Markey playing defense against GOP clean energy plans
As Senate committees dive into the 'Big Beautiful Bill' that could reach President Donald Trump's desk by July 4, Markey said the version that narrowly passed the House last month would slash $500 billion from the 'clean energy revolution,' in addition to $760 billion in Medicaid cuts.
The House reconciliation bill, which also features deep tax cuts and spending reductions, would repeal or accelerate the phaseout of IRA provisions, including tax credits tied to electric vehicles, clean electricity production and clean electricity investment, according to the Tax Foundation.
'I'm working with my Republican colleagues, especially from the red states, because 80% of all that funding has gone to red states in the IRA, and it's already created 400,000 new jobs,' Markey told business, academic and health care leaders at a New England Council breakfast at the Boston Harbor Hotel.
'The way we drafted the bill is, if you do the manufacturing in an energy transition state — meaning West Virginia, etc. — you get a bonus 10% tax break,' Markey continued. 'So that's where it all went over the last 3.5 years. Now if they cut those tax breaks, it's going to mean 900,000 jobs are going to be killed over the next 10 years that were otherwise going to be put in place. So I'm working with my Republican colleagues to try to find a pathway here to keep as much of that clean energy strategy for our country in place.'
Markey told reporters he needs to find four Senate Republicans who are willing to preserve the clean energy tax credits. It will take a simple majority for the Senate to pass the reconciliation bill.
Four Senate Republicans in April — Sens. Lisa Murkowski, John Curtis, Thom Tillis and Jerry Moran — voiced their opposition to a 'full-scale repeal' of energy tax credits, according to The Hill. On Friday, 13 House Republicans sent Senate leadership a letter requesting improvements to some of the clean energy provisions they passed, including one measure they said would 'would abruptly terminate several credits just 60 days after enactment for projects that have not yet begun construction.'
Markey called the 60-day timeframe 'pretty draconian,' and said he plans to work on pushing out that date.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates the environment, energy and climate cuts in the House bill would shrink the country's economy by $1.1 trillion over the next decade, according to Markey's office. The Malden Democrat joined union leaders at IBEW Local 103 in Dorchester on Friday to decry the House cuts.
'Repealing clean energy tax credits is a union job killer,' Lou Antonellis, business manager and financial secretary at IBEW Local 103, said in a statement shared by Markey's office. 'These tax credits help level the playing field, they drive investment, and they put IBW electricians, laborers, ironworkers, and pipe fitters to work building America's energy future. If you take those tax credits away, you're not just pulling funding: you're pulling paychecks from working families, you're pulling apprentices out of training facilities, you're pulling opportunity straight out of our communities.'
At the New England Council forum, Markey pointed out that 94% of all new electrical generation capacity in the United States last year came from wind, solar and battery. Only 6% came from natural gas, he said.
'That's a threat to the natural gas industry,' Markey said. 'That's why Trump is trying to kill offshore wind because we just want to plug in all that electricity.'
On his first day back in office in January, President Donald Trump signed an executive order halting new offshore wind projects.
Massachusetts lawmakers have pegged offshore wind as key to reach its clean energy goals, while Trump has embraced natural gas and other fossil fuels. In last year's economic development bill, the Legislature agreed to a $400 million investment in climate technology, with an eye toward bolstering the offshore wind industry.
Markey argued eliminating tax breaks for solar and onshore wind would make the New England region more dependent on energy sources from elsewhere in the country. He also lamented the financial blows that clean energy companies, including those based out of Greentown Labs in Somerville and The Engine in Cambridge, would experience without tax credits for electric vehicles, plug-in hybrids, and battery storage technologies.
'My concern is that if all of the clean energy tax breaks are killed, that will kill the wind and solar and all electric vehicle and battery storage technologies that come out of Massachusetts but are revolutionizing the nation's relationship with fossil fuels, which get into the lungs of the American people,' Markey told reporters. 'So I'm working with Republicans to try to find a way to preserve as many of the clean energy tax breaks, which will help our state, but it will also help those red states, as well, to transition to a clean energy future.'
WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on WWLP.com.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Your kid is getting a ‘Trump account.' Should you put your money in it?
Republicans' 'big, beautiful bill' includes a gift to millions of families: $1,000 in an investment account for every eligible newborn. The new savings vehicles, akin to Individual Retirement Accounts, are designated for children who are U.S. citizens born from 2025 through 2028. In addition to the one-time government contribution, parents and others can chip in as much as $5,000 a year to the accounts, which beneficiaries can access at 18, with some constraints. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. The seed money is a boon for recipients and will grow tax-deferred. Financial planners say parents and guardians might do better putting their money into existing investment vehicles such as a 529 plan, a savings plan designed to cover college expenses. But 529s are limited to education, while backers say the new accounts can help their recipients beyond college. Republican lawmakers call the accounts 'Trump accounts,' though the Senate's plan to officially name them after the president did not make it to the final version of the legislation, which was signed Friday. They deliver on an idea that both Democrats and Republicans have floated for years: to invest money for all children at birth. Withdrawals from a 529 are not subject to state or federal taxes as long as the funds go toward qualified education expenses - a feature the new investment accounts don't share. And in the new accounts, parents' deposits don't qualify for a tax deduction, notes Greg Leiserson, a senior fellow at the Tax Law Center at New York University. 'You have this very slight or minimal-to-nonexistent tax benefit,' he said. 'What is the point here?' Financial adviser Amy Spalding of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, said she will continue to steer her clients to 529s. 'It's better from a tax standpoint,' Spalding said. 'And there are more investment options. And then there's a higher contribution limit.' (For 2025, a single person can deposit as much as $19,000 a year into a beneficiary's 529, while married couples can contribute as much $38,000.) Jeremiah Barlow, a financial planner in Santa Barbara, California, said the new accounts could benefit a family that has hit the maximum on their child's 529 and wants to save more, or who like the idea of setting up a fund for their child's first home or as an economic safety net. 'It would likely appeal to our families who want more flexibility for more general-purpose savings for their child's future,' Barlow said. 'You shouldn't rush to just use it because it's out there.' Leiserson cautioned that account holders should understand the tax implications, noting that withdrawals will be taxed at typical income rates, not at the capital gains rate of a taxable brokerage account. 'For most people, this is going to be worse than what they could do in a taxable account,' he said. Though parents don't get a tax deduction when they contribute to a new account, employers can claim a tax break for contributions on behalf of their workers' children or their teenage employees. Nonprofits also can contribute to they accounts. The law requires the new investment accounts to track a U.S. stock index, which means account holders have fewer options than they would in a brokerage account or a 529 plan, which generally offer a range of investment options with varying levels of risk, including stocks, bonds and mutual funds. Leiserson noted that all-stock portfolios come with their own risks, because they're tethered to market conditions. 'If you're saying, 'Okay, I'm going to start school in the fall' - if the market falls over the summer, the planning you were doing about how you were going to pay for college is totally messed up, because the money you thought would be there, isn't." The White House said the accounts 'will afford a generation of children the chance to experience the miracle of compounded growth and set them on a course for prosperity from the very beginning.' While some experts appreciate the premise of the accounts, they also see flaws in the design, such as the requirement that parents opt-in to the account on their tax return, which means people who don't know this might miss out. In addition, the law includes a penalty of at least $500 if a parent mistakenly claims an account, which could scare off some parents. During the grinding process of crafting the massive tax and spending legislation, the accounts changed both superficially - they were renamed from MAGA accounts to Trump accounts to a yet-to-be-determined name - and in substance. Legislators dropped plans to give account withdrawals favorable tax treatment similar to a brokerage account. Account withdrawals will be taxed at ordinary income tax rates, not capital gains rates. Congress also discarded rules that would have prescribed how beneficiaries could spend the money - on college at 18, on starting a business at 25, on buying a house at 30. Instead, account holders cannot touch the funds until they turn 18. After that, the rules are the same as those of an individual retirement account - withdrawals are taxed like income, plus an additional 10 percent tax penalty on any withdrawals before age 59½ except for certain qualified uses. Those uses include paying for college, supporting themselves if they become disabled, or recovering from domestic abuse or a natural disaster. Beneficiaries also can withdraw as much as $10,000 to buy their first home, and up to $5,000 when they have a new baby themselves. Even one of the Trump accounts' biggest proponents in Congress, Rep. Blake Moore (R-Utah), said in an interview that for many parents, the new account design offers more benefits for retirement than for college expenses. 'I would argue that the tax implications of a 529 are far more favorable,' he said, but noted that most families don't have the disposable income to invest in a 529, and the new accounts' $1,000 from the government can benefit people at all income levels. If the account saw a 6 percent rate of return for 18 years, it would be worth $2,854; if the stock market does well, it could be worth even more. 'The most beneficial thing in my opinion about these is that … you're investing from birth into an IRA,' Moore said. 'Most people start investing in an IRA at 30 …. We're talking at birth or at 30. The benefits of investing early into that IRA are significant.' Moore has four sons, and while none will qualify for the government's $1,000 seed money contribution for newborns, the law allows him to open a Trump account as a parent. He says he'll be putting money in it: 'I want my kids having a Trump account so they can take it out when they're 50 or 60 years old.' - - - Jacob Bogage contributed to this report. Related Content Arthur Ashe's knack for reinvention led him to history at Wimbledon Newlywed detained by ICE freed after 141 days and two deportation attempts The Met opens a dazzling wing of non-European art Sign in to access your portfolio
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
To tame Washington, we need a DOGE 2.0 — but done right this time
Elon Musk has repeatedly achieved the impossible, but not even he and his Department of Government Efficiency could tame Washington, DC, and its massive federal bureaucracy. Yet there's still hope — and the need has never been more urgent. The Senate parliamentarian gutted major cost savings at the heart of the Republican reconciliation bill that President Donald Trump signed Friday, so he must resume DOGE efforts immediately. Advertisement In Silicon Valley terms, DOGE had product-market fit; it just didn't have the right tech stack. This time, the White House must get the architecture right. Step 1 is understanding what went wrong. DOGE's failures stemmed from three fundamental flaws that doomed the effort from the start. The first was structural. Don Devine, who ran the Office of Personnel Management for President Ronald Reagan, warned that creating a new agency to shrink government never works — it only causes confusion, diffusion of responsibility and more bureaucracy. Advertisement It also ignores that in Washington, the coin of the realm is power. DOGE was a new agency made up out of thin air with zero inherent legal authority — and Cabinet secretaries naturally bristled at an outside third party meddling in their agencies. They wanted to control the change, and they possessed the legal authority to do so. Indeed, as secretaries were confirmed, they moved quickly to throw off DOGE's yoke. Advertisement By late February, Musk faced a revolt as top officials countermanded DOGE's 'five weekly accomplishments' order. An 'explosive' Cabinet meeting in early March ended with Trump telling Musk to make changes with a scalpel, not a hatchet. Musk's second problem was a legal one. Private-sector experience can't prepare anyone for the labyrinth of administrative law that liberal activists use to stymie progress. DOGE lacked a dedicated legal team within the Justice Department focused solely on its policy reforms and preventing unforced errors. For example, DOGE lowered NIH's cap on allowable research overhead from 69% to 15%, explaining that private foundations allow for zero such funding — but it made the cap retroactive, jeopardizing the reform in court. Advertisement The third sin was flash. Even as DOGE's publicity invited legal challenges, it increased the pressure to meet publicly proclaimed, wildly optimistic targets. DOGE's $1 trillion in promised cuts will strain to hit $150 billion. We had a saying in the White House during Trump's first term, and it proved true here: Whales that surface get harpooned. Musk acknowledged as much on X last week, admitting that his attention-getting antics 'lacked empathy.' Fortunately, the source code exists to reengineer the DOGE mission with bold, swift, high-impact moves. The White House must implement three critical components to make DOGE 2.0 work. First, empower Cabinet control: The White House should give Cabinet secretaries direction, then let them make reforms themselves. Trump must give each Cabinet member mandatory workforce reduction goals, the same way tech sales teams have strict quotas. Faced with a requirement, for example, to trim 25% within six months, agency heads will snap into action — and will feel personal responsibility for performance. The federal government works best when it functions as designed, with the president — not a third party — telling his Cabinet what to do. Advertisement Second, the White House must assemble a dedicated legal defense team within the Justice Department focused solely on reform policies, and get each agency's general counsel on board with the effort. These lawyers will catch pitfalls early — and will go the extra mile to defend policies they helped write. For example, these lawyers must aggressively demand injunction bonds to rein in activists' district-court lawfare. Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! Advertisement When the Supreme Court ended universal injunctions last week, it left activist judges a 'significant loophole' in the class-action realm. DOJ lawyers should head this off by demanding that plaintiffs pay injunction bonds — upfront money to cover costs should they lose. Finally, DOGE 2.0 must execute in Stealth Mode. Follow the example of the Obama administration, which initially pursued amnesty for undocumented aliens by relaxing enforcement via phone calls, without making a public announcement. This made it much harder for Congress to learn what was happening — or to attack it in court. Advertisement The same quiet execution model applies here: Trump must pursue smart, quiet rollouts, not splashy launches. This was the model my former boss John McEntee used to reform personnel in Trump's first term. He used the authorities inherent in the White House to hold the Cabinet accountable, placed dedicated lawyers in key positions of authority and operated off-the-record. It was a successful model and should be deployed again. Advertisement Watching Musk leave Washington in frustration brings to mind the Roman historian Livy. As the Republic collapsed, he lamented: 'We can endure neither our vices nor the remedies needed to cure them.' America need not repeat Rome's fate — but only if we abandon failed approaches and embrace methods that actually work. The clock is ticking. Daniel Huff is a former White House lawyer in the Office of Presidential Personnel, and was a senior advisor to Project 2025.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Mark Green resigns from Congress to take mystery job — narrowing Republicans' threadbare majority
Tennessee Rep. Mark Green announced that he has resigned from Congress to take a new mysterious new job — narrowing Republicans' already ultra-slim majority by one seat ahead of messy fights such as the looming government shutdown battle in the fall. The retired US Army officer had revealed his intention to step down last month after passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, but had refrained from giving an exact date. On Friday, he tendered his resignation, which is effective July 20, per his letter to GOP leadership. 'It's with a heavy heart that I say farewell,' Green said in a statement. 'To my constituents across Tennessee's 7th District—thank you. The trust you put in me is humbling. I will look back fondly on my years of serving as your voice in Washington.' 'While I cannot give the details here, I will be doing something specifically designed to help America compete against the CCP [Chinese Communist Party], but this time in business,' Green explained in his resignation video. Shortly after his announcement last month that he intended to leave Congress, Notus reported that Green had been floating business opportunities in Guyana to lobbyists. Now that he is stepping aside, Republicans will have a 219-212 majority in the House. 3 Mark Green had said he wouldn't step down from the House until Republicans passed their megabill. Getty Images But that is set to further shrink when Democrats fill three vacancies for reps that died earlier this year during special elections in the fall. Democrats are heavily favored to reclaim all three of those seats. Eventually, there will be a special election to replace Green, who had won Sen. Marsha Blackburn's (R-Tenn.) old House seat in 2018. Blackburn is now eyeing a potential run for Tennessee governor. Green was also the chairman of the chair of the House Homeland Security Committee, which played a critical role in developing the border security provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that cleared the House last week. 3 The Tennessee Republican has been tight-lipped about his next job. X/@RepMarkGreen With the Tennessee rep stepping down, Republican leadership will have even less room for error during key fights coming up later this year, such as a potentially nasty government shutdown showdown in the fall when Congress has to fund the government for the next fiscal year. His departure also makes the math harder for other GOP goals, such as House Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La.) plan to pursue another reconciliation bill later this year — the legislative vehicle Republicans used to wrangle the One Big Beautiful Bill Act without Democratic support. The Tennessee Republican declined to provide details of his next gig in the private sector. 3 Republicans are not set to have a slimmer 219–212 House majority. CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images Last September, Green drew national headlines after his wife accused him of having an affair. She filed for divorce and alleged that he was having a dalliance with a woman employed by Axios. She later admitted to misidentifying the purported mistress, telling Politico, 'I want to correct the record, because I misidentified someone in that message. My husband has never had a relationship with a reporter from Axios, and I regret having said that.' The retired U.S. Army officer had previously announced that he wouldn't pursue another term in the 2024 election cycle, but abruptly changed course about 15 days later.
