dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

>>23070363

Who are they listening to? Do they really think they can do a deep dive and find the traitors. They unfortunately don’t know, none of the have respect for the leaders. Perhaps that was why Wray was so weak. They told him lies and to fuck off, with serious threats on his life

ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT

Congress Is Giving Energy Lobbyists a 3-Year Window to Keep Up to $2 Trillion in Subsidies

The "one big, beautiful bill" keeps the corporate welfare that Republicans claim to hate.

JEFF LUSE | 5.22.2025 11:47

The House of Representatives passed its "one big, beautiful bill" on Thursday. The sweeping domestic policy legislation includes extensions of President Donald Trump's 2017 tax cuts, increased funding for immigration enforcement and defense, and work requirements for Medicaid. The legislation is expected to add $2.3 trillion to the deficit.

Notably, the bill accelerates the phaseout of several green energy subsidies that were passed in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Starting in 2028, the bill's technology-neutral production and investment tax credits for clean electricity will be fully phased out. (Earlier drafts of the bill left a partial credit available through 2032.) To qualify for these tax credits, projects will need to begin construction within 60 days of the bill's enactment, reports The Hill. Tax credits for nuclear power will remain untouched through 2031. The energy clawbacks in an earlier version of this bill were estimated to raise $515 billion in revenue.

While rollbacks are better than keeping these tax credits fully intact, the bill falls woefully short by not repealing the IRA completely.

Signed into law in 2022, the IRA extended tax credits for green energy resources and created new ones for emerging technologies. The slew of new credits and subsidies was originally expected to cost $271 billionover 10 years. Within a year of its passage, the price tag of these provisions climbed to $536 billion and now stands at $1.2 trillion over 10 years. A recent analysis from the Cato Institute estimates that these subsidies could cost $1.97 trillion through 2034 and reach $4.67 trillion by 2050. One of the drivers of projected cost increases is the IRA's technology-neutral tax credits that have no sunset date and would only expire when a 75 percent reduction (compared to 2022 levels) in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the electricity sector is achieved.

For some climate hawks, these costs may be a small price to pay for tackling climate change. But it's important to note that the IRA, which was heralded as "the boldest climate bill ever" when it was passed, has done a poor job at reducing GHG emissions.

"I don't think you could throw that much money at industry and have nothing happen, but the latest emission data shows a lot less [emission reduction] than the initially projected benefit," Philip Rossetti, senior fellow at the R Street Institute, tells Reason. Rossetti says it may take "some time" before hard numbers are available, but it's "fair to say that the subsidies are under performing as a climate policy."

While the IRA has failed as a climate policy, it has succeeded as a wealth transfer program. Wealthy households have been the largest beneficiaries of the bill's tax credits for energy efficiency and electric vehicles. Meanwhile, over 90 percent of claimed green energy tax credits have gone to corporations with annual revenue of $1 billion or more.

There are few things as permanent as a federal subsidy. By keeping these tax credits alive, Congress is giving industry groups a three-year runway to ramp up their lobbying efforts and keep these provisions in place. As the Cato Institute's Adam Michel and Joshua L. Loucks write, "Subsidy-dependent industries don't need a long offramp; they need a clear signal that the taxpayer-funded gravy train is over."

With the bill now moving to the Senate, the House's accelerated rollback might be the closest thing we see to a full repeal of the IRA. Energy lobbyists have begun to plead their case and several Republicans have called for a "targeted" approach to IRA reform. Others have saidthe House's cuts to green energy tax credits won't work.

This article is why I hate the Congress liars

https://reason.com/2025/05/22/congress-is-giving-energy-lobbyists-a-3-year-window-to-keep-up-to-2-trillion-in-subsidies/

Senate GOP preps for ‘one big, beautiful’ rewrite

Just hours after House passage, senators are already talking about big changes.

JORDAIN CARNEY

05/22/2025, 1:04PM

Senate Republicans are vowing they will make changes to President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” after it passed the House early Thursday morning.

While the end product is likely to contain sweeping areas of overlap with the proposal negotiated by Speaker Mike Johnson,GOP senators made clear Thursday that the House bill can’t pass without major changes. Some of the member demands are contradictory, with some fiscal hawks demanding beefed-up spending reductionswhile others want softening of the House’s Medicaid language and to preserve more green-energy.

“I’m hoping now we’ll actually start looking at reality,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).“I know everybody wants to go to Disney World, but we just can’t afford it.”

Johnson batted down the idea that he would fold under arm-twisting from Trump — much as his House counterparts did. “Listen, in the House, President Trump can threaten to primary [holdouts], and those guys want to keep their seats. I understand the pressure. Can’t pressure me that way.”

Johnson said there are sufficient votes to block the bill if his party doesn’t bend in his direction on spending reductions, including setting up a bicameral process for going “line by line” to find a total of roughly $6.5 trillion in cuts over the coming decade. (Is this a play and both parties are different actors? Did Trump know the house had no fiscal discipline?)

One of the Republicans he believes is in his corner — Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) — said Thursday that while he supports the party’s tax agenda,he cannot support the bill if it includes a debt ceiling hike. Republicans want to use the party-line bill to increase the debt ceiling until after the 2026 election without having to give concessions to Democrats.

“I think if you’re going to raise the debt ceiling $4 or $5 trillion, it indicates that the project afoot isn’t going to fix the deficit at all,”Paul said. “Once Republicans vote for this, Republicans are going to own the deficit.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune can lose three GOP senators and still get the party-line bill — which ties a tax overhaul together with new border, defense and energy spending — through the chamber. Most Republicans view Paul as a hard “no” and acknowledge Johnson might be, as well.

Thune wants to get the bill through the Senate by July 4, saying Thursday that holiday deadline is the “goal and the aspiration” but will depend on “what does it take to get to 51?”

He added that he spoke to Trump after the House bill passed just hours before. “The president,” he said, is “very happy” and “ready to go to work with the Senate.”

In addition to the fiscal hawks, Thune is facing a clutch of senators who have concerns about the House’s language on a range of issues,including changes to Medicaid, the cancellation of green-energy tax credits and pushing some food-aid costs onto states.

Trump spoke to one of the potential holdouts — Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) — Wednesday night, though their conversation also touched on unrelated issues like disaster aid. Two others — Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said they expected significant changes.

“There are some things that we want to address on the Medicaid side that I think are challenging for us in Alaska,” Murkowski said.

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/05/22/congress/trump-bill-senate-rewrite-00365731

Anonymous ID: 264b9a May 22, 2025, 6:15 p.m. No.23070646 🗄️.is 🔗kun >>0668

HHS Freezes $60 Million in Federal Grants to Harvard in Third Round of Trump Cuts

By Dhruv T. Patel and Grace E. Yoon, Crimson Staff Writers

3 days ago

The United States Department of Health and Human Services cut anadditional $60 million in multi-year grants to Harvard over allegations of campus antisemitism and racial discrimination on Monday— the Trump administration’s third funding cut to Harvard in the last two months.

The cut, which was announced by the agency on X late Monday evening and applies only to HHS-sponsored grants, comes in addition to the $450 million cut announced last week and the $2.2 billion cut announced last month by eight federal agencies.

In a post on X announcing the cut, the HHS took aim at Harvard’s “continued failure to address anti-Semitic harassment and race discrimination.”

“HHS is taking decisive action to uphold civil rights in higher education,” the agency wrote.

A Harvard spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment to confirm whether the University received the letter. Harvard has sued the Trump administration over the first two funding cuts, alleging they overstepped the bounds of agency authority, violated the First Amendment, and retaliated against Harvard for defending its institutional independence.

The Monday cut is the latest salvo that the administration has launched against Harvard. After Harvard President Alan M. Garber ’76 issued a stern rebuke of the Trump administration’s demands in April, the White House responded with threats to strip Harvard’s tax-exempt status, slash research funding, and impose punitive visa restrictions on international students. And Secretary of Education Linda McMahon announced earlier this month that Harvard would no longer be eligible to receive federal grants.

Since the first funding cut, which focused squarely on campus antisemitism, the $450 million and $60 million cuts have also expanded the scope of the criticism to emphasize claims of racial discrimination as well. A letter announcing the $450 million cut cited allegations that Harvard and the Harvard Law Review discriminated againstwhite people on campus.

The Trump administration has consistently advocated for “merit-based” hiring and admissions— seemingly a demand for Harvard to scrub any consideration of race from its procedures — and launched an investigation into Harvard’s hiring practices that cited increased racial diversity among faculty as a cause for suspicion.

HHS’ $60 million cut also comes just four days after Garber announced Harvard’s central administration would distribute cash from a $250 million fund for research projects affected by stop-work orders issued by the Trump administration.In a message to Harvard affiliates announcing the pool of funds, Garber acknowledged that Harvard could not “absorb the entire cost” of the funding cuts.(Don’t practice racism this could go away.)

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/5/20/hhs-60-million-cut/

I don’t know what is wrong with them, he threatened it for many years, and they didn’t think he’d do in his last term.When Trump warns you, listen next time!

Watters: Liberal media loves denying the truth

Fox News host Jesse Watters exposes the liberals siding with Wednesday night's suspect in the murder of a Jewish couple on 'Jesse Watters Primetime. (Jews used to support Democrat leftists, what is the party doing? Are they trying to alienate their Jewish donors? Strange strategy.)