Buddy Carter, GOP rep from Georgia, on solar power, EVs, and nuclear

Rep. Buddy Carter, the Republican congressman for Georgia's 1st congressional district, joined Canary Media's Julian Spector for an interview on stage on June 4 at our Canary Live event in Washington, D.C. Listen to the audio or read the transcript, which has been edited for clarity and brevity.
Julian Spector: Congressman Buddy Carter from Georgia — there he is. Let's give him a warm Canary Media welcome.
It's an honor to have you here. We're just kicking off our first live event in Washington, D.C. Everyone is into the energy scene — the technologies and the policies. I wanted to start by saying why we were so excited to have you here. You're the Republican congressman from Georgia's 1st district.
Buddy Carter: Thank you! My district is around Savannah. You've got the entire coast of pristine coastline and two major seaports: the Port of Savannah and No. 3 container port in the country, and the Port of Brunswick, the No. 1 roll-on, roll-off port in the country. A lot of military presence, Fort Stewart, Kings Bay, two Coast Guard stations. A strong forestry presence, a strong ag presence.
Spector: And recently, about an $8 billion EV factory, right?
Carter: Yes, a $7.6 billion investment by Hyundai, the largest single economic development project in the history of our state. And we're very, very proud of that.
As I say, $7.6 billion to generate about 8,500 jobs — it will probably be that much more investment and probably many more jobs and ancillary businesses. We're very excited about it. They've already geared up and have announced that they're even going to expand before they even got started.
Spector: And I think it's making the Ioniq 5 and Ioniq 9. So if you have one of those cars, it'll come from your district.
I'm from D.C., and I ended up going to college down in the South. (Go Blue Devils, figure that one out.) But sometimes, I think D.C. folks, we don't always keep up with all the things happening in the South. There's really a cluster of innovation and factories there. I was wondering if you could say, what has clean energy meant to the economy of Georgia, both in the manufacturing side and the installation of solar and battery projects?
Carter: First of all, Georgia is the No. 7 state in the nation in solar energy. We're very proud of that. We've worked very diligently to make that happen. I like to say in Georgia, we've got a lot of pine trees, a lot of sunshine, a lot of pretty girls. We've got a lot to be proud of, and certainly sunshine and solar is very important.
I also would be remiss if I did not mention the fact that Georgia is the first state to have nuclear reactors in the last 30 years — Plant Vogtle.
I'm a nuclear fan. Plant Vogtle is the largest clean energy plant in the United States. We added two reactors, reactors 3 and 4 at Plant Vogtle. And now, in addition to Plant Vogtle, Plant Hatch, which is in my district, is delivering about 33% of the energy in the state of Georgia right now. I think that's very significant.
Spector: That's a lot more than the nation as a whole. It's about 18% or 19% of overall U.S. generation. So you're above the national average there.
Carter: We talk a lot about the small [modular] reactors, SMRs, and we're excited about them, too. But I think it's significant to note that Southern Co. has said that their next investment is going to be another [AP1000]; they like the big reactors. I thought that was pretty significant for them to say that.
We look forward to that because nuclear power is a big part of what we're doing. We also have battery plants in the state of Georgia.
Georgia, for 11 years in a row, has been the No. 1 state in which to do business, and there's a reason for that. We are under good leadership from our governor, from our legislature. We create a pro-business environment, but we've also had the availability and accessibility and affordability of energy, which is very important.
Now let's talk about affordability, because I think that's an important thing to talk about as well. Yes, nuclear power is more expensive at this point, but I think it's important to note that the difference between the cost of reactor No. 3 and reactor No. 4 was significant.
We learned a lot of things when we built reactor No. 3 that we were able to apply to reactor No. 4 that saved a lot of money.
Spector: So for full journalistic duty, there was quite a bit of going over budget on the total Vogtle project, but that's an interesting point about bringing the overruns down with the learning.
Speaking of the cost of energy, I think we can't ignore there's a little something going on in Washington this week, which is this big, beautiful budget. I was looking back over a letter you wrote with some of your colleagues from the Conservative Climate Caucus last summer, basically saying that prematurely repealing the energy tax credits, particularly those used to justify investments that already broke ground, could undermine private investment and stop development that's already ongoing. And I think that applies both to factories that are trying to make things in America, and power plants, solar plants.
So, you voted for the budget bill. What happened between the argument you were making in that letter last summer and the bill that you ultimately voted for?
Carter: Let's stay focused on what we're trying to do with one big, beautiful bill. If we do not pass that, Americans will be looking at the largest tax increase they've ever seen.
In fact, I've signed three letters saying that we should not take a sledgehammer to the Inflation Reduction Act. Instead, we should take a scalpel, because I've always said, and I continue to say, if these policies result in stabilizing our supply chain or if they result in domestic manufacturing, why wouldn't we look at them? Why wouldn't we keep them? That's Republican priorities anyway.
I want to share a quick story with you because I thought it was somewhat humorous. I was calling up a supporter. And, you know, I'm running statewide. I should have mentioned that I'm running for U.S. Senate in the next election.
I called up a potential supporter, and he was saying, 'Well, you signed that letter and you're not supporting the president because you're not doing away with the IRA.'
And I said, 'Well, wait a minute now, why would we?'
He responded: 'Well, if you want to keep some of those things, you ought to just do away with the IRA and then bring them back. So what's the difference?'
Give me a break. Republican ideas, Democratic ideas. We do it all the time — we take things that the Democrats did, we claim them to be ours, and they do the same thing. They're good ideas, and I think it's important to note that. Some of these things did result in stabilizing the supply chain and in domestic manufacturing. Why wouldn't we keep those things? Why wouldn't we look at that? The Republicans want that just as much as the Democrats.
Now, having said that, let me make one thing clear: The decision to make the $7.6 billion investment and to build that plant was made pre-IRA.
Now, would they like to have the tax credits? Of course they would; any business would. But I think it is significant that we understand that decision was made. Let me assure you, as I have assured them, they made a wise decision. There's going to be a market for EVs.
I'm one who strongly believes that the government shouldn't be choosing winners and losers, because when the government chooses winners and losers, consumers lose. There's going to be a market for EVs. It may not be in rural South Georgia, but eventually it will. I can assure you, in the urban areas, Hyundai is going to do great.
Spector: If the current budget gets enacted, it almost guarantees a lower demand for their product. Are you worried about the jobs in your district, or any kind of follow-on impacts from that?
Carter: I'm not naive enough to believe that it's not going to have some impact. But as I said, the decision that Hyundai made was before those tax credits were there. I think they're going to feel like they made a very wise decision in building this plant, making this investment.
I think it ought to be market-driven. I don't think the government should be telling people what kind of car to be driving or what kind of appliance you're going to be using. I just don't think that's the role of the government.
Spector: Do you see yourself having any role in trying to talk to your Senate colleagues and see if some of these credits could get back in on the Senate side in a way that ends up in the final package? Are you actively talking to anybody about that or trying to make that case?
Carter: Yes, yes. I do. I signed all three letters, and I didn't just sign them — I meant it. I truly feel that way. So yes, I have been talking to some of our Senate colleagues, although I quite honestly don't know how much difference it makes. I'm talking to these guys and trying to join them. I don't know why.
The main thing is we've got to get these tax cuts extended. We have to make sure that we don't have the largest tax increase in the history of the world.
We have companies coming into our office every day. They need stability. They need certainty in order to make investments. I understand that — I was in business for myself for 32 years. I ran three independent retail pharmacies — talk about swimming with sharks, I was up against the big boys.
The government's been run in the past few decades by executive orders. We've got to get away from that. Whether you're Republican or Democrat, you ought to feel, if you're a member of Congress, that the legislative branch has got to assert themselves and their authority as our forefathers intended for it to be.
I am trying to encourage some of these senators and, even still, some House members, because it's going to come back to us.
I'm not going to mislead you. It's a heavy lift. I think the biggest hurdle we're trying to get over is in the Senate, and some of those who, first of all, feel like, you know, we didn't address the debt. That's not what we were doing this for. Does it need to be addressed? Obviously. I'm on the budget committee. Obviously it needs to be addressed. And don't think that we can't do another reconciliation package. We can do another one, and I would submit to you that we need to do a budget reconciliation package for debt reduction.
I'm chair of the health subcommittee. I'm a pharmacist by profession. Medicaid, Medicare — we need reforms in that, but not here. Keep the main thing the main thing, and the main thing is to get these tax cuts extended, because if we don't, the impact it's going to have on our economy is going to be devastating.
Spector: And then another kind of impact that's been flagged recently in a tweet from Tesla's Elon Musk and his electric car company: It's about the changes to tax credits, jeopardizing the ability to build the new power production we need for the AI boom.
After decades of pretty much flat demand for electricity, we're now seeing pretty mind-blowing expectations of how much is going to be needed in the next few years. Solar is the thing that's getting built the most across the country right now, and if the credits sort of shake up the investment landscape there, they're saying it could jeopardize 60 gigawatts of annual deployment of clean energy.
Do you think your colleagues are grappling with that, a possibility that these cuts might actually undermine the president's AI agenda and the sort of economic vitality that's powered by electricity?
Carter: Look, I don't care what economic sector you're talking about. In Congress right now, the buzz at the Capitol is AI. Every committee is having a hearing on AI. Health subcommittee, we are having hearings on AI, and so is natural resources. Everything is AI right now.
We understand now, to your point, the demand for energy. That's why I'm an all-of-the-above type energy strategist, because we are going to need every electron we can get. We all know how much data centers in AI are going to demand.
To your point, yes, we're going to need solar, we're going to need wind, we're going to need nuclear and its baseload reliability. Yes, we're going to need it. We're going to need every available electron.
All of you understand how important this is. We cannot afford to lose this race to China. We cannot afford to lose the AI race to China. If we do, then God help us, and China's trying to do it.
Spector: Setting aside the current budget battle, are there any specific policies you would want to propose to ensure the U.S. can meet its electricity needs for AI and all the new factories? Are there any specific policies you'd like to pass once the budget discussions get taken care of?
Carter: Absolutely. In the Energy and Commerce Committee, we're working on a number of different policies. I mentioned that I've signed three letters. The last letter was with [Rep.] Dan Newhouse on nuclear energy.
We had this tragedy in Fukushima, and I was able to go to Japan and see what happened there. Europe's kind of abandoned nuclear energy, but I think they're going back now. I know France, thank goodness, didn't abandon it; they're providing it for everyone. Nuclear is going to be a big part of it. We're going to need everything. I am encouraging my colleagues to look at everything.
Spector: I've been seeing in my reporting a lot of companies that used to talk a lot about climate, and nonprofits, NGOs, pulling back from using the word climate in today's Washington. You're still a leader of the Conservative Climate Caucus. So I wonder, can you get traction in President Trump's Washington, using that word climate? Does that generate some pushback from your colleagues? Or do you think it's important to keep using that language?
Carter: I know that some of you are not going to believe this, but Republicans are pro-environment. Being pro-growth and pro-environment are not mutually exclusive. You can be both, and we are both.
I have the honor and privilege of representing, as I said, the coast of Georgia. It's where I've lived all my life and where I intend to live the rest of my life. Some of my fondest memories growing up are going fishing with my dad. I want my sons, I want my grandchildren, to have that same opportunity to enjoy those memories.
I love the environment. I'm not going to ever do anything intentionally to hurt the environment. I tell you, environmentalists are tough — you can be with 99.9% of the time, but that 0.1% of the time you're not with them, oh boy, they will persecute you.
My point is, it is important for us as Republicans to acknowledge, and I do believe. I believe in climate change. I believe that man has an impact on the climate and that we need to address it.
I believe that we should be looking toward cleaner energy and renewable energy. I do believe that. That's why I'm cochair of the Conservative Climate Caucus. That's why I work. That's why I signed those three letters. That's why I'm working diligently on this. I want us to do that, but at the same time, we've got to be careful not to cut our nose off in spite of our face. It needs to be an approach that is sensible and logical.
Spector: Do you have any particular priorities regarding some sort of permitting reform or grid interconnection reform? Any dream goals you'd want to work on in the next session?
Carter: You know, I don't care what sector of our economy you're talking about, whether you're talking about health care, whether you're talking about communications technology, or whether you're talking about energy. When people and companies come into my office, it is always the same — permitting regulations, crushing us. And that's what we've got to address.
I'll give you an example. I think this is relevant. As I said, I represent the city of Savannah. The Savannah Harbor expansion project, where we deepened our harbor from 42 feet to 47 feet in order to accommodate the bigger ships that are coming through — that project was finished in March of 2022.
The permitting — this is true — the permitting for that project started in 1996.
In that period of time, China has started and completed three new ports. The point I'm trying to make here: We can do a better job than this without endangering our environment, and we need to do a better job. It doesn't matter what part of our economy you're talking about, there are people coming to my office and saying permitting is killing us.
Spector: Is there any other message you'd like to leave our crowd with here? You know, on the future of clean energy in America?
Carter: Well, again, I'm proud of the state of Georgia. I'm proud of what we've done. We've been a pro-business state, and again, we've led in clean energy, nuclear energy, solar energy, all of it. I know some of y'all don't like biomass, but I happen to like it, and if you look at the entire cycle, I think you agree that biomass, too, is something we should be looking at. And as I mentioned before, we've got a lot of pine trees in Georgia, so biomass is really big too.
Spector: Congressman, thank you for being here at Canary Live. Let's give him a show of appreciation. Thank you and have a great rest of your week.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

34 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Mysterious poll may shape Royals' stadium choice. No one will say where it came from

As Missouri lawmakers weighed an incentives package to keep the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals inside state lines, speculation about polling related to the Royals and Clay County circulated throughout the state Capitol. Top lawmakers involved in the debate, from the Republican bill sponsor to the top Democrat in the state House, have ascribed significance to the mysterious poll, mentioning its existence in legislative hearings, interviews and a press conference over the past several weeks. Any type of polling in Missouri could hold significant weight as the Royals decide whether to stay in the state or move to Kansas. The incentives plan in Missouri requires commitments from local governments and a poll in Clay County could help the team determine whether voters would support some form of tax increase to fund a new stadium in the Northland. Kansas City-area officials contacted by The Star say they heard the polling showed positive results for the likelihood of Clay County voters supporting a new Royals stadium in North Kansas City. But most who spoke with The Star expressed some level of skepticism about it. In interviews, most officials said that they have not actually seen the alleged poll, its full results or who paid for it. While very little has been shared publicly, nearly every official who spoke with The Star, from state lawmakers to a Kansas City councilman to a Clay County commissioner, said they had either heard of it or seen a small portion of its results. Clay County Commissioner Scott Wagner said in an interview that he received the top line results of the poll. However, he would not say who shared it with him, saying only that it didn't come from the Royals and that the poll was not commissioned by the county. 'The top line results that have been shared with us suggest that Clay Countians are very open to the Royals coming,' Wagner said, adding that he hasn't seen finer details about the poll. 'But, as you know, the devil's in the details. And, as was witnessed last year, the details can make or break a question like that.' Revelations about the mysterious poll come after Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe signed legislation that would allow the state to offer incentives to help pay for up to 50% of new stadiums for the Chiefs and Royals. But neither team has committed to staying amid a competing offer from Kansas that would potentially pay for up to 70% of new stadiums across the state line. The lack of firm commitment will likely put pressure on officials in Kansas City, Jackson County and Clay County to put together additional funding packages for the teams. The required local commitment in the Missouri plan would likely come in the form of a local tax vote, just more than a year after Jackson County voters rejected a similar tax. Rep. Chris Brown, a Kansas City Republican who handled the Missouri bill in the House, was also one of the officials who said he had heard about the poll. Brown, who hails from Clay County, said he would love to see the Royals move to the Northland. 'I have heard that it has been done. I heard that it was favorable,' Brown said. 'I would like to think that is something that people would not just imagine or put that out there, you know, without it being based in some sort of reality.' Brown said he heard that Axiom Strategies, a political campaign firm owned by GOP consultant Jeff Roe, conducted the poll. Representatives from Roe's firm did not respond to requests for comment for this story, but Axiom's involvement would not come as a major surprise. The firm previously managed the local tax vote campaign for the Royals and Chiefs, The Star previously reported. The teams and the campaign did not go out of their way to make it known that Axiom was involved at the time, either. A spokesperson for the Royals also did not respond to a request for comment about the poll. But others who spoke with The Star had heard about the poll as well. Kansas City Councilman Wes Rogers said he has seen a copy of it, but said it was not given to him. Sen. Kurtis Gregory, a Marshall Republican who sponsored the Missouri funding bill, and Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, a Kansas City Democrat, said they had heard of its existence but have not seen it. 'What I had heard, it (polled) so high that I thought…it was a pretty far stretch, quite frankly,' Nurrenbern said in an interview, adding that she takes every poll with a grain of salt. However, she said that if Clay County decides to put a stadium-funding tax vote on the ballot, 'we can make the case to all of Clay County, northern Clay County as well, that this would be a good investment for our county.' In April, the FOX 4 TV station in Kansas City reported that a Royals poll had been sent out to Clay County residents. While it's unclear if this is the same polling circulating among lawmakers, the station reported that the poll asked if residents would support a half-cent sales tax increase to support a Royals stadium in North Kansas City. If the Royals decide to stay in Missouri, a potential fight over the teams between Kansas City and Clay County could be on the horizon. But, so far, the team has not shared where it would like to build a new stadium. A downtown Kansas City site at Washington Square Park and a spot in North Kansas City in Clay County have both been floated as potential sites in Missouri. But news of a recent real estate deal tied to an Overland Park site in Kansas has also intensified speculation about the Royals' intentions — and their preferred stadium location. It's also unclear when the team plans to make its decision and whether the decision to stay in Missouri would be based on polling in Clay County or Kansas City. Any local tax vote in Missouri would likely come in November at the earliest. The Kansas incentives offer expires at the end of June, which means the team could decide whether to cross state lines by the end of the month. But Kansas could also extend that deadline to give the teams more time to decide. Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas is one of the biggest supporters of the Royals moving downtown. When asked whether Lucas was concerned about the polling in Clay County, his spokesperson said that the mayor's 'focus remains on Kansas City's plan and providing the best option for the Royals in Downtown Kansas City.' 'With Missouri state support now secured, Kansas City will continue its work with the Royals to build a robust and responsible development plan,' the spokesperson, Megan Strickland, said in an email. 'The Mayor is committed to leveraging Kansas City's unique experience in large facility development to create the best venue and district for our community, our taxpayers, our future, and our team.' After Kansas and Missouri approved incentives packages for the Chiefs and Royals, officials who spoke with The Star now say they're largely waiting to see where the teams decide to end up. For Wagner, the Clay County commissioner, Clay County would respond if 'something comes our way.' But, 'we're not driving that ship,' he said, the Royals are. 'I have come to learn that anybody who says they know anything doesn't know anything,' Wagner said. 'Because, at the end of the day, there's only one decision-maker and that is the team.'

Yahoo

an hour ago

• Yahoo

What is the Prenatal Equal Protection Act? New bill would effectively ban abortion in Ohio

(WJW) — On Wednesday, Republican State Reps. Levi Dean and Johnathan Newman are set to introduce a controversial new bill at the Ohio Statehouse that would ban abortion in the Buckeye State. The legislation is called the Prenatal Equal Protection Act, and it aims to extend full legal rights to fetuses from the moment of fertilization. Bagworm outbreak threat growing in Ohio, OSU warns 'We are trying to create a constitutional debate in which we believe the state's constitution would be superseded by the U.S. Constitution,' said pro-life activist Austin Beigel, who helped craft the bill. Beigel, a member of End Abortion Ohio, said the legislation is about ensuring what he sees as equal protection for all life — born or unborn. 'To simply say this is a person in the womb, out of the womb — we know they are human. We believe all people deserve legal protection under the law,' he said. Supporters of the bill argue it is not about politics, but about morality. 'It is not going to permit the killing of innocent human beings, innocent people,' Beigel added. But opponents said the bill defies the will of Ohio voters, who passed a constitutional amendment in 2023 explicitly protecting access to abortion. 'I mean, we knew on Nov. 7, 2023, that there would be plans to undermine the will of the Ohio voter,' said Jordyn Close, deputy director of the Ohio Women's Alliance. Close said she first learned of the proposed legislation last week and was troubled by what she found. 'This bill does not account for any special circumstances. It does not account for any real-life realities for Ohioans who need abortion care,' she said. Baby delivered from brain-dead woman on life support in Georgia The bill argues that Ohio's constitutional amendment legalizing abortion should be considered invalid, claiming it violates the U.S. Constitution's equal-protection clause. But Close believes that argument won't hold up in court. 'Our fantastic legal team and legal scholars will be able to defeat this,' she said. Supporters of the legislation are expected to hold a rally inside the Statehouse from 2:30 to 4 p.m. on Wednesday as the bill is officially filed. Whether the bill gains traction in the legislature remains to be seen, but the fight over abortion rights in Ohio appears far from over. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

New York Post

an hour ago

• New York Post

Gavin Newsom sipped wine at Napa fundraiser while anti-ICE protesters plunged L.A. into chaos

California Gov. Gavin Newsom threw on a pair of sunglasses and sipped wine at a ritzy party at his sun-drenched vineyard earlier this month – just as chaotic, anti-ICE protests kicked off in Los Angeles. The luxe event dubbed 'Vineyard Vibes' was held at the Odette Estate Winery in Napa Valley to raise money for the PlumpJack Foundation, founded by Newsom's sister, on the afternoon of June 7. One witness was appalled that the Democrat was casually enjoying a glass of vino in a V-neck T-shirt and baseball cap the day after his City of Angels started spiraling into violence, with rioters throwing concrete rocks at cops and vandalizing federal buildings. 4 California Gov. Gavin Newsom was spotted at the Odette Estate Winery in Napa Valley as anti-ICE protests kicked off in Los Angeles earlier this month. Obtained by NYPost 4 The governor was dressed casually at the fundraiser, just a day after LA started spiraling into violence. Obtained by NYPost 'I couldn't believe it,' said the source, who photographed Newsom at the wine-tasting event. 'He was just walking around like this was an everyday occurrence.' But more than 400 miles away, downtown Los Angeles was plunging into chaos – rioters were busted for tossing Molotov cocktails at law enforcement while vehicles were set on fire and scrawled with graffiti reading 'KILL ICE' and 'F–K ICE.' The violence, spurred by raids on illegal immigrants by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, reached a point that President Trump called in the National Guard over objections from Newsom, who ripped into the Republican for inflaming the situation. Newsom attended the wine fundraiser for at least 90 minutes, the source said — with Trump sending in the troops later that evening. 4 The 'Vineyard Vibes' event happened on June 7, as one witness there was shocked to see Newsom in a V-neck T-shirt enjoying a glass of wine on the same day protests were breaking out across the City of Angels. AFP via Getty Images The event featured 'contemporary yet sophisticated' wines, live jazz music and local sources pizza and smash burgers. 'It's the perfect kick-off to summer fun,' promotional language stated. 'The fete will take place on the Winery Crushpad, where we'll gather for music, food, conversation, a delicious wine!' A spokesperson for the governor's office made clear Newsom 'proudly attended' the annual fundraiser for the UCSF Cancer 'in honor of his mother who died of breast cancer' at age 55. 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! PlumpJack Foundation is focused on cancer prevention and education and combating the cycle of poverty, according to its website. Newsom co-founded Odette Estate Winery with two other business partners more than a decade ago. Newsom, a possible contender to run for president in 2028, has faced past criticism for being out of touch, including in November 2020 when he was caught attending a swanky dinner party for 12 even as he encouraged California residents not to socialize because of the COVID-19 pandemic. A photo snapped at the time showed him and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, unmasked around the same time he pushed for state guidelines meant to suppress the spread of the disease. 4 A source indicated that Newsom was at the fundraiser for around 90 minutes before troops were later sent by President Trump across the city. REUTERS Newsom apologized for the shocking display of hypocrisy as he faced a firestorm. 'While the First Partner and I followed the restaurant's health protocols and took safety precautions, I should have modeled better behavior and not joined the dinner,' he said in a statement. Newsom and Trump have been battling in court over the commander in chief's authority to control National Guard troops he sent to the liberal West Coast city. Newsom claimed the deployment wasted resources and raised the temperature while Trump insisted he had to take the action to restore order.