rescinding $1 billion allocated in the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act to purchase the vehicles. But according to Pastre, it would cost more than $450 million to replace the 7,200 revoked vehicles, and the USPS has already spent more than $540 million on electrical upgrades for infrastructure to support the cars.
Because the majority of the vehicles are specially designed for the Postal Service — like right-side driving for mail delivery trucks — and most of the electrical infrastructure is buried under ground, the potential for raising money at auction is "negligible," according to Pastre.
Pastre was direct about the harm this action would cause the Postal Service saying, "it will seriously cripple our ability to replace an aging and obsolete delivery fleet."
"The Postal Service has over 200,000 vehicles in an outdated and aging fleet. Using EVs will reduce fuel and maintenance costs and help the USPS to better serve the public," Mark Dimondstein, president of American Postal Workers Union, said in an email to CBS News. "Eliminating energy-efficient vehicles would be a step backward and not be in the best interest of those we serve and the communities where we live."
Since 2015, the USPS has been looking to update and modernize its fleet of more than 200,000 vehicles. The majority of the trucks were 25 years old or more, often lacked proper heating and cooling and in some cases, would spontaneously combust in neighborhoods as workers operated the aging vehicles.
When the Postal Service first announced its proposal in 2021 to replace 165,000 vehicles, it originally intended to purchase traditional gas vehicles to replace 90% of the fleet. But the gas-powered mail trucks had low fuel efficiency, guzzling fuel at under a 9-m.p.g. rate, according to filings by several environmental organizations and more than a dozen states that sued to block the plan.
"It's important that EVs be part of the mix for the USPS because it should represent the next generation," said Dan Becker, director of the Safe Climate Transport Campaign at the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the organizations that sued the USPS in 2021. "The last generation of vehicles are literally dying on its wheels."
The legal action forced the USPS to reconsider its plan, and it finalized a deal in late 2022 to purchase 106,000 new cars — and 66,000 were to be zero-emissions vehicles. It also planned to install more than 14,000 chargers to keep the fleet running. The cost to update the fleet totaled $9.6 billion, and the Biden administration allocated $3 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act to help cover the costs, with the rest financed by the Postal Service.
"My bet is this will survive another day," said Becker, given that the parliamentarian has ruled it should be stricken and it would be difficult to get 60 votes in the Senate to keep it in the bill. But Congress recently voted to revoke California's EPA waivers to enact its EV mandate under the Congressional Review Act, which the parliamentarian said was illegal. It remains to be seen if Republicans will follow her recommendations.
"Selling them off at a discount just so you don't have to say you don't have EVs for political reasons makes no sense," said Becker.
Israel-Iran ceasefire in precarious position, Trump claims Biden let Iran sleeper cells into U.S.
How prepared are American forces for attacks from Iran?
Sen. Schumer slams Trump administration over postponed Israel-Iran conflict briefings

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Senate Republicans' tax cuts now projected to cost $4.45T
Senate Republicans' tax cuts now projected to cost $4.45T

Politico

time23 minutes ago

  • Politico

Senate Republicans' tax cuts now projected to cost $4.45T

Senate Republicans released updated megabill text late Friday that would make sharp cuts to the Inflation Reduction Act's solar and wind tax credits after a late-stage push by President Donald Trump to crack down further on the incentives. The text would require solar and wind generation projects seeking to qualify for the law's clean electricity production and investment tax credits to be placed in service by the end of 2027 — significantly more restrictive than an earlier proposal by the Senate Finance Committee that tied eligibility to when a project begins construction. The changes came after Trump urged Senate Majority Leader John Thune to crack down on the wind and solar credits and align the measure more closely with reconciliation text, H.R.1, that passed the House, as POLITICO reported earlier on Friday. The changes are likely to put some moderate GOP senators, who have backed a slower schedule for sunsetting those incentives, in a tough position. They'll be forced to choose between rejecting Trump's agenda or allowing the gutting of tax credits that could lead to canceled projects and job losses in their states — something renewable energy advocates are also warning about. 'We are literally going to have not enough electricity because Trump is killing solar. It's that serious,' Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) responded on X early Saturday. 'We need a bunch of new power on the grid, and nothing is as available as solar. Everything else takes a while. Meantime, expect shortages and high prices. Stupid.' The revised text would retain the investment and production tax credits for baseload sources, such as nuclear, geothermal, hydropower or energy storage, as proposed in the Finance Committee's earlier proposal. But it would make other significant changes, including extending a tax credit for clean hydrogen production until 2028. The panel's earlier proposal would have eliminated the credit after this year. And despite vocal lobbying by the solar industry, the proposal would maintain an abrupt cut to the tax incentive supporting residential solar power. The committee's earlier proposal would have eliminated that credit six months after the enactment of the bill; now the updated draft proposes repealing it at the end of this year. It would also deny certain wind and solar leasing arrangements from accessing the climate law's clean electricity investment and production tax credits, but, in a notable change, removed earlier language specifically disallowing rooftop solar. And it would move up the timeline for certain rules barring foreign entities of concern from accessing those credits. The bill would move up the termination date for electric vehicle tax credits to Sept. 30, compared to six months after enactment in the earlier Finance text. The credit for EV chargers would extend through June 2026. The new text also provides a bonus incentive for advanced nuclear facilities built in communities with high levels of employment in the nuclear industry. And the bill makes metallurgical coal eligible for the advanced manufacturing production tax credit through 2029. Sam Ricketts, co-founder of S2 Strategies, a clean energy policy consulting group, said the new draft is going to 'screw' ratepayers, kill jobs and undermine U.S. economic competitiveness. 'All just to give fossil fuel executives more profits,' he said. 'Or to own the libs. Insanity.' Josh Siegel contributed to this report.

Senate's ‘big, beautiful bill' faces serious headwinds in the House
Senate's ‘big, beautiful bill' faces serious headwinds in the House

Yahoo

time24 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Senate's ‘big, beautiful bill' faces serious headwinds in the House

The Senate's version of the 'big, beautiful bill' is facing serious headwinds in the House with The Hill learning that at least six House Republicans are currently a 'no' on the framework, a daunting sign for GOP leadership as the Senate races towards a vote. Those six House Republicans, some of whom requested anonymity, are enough opposition to tank the package, as GOP leaders grapple with a razor-thin majority. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who was one of two GOP lawmakers to oppose the House version of the bill last month, is also likely to oppose the Senate's edition, deepening the pocket of resistance in the lower chamber. Republicans can only afford to lose three votes and still clear the legislation, assuming full attendance and united Democratic opposition. 'I support the reasonable provisions in H.R. 1 that protect Medicaid's long-term viability and ensure the program continues to serve our most vulnerable, but I will not support a final bill that eliminates vital funding streams our hospitals rely on, including provider taxes and state directed payments, or any provisions that punish expansion states,' Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.) wrote in a statement on Saturday. 'President Trump was clear when he said to root out our waste, fraud, and abuse without cutting Medicaid and I wholeheartedly agree,' he continued. 'I urge my Senate colleagues to stick to the Medicaid provisions in H.R. 1 — otherwise I will vote no.' Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) told The Hill that he is also opposed to the bill because of the Medicaid provider tax provision. Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.) is currently a 'no' on the measure because of the Medicaid language, rollback of solar energy credits and public lands provisions, a source familiar with the matter told The Hill. Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), meanwhile, told The Hill that he is against the current version of the package because of the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap proposal. The legislation would increase the currently $10,000 SALT cap to $40,000 for individuals making $500,000 or less for five years, then snap back to the original number. 'While I support the President's broader agenda, how could I support the same unfair $10k SALT cap I've spent years criticizing?' LaLota said. 'A permanent $40k deduction cap with income thresholds of $225k for single filers and $450k for joint filers would earn my vote.' It is not, however, just moderates who are signaling issues with the Senate bill: Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, posted an ominous message on X that suggested he was not pleased with the package. 'I will not negotiate via X. But it's important to know that jamming us with a bill before we've had any chance to review the implications of major changes & re-writes, fluid scores, a high likelihood of violating the house framework (deficits) , & tons of swamp buy-offs is bad,' he wrote. The opposition is rising to the surface as Senate Republicans inch closer to holding an initial vote on the 'big, beautiful bill,' which would officially kick off the consideration process and eventually tee up a final vote in the House. It remains unclear, however, if Senate GOP leaders have the votes to move forward. If the motion to proceed passes by a simple majority, the chamber would hold a series of unlimited amendment votes called a vote-a-rama, which could result in changes to the measure. Senate GOP leaders are also still talking to holdouts and could make changes to the bill as written. In the meantime, House Republicans — beginning to review the revised Senate text unveiled overnight — are expressing resistance to the measure, prompting serious questions about whether top GOP lawmakers will be able to enact the legislation by their self-imposed July 4 deadline. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) convened a call with the House Republican Conference Saturday afternoon and urged lawmakers to keep their concerns with the Senate bill private, and instead speak directly with their senators and the White House, two sources told The Hill. Senate Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) told members that it is unlikely they will have to return to Washington on Monday, the sources said. Tuesday or Wednesday is more realistic, he told lawmakers. One source told The Hill that the call was brief and leadership did not take questions. The main qualm among House Republicans appears to be the Medicaid language in the bill. The Senate's legislation includes a proposal that would effectively cap provider taxes at 3.5 percent by 2031, down from the current 6 percent, but only for the states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. The decrease was initially supposed to begin in 2027, with a 0.5 percent phase down annually, but Senate Republicans overnight changed the text to delay the implementation to 2028. The upper chamber also inserted a provision to create a $25 billion rural hospital relief fund that would be distributed over five years to assuage those concerns. The changes, however, do not seem to be solving all of the GOP's problems, with House Republicans still voicing opposition to the language. Aside from Medicaid, the Senate bill's rollback of green-energy tax credits is an issue for some House Republicans. The revised legislation for the upper chamber slashes tax incentives for wind and solar energy and adds a new tax on future wind and solar projects. Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) would not say how he plans to vote on the bill, but signaled that he is not happy with the Medicaid provisions and green-energy tax credit language. 'Instead of improving the Medicaid and energy portions of [the] House bill it appears the Senate went backwards,' he told The Hill. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump, 3 GOP senators play golf ahead of Saturday's push for megabill vote
Trump, 3 GOP senators play golf ahead of Saturday's push for megabill vote

Yahoo

time28 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump, 3 GOP senators play golf ahead of Saturday's push for megabill vote

As Senate wrestled with whether to begin debate on President Donald Trump's megabill, a few key Republican allies spent part of the afternoon golfing with the president at his nearby club in Northern Virginia. Trump, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and GOP Sens. Eric Schmitt of Missouri, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina played golf a few hours before the Senate voted to debate the so-called 'Big Beautiful Bill.' Live updates: It's go time for Senate on Trump's megabill. Do they have the votes? Graham posted a photo of himself and Trump on social media as gave the camera a thumbs up. Graham said in a post that he partnered with Trump and Paul to beat Schmitt and Ratcliffe. "Proud to announce no casualties," Graham wrote. "A lot of fun! Big Beautiful Bill on the way." Schmitt posted a similar photo of himself and the president, writing "Big week for President Trump and he crushed it on the golf course this morning as well." Looking forward to beginning the One Big Beautiful Bill soon. Started the day with @POTUS and thanked him for his leadership. Let's Go! — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) June 28, 2025 White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters around 2 p.m. that the president was wrapping up lunch and would soon depart the course, located about 25 miles from the White House. Senate Republican leaders launched the debate June 28 that is expected to culminate with a vote June 29 or 30 on the 990-page bill. While Democrats are all expected to vote no on the massive legislative package, the open question going into the debate is whether enough Republicans will end up supporting the Senate's version, which would send it back to the House. Trump has asked Congress to send him the completed bill to sign by July 4. The megabill is stuffed with tax cuts, Medicaid reforms and border security funding, containing several signature campaign promises from Trump and the Republican party. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump plays golf ahead Saturday's push for Senate megabill vote

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store