Latest news with #GreenNewDeal
The Hill
20 hours ago
- Business
- The Hill
Green energy credits phaseout divides Senate Republicans
How to phase out Biden-era green energy tax credits is emerging as a key flashpoint among Senate Republicans as they seek to advance their version of the 'big, beautiful bill.' The Senate is taking an approach to the credits for climate-friendly energy that is less aggressive than the House but still represents a major rollback of these incentives. Members who have opposed a full repeal of the credits have signaled that the upper chamber's approach still goes too far. But Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has emerged as a leading voice calling for the subsidies to be phased out more quickly. Hawley told reporters this week that solar tax credits cost 'a gob of money.' 'Funding the Green New Deal is like the least conservative thing I could think of to do,' he said. The dynamic sets up a difficult task for leadership, as President Trump has said he hopes to sign the legislation by July 4. The discord also comes amid similar policy differences on Medicaid and federal tax deductions in areas with high state and local taxes. While Hawley, who opposes Medicaid cuts pressed by the right, says the green subsidies should be reduced, lawmakers who have called for leniency said they generally approve of the current approach — but they'd like to see further changes. 'I think that Senator [Mike] Crapo did a really good job, but there's more work to be done,' Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah) told The Hill, referring to the Idaho Republican chair of the Senate Finance Committee. Curtis declined to elaborate. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who, like Curtis, has called for a 'targeted, pragmatic approach' toward the tax credits and not a 'full repeal,' told reporters he was generally pleased with what Senate leaders came up with. 'They've moved substantially in the right direction,' Tillis, who faces a closely watched reelection race next year, said on Wednesday. He added that he expected to see 'a few more adjustments,' particularly in terms of restrictions on energy projects' reliance on China. Meanwhile, West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R) said she's pushing for more flexibility for tax credits for hydrogen energy. Capito, whose state is home to one of several 'hydrogen hubs' set up under the Biden administration, told The Hill Wednesday that she's wants to 'push the dates back' since the bill would require projects to be under construction by the end of this year to qualify for the credit. 'That's a pretty tight timeline,' she said. 'I'm trying to get the date pushed back. I don't know if I'll be successful.' However, she also said that she's not willing to torpedo the entire bill over the issue. 'It's not a hard line for me, but I'm not the only one who has an interest in this,' she said. The disagreements emerging within the Senate GOP come on top of an impending clash with the House, where the conservative Freedom Caucus says it will not accept changes that water down the House-passed cuts to the tax credits. The House version included provisions that were expected to knee-cap access to some credits, particularly for wind and solar, such as language saying projects could only be eligible if they began construction within 60 days of the bill's enactment. The Senate version removed this provision and some others passed by the House, generating pushback among some hardline conservatives. 'They either fix it or they don't have my vote,' Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) told reporters this week. 'The president rightly campaigned on terminating the Green New Scam subsidies. It's destroying our grid. It's subsidizing China.' In the House, a contingent of moderate members were also pushing for leniency on the tax credits, but most of them still lined up to vote for the bill's more dramatic cuts. It's not clear which faction will win out in the Senate. The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act passed by Democrats included hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of tax incentives for climate friendly energy sources including wind, solar and nuclear energy, as well as emerging technologies such as hydrogen and carbon capture. Republicans have set out the goal to repeal these credits — partly as a pay-for for tax cuts and partly due to ideological opposition to them. Democrats have warned that axing the credits would undermine the fight against climate change, contributing more greenhouse gases to a dangerously warming planet. And they argue that fewer renewables on the grid means higher energy prices.
Politico
2 days ago
- Business
- Politico
AI's energy appetite exposes a renewables rift in Washington
With help from Aaron Mak The astronomical energy needs of data centers for the fast-growing artificial intelligence industry have triggered a huge buildup of new power generation across the country — but the role that renewable energy will play in that mix is still very much up for grabs. Tech companies, which have long touted their public commitments to climate goals, have leaned heavily on renewable energy as a way to ramp up their power-hungry data centers without pumping more carbon into the air. In late 2024, U.S. data centers accounted for half of total US corporate clean energy procurement, according to an analysis by S&P Global. Now, however, the energy politics of Washington are changing — and this week's horse trading over the Senate's megabill showed that the tech industry may be shifting its stance. At the center of the debate are the tax credits for solar, wind and energy storage that were part of the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act. Republicans running the reconciliation process on the tax bill in the House and Senate have pledged to eviscerate the subsidies. The tech industry has publicly pressed Congress to preserve those tax incentives — an issue that became urgent when the House tried to gut clean energy subsidies far sooner than the IRA timeline. A group called the Data Center Coalition — whose 38 members include Amazon Web Services, Google, Meta, and Microsoft — sent a letter last month to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, asking him to extend the deadline for building new clean energy facilities with the subsidies. The letter warned that energy constraints could hinder or delay the buildout of data centers vital to U.S. leadership in AI, and that the credits were important to being sure that new power got built. 'We urge you to take a pragmatic approach to ensure we can meet the energy needs of data centers at a pivotal moment for our industry and country,' the letter reads. The Senate did not exactly comply. In its tax proposal, the Senate Finance Committee took a more moderate approach than the House of Representatives, but still issued a plan to wind down subsidies for most renewable energy by 2028. Senate Finance Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) said in a statement that his committee's portion of the megabill 'achieves significant savings by slashing Green New Deal spending and targeting waste, fraud and abuse in spending programs.' Instead of solar and wind tax incentives, the legislation bolstered nuclear and geothermal energy. DFD asked Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Meta — some of the biggest members of the Data Center Coalition — for a response to the Senate's latest moves. None provided an answer. The Data Center Coalition, which initially pressed the Senate to keep the credits, also didn't comment on the Senate's bill. One industry player willing to address it this week was Chris Lehane, chief global affairs officer for OpenAI, whose CEO Sam Altman is an aggressive investor in clean energy. Lehane did not critique the Senate or House moving to sunset off the tax credits. Instead, he focused on permitting delays as an impediment to building new power sources. 'Ultimately … the big challenge in all of this is time,' he said, saying that slow permits were the bigger threat to getting new energy online for data centers. That view dovetails with Republican perspectives on the industry. A senior Senate GOP aide called wind and solar 'mature industries' that no longer need federal support, especially given the high demand for electricity for AI, and said Republicans were more focused on removing permitting hurdles. Climate change used to be a central tenet of tech companies' energy policy. Both Microsoft and Google once said they would be at net-zero or negative carbon emission by 2030, and invested heavily in wind and solar to meet their targets. AWS, Meta, Google and Microsoft did not provide a response on where their climate goals stand right now. OpenAI just agreed to help build data centers in the United Arab Emirates — and the source of energy for those data centers remains unclear. The apparent industry shift is frustrating to some longtime clean-energy advocates. 'Companies like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have increasingly moved toward an 'all-of-the-above' energy strategy,' said Evan Chapman, senior director of policy at the nonprofit Clean Tomorrow. That includes nuclear, gas, geothermal and utility-owned generation — especially as AI workloads strain power systems. The final shape of energy policy in the AI era is still under construction; the reconciliation bill needs a full Senate vote and House approval before it's passed. But one thing is clear: Big Tech's original ask for keeping renewable energy tax credits isn't likely to be heeded. Lehane said OpenAI would be fine under the new policy and had not been planning to use IRA incentives as part of its massive Stargate data center project in the U.S. The company expects some of its early sites to be natural gas and solar powered, but will look to include nuclear and geothermal energy where possible, a spokesperson said. Observers say the tech sector hasn't turned against renewables. But it's not fighting for them, either — suggesting that in 2025 Washington, there's more to be gained from playing ball with Republicans than from sticking their necks out for clean energy. Local news' tech blues As Donald Trump feuds with journalists and cuts funding to public broadcasting, several blue states are scrambling for ways to protect their local newsrooms as they lose revenue to tech companies like Google and Meta. POLITICO's Tyler Katzenberger reports that Democratic legislators from five states – Hawaii, Illinois, New York, Oregon and Washington – are engaged in parallel efforts to get tech companies to compensate news outlets for using their content. These lawmakers fear that aggregating articles and posting them on Google search results and various social media platforms deprives local outlets of revenue. But it's been an uphill battle. Bills in four of those states failed this year, with only Oregon's proposal still alive. Lawmakers who pushed for the failed bills have pledged to try again. The journalism industry has a long history of trying and failing to get help from governments to stanch the bleeding brought on by digital media. In 1980, Washington Post Publisher Katharine Graham lobbied senators to block a proposal from AT&T to develop electronic yellow pages. The company was able to launch the product only a few years later. More recently, Australia and Canada passed laws requiring the likes of Meta to pay outlets for their content, though pushback from the industry has diminished their intended effects. Prosecutors seize millions in cryptocurrency The Trump administration is asking a federal judge to let it keep $225.3 million in seized cryptocurrency allegedly connected to fraud. On Wednesday, the Department of Justice filed a civil forfeiture complaint allowing the government to keep cryptocurrency confiscated during an investigation into an alleged investment fraud scheme. The department believes more than 400 people were tricked into forking over money for what they thought were legitimate cryptocurrency investments. The department conducted the investigation in conjunction with the U.S. Secret Service and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The cryptocurrency seizure is the largest in the history of the Secret Service, which investigates the illicit exploitation of U.S. financial systems. Crooks on the blockchain have been stealing and scamming people out of cryptocurrency since the early years of the technology. By 2018, about 80 percent of initial coin offerings – the first round of token sales for a new cryptocurrency – were fraudulent according to estimates from the digital asset investment bank Satis Group LLC. President Joe Biden tried to rein in these scams, and issue a 2022 executive order directing federal agencies to implement new industry regulations and consumer protections. President Donald Trump repealed that order in January. Initially a skeptic of the technology, he's now become an outspoken booster – loosening crypto restrictions and pushing a law passed on Tuesday that would make it easier to launch stablecoins, or tokens pegged to another asset. post of the day THE FUTURE IN 5 LINKS Stay in touch with the whole team: Aaron Mak (amak@ Mohar Chatterjee (mchatterjee@ Steve Heuser (sheuser@ Nate Robson (nrobson@ and Daniella Cheslow (dcheslow@
The Guardian
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Youth-led Sunrise Movement to launch campaign to ‘villainize big oil' and force climate action
The youth activists who put the Green New Deal on the political map are launching a new campaign to 'villainize big oil' which will push for the industry to pay for climate action so the costs don't fall on ordinary people. Seven years ago, the Sunrise Movement captured headlines when its members stormed then incoming House speaker Nancy Pelosi's office, demanding the rapid phase-out of fossil fuels and creation of good jobs. The movement helped inspire some of Joe Biden's green policies. But under Donald Trump, those moves – and other, decades-old environmental regulations – are under siege. A major reason for that, Sunrise says, is the president's allegiance to oil bosses over ordinary people. 'He takes his orders from big oil billionaires like the ones who funded his campaign,' said Stevie O'Hanlon, co-founder and communications director of the Sunrise Movement. Now, the Sunrise Movement is calling for polluters to foot the bill for climate action and asking down-ballot candidates to do the same. In the lead-up to the 2026 midterm elections, the organization will be rallying young people around the country under the banner 'End the Oligarchy, Save Our Futures'. The campaign will kick off with a virtual call on Wednesday night, which will be streamed at nationwide watch parties and feature California representative Ro Khanna and TV star Hannah Einbender. It will attempt to reframe climate action, which powerful conservatives have long aimed to write off as a 'culture war' issue despite its material repercussions for ordinary people. 'Climate disasters are devastating working people around the country – destroying homes and pushing people into crushing debt. It's far past time that big oil be held accountable,' said Khanna. With the new effort, organizers will try to harness the populist outrage that Sunrise believes helped elect Donald Trump, Aru Shiney-Ajay, Sunrise's executive director, said. 'What we're seeing right now around the country is a deep sense that this system isn't working for us and that it is working for billionaires and rich people,' said Shiney-Ajay. 'The polluters pay frame speaks to that idea that some of the richest companies should help clean up the mess they made, while also undermining Trump on something where he polls the lowest, which is on climate issues.' A focus of the campaign will be passing 'climate superfund' bills – which require fossil fuel companies to pay for climate damage – in statehouses across the country. Vermont and New York last year became the first two states to pass such legislation, and California, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Oregon are considering similar measures. 'We see this as a 50-state campaign,' said O'Hanlon. To obtain its endorsement, Sunrise has since its founding required political candidates to eschew money from oil donors. Now, it will also ask endorsees to support such legislation. Passing 'polluters pay' bills may be a long shot in some states, but Sunrise thinks it has a better chance than other kinds of climate measures, potentially even garnering support from conservatives who are concerned about both corruption and their pocketbooks. The two successful Vermont and New York bills passed with co-sponsorship from Republicans, organizers note. 'We're bringing this message to the people who liked the call for government efficiency that we've seen from Doge and Elon Musk and Trump,' said Ramón Pereira Bonilla, a 24-year-old Sunrise organizer in the flood-prone city of Orlando, Florida. 'We're saying: 'We want to make the government more efficient for taxpayers, save taxpayers money.'' In Florida, activists hope to see lawmakers introduce a bill in the fall or next spring, Pereira Bonilla said, adding that canvassing in the state has already suggested interest from conservatives. In California, where historic fires ravaged Los Angeles earlier this year, advocates are looking to pass a climate superfund proposal before the legislative session ends in September, helping the state pay for infrastructure damage, public health programs and climate resilience measures, said Nico Gardener Serna, 26, of Sunrise's Los Angeles chapter. Sign up to Down to Earth The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential after newsletter promotion 'We've known that fossil fuel extraction has caused the climate crisis for decades,' he said. 'There is a sustained and powerful effort from the community to hold corporations accountable.' Laws in Vermont and New York are facing legal challenges from oil interests, and Trump in April issued an order to 'stop the enforcement' of climate superfund laws. But Sunrise and other activist groups believe they can still succeed. 'When we organize, we can rewrite the rules and build something more fair, more honest and more prepared for the future we deserve,' Cassidy DiPaola, communications director of the Make Polluters Pay campaign, said. Sunrise's new campaign will also aim to re-energize the youth climate protest movement, which advocates say has lost steam in recent years. To do so, it will hold nationwide 'school strikes' like the ones popularized by the young Swedish activist Greta Thunberg, and will also explore using more disruptive nonviolent tactics than they have previously employed. The rallies will aim to build momentum and courage in service of a prospective general strike in 2028, as called for by the United Auto Workers president, Shawn Fain. Students helped kick off historical general strikes, such as that in May 1968 in France, Sunrise notes. In the nearer term, the organization will be looking to next year's midterm elections as a way to fight back against Trump's attacks on climate action, pushing candidates to pledge to support ordinary people over corporate interests and stand up to Trump, Shiney-Ajay said. 'We'll be looking for candidates to talk about climate as the populist, working-class issue that it is,' she said. The campaign could be a wake-up call for Trump, who not only benefits oil bosses but in has also placed them in the White House, said Gardener Serna. 'The billionaires and corporations and fascists from the administration are terrified of communities coming together and standing up for themselves,' he said.
E&E News
06-06-2025
- Business
- E&E News
Unlikely champion notches green energy win in megabill
Republican Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona has for years been trying to pass legislation to boost solar and wind power on public lands, but has met with little success. Now a little-noticed section of the House-passed Republican megabill includes portions of the House Freedom Caucus member's 'Public Land Renewable Energy Development Act.' Specifically, the bill would share revenues from renewable projects with counties and states where the projects are located. The hope is that spreading cash around will make renewables more attractive for local governments. Advertisement 'I'm a guy that's all about all of the above,' Gosar said during an interview this week. 'Arizona's got great solar. We can't turn our back on it.' Despite that enthusiasm, don't expect him to sign on to the Green New Deal just yet. He's more than happy to see renewable energy tax credits get rolled back in the reconciliation package, known formally as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' H.R. 1. 'As long as nobody's getting any subsidies, and everyone's playing fair and square across the board, I think we win,' he said. The Senate is now working on its own version of the budget reconciliation bill, with the hope of getting it to President Donald Trump's desk by July 4. Lawmakers there say they have been eyeing changes to some of the rollbacks House Republicans made to energy tax credits. Under budget reconciliation rules, only a simple majority in both chambers is needed to pass the legislation. Renewable energy backers have had little to cheer about in recent weeks. Aside from some nuclear and renewable fuel provisions, Gosar's language is one of the few green energy wins in the megabill. Still, what's in there now is a slimmed down version of the 'Public Land Renewable Energy Development Act,' reintroduced in March as H.R. 1994. Like many previous iterations over the past half-decade, that proposal includes provisions to speed up permitting and create a fund for conservation efforts, neither of which made it into the megabill. The former wasn't included because of Senate procedural issues, Gosar said. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office did not give a score for Gosar's portion of the megabill, though it seems likely to increase the deficit because money would be steered away from federal coffers. According to text of the House-passed package, 50 percent of bonus bids, rentals, fees, permits and leases for renewable projects would go to states and counties that host such projects, divided evenly between the two. Currently, 100 percent of that money goes to the federal government. The new revenue-sharing arrangement would begin Jan. 1. 'We wanted people to embrace this at the district and state levels,' Gosar said. 'That way, some of the money came back to them. It's what we call 'sniffle money.'' Group support Advocates like the American Clean Power Association have backed Gosar's past efforts, but they've had little to say this time around. Jason Ryan, a spokesperson for ACP, declined comment, though in March, Frank Macchiarola, chief advocacy officer for the group, hailed H.R. 1994 as 'key to harnessing' renewable energy 'to enhance energy security, improve grid reliability, and boost local economies.' The conservative Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, however, said it was 'pleased' to see a version of PLREDA make it into the reconciliation bill. 'It will be a positive driver of energy projects, especially in the West, that are crucial to securing American energy independence and national security interests,' Heather Reams, president of the group, said in a statement. 'Furthermore, we appreciate the preservation of flexibility for states and localities in how to best allocate funds and hope to see similar language come out of the Senate.' According to House Natural Resources testimony from an Interior Department official last July, the Bureau of Land Management under President Joe Biden had permitted renewable energy projects expected to power about 2.4 million homes. The chair of that committee, Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), deemed the revenue-sharing provision a modest win that should have widespread support. 'It is a bipartisan bill, and it is something Gosar was wanting to see in the package,' he said in an interview. Partisan rift It's not exactly bipartisan anymore. Ever since the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021, the main Democratic co-sponsor of the bill, Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) has refused to join with Gosar on the legislation, instead offering his own version each year. Gosar has called the rioters 'peaceful patriots.' Gosar seems to have moved on from all that, though he did have thoughts on Levin's parallel efforts. 'I think when you copy me, I think that's a … how should I say this? Great admiration. My work is pretty good.' Gosar hasn't exactly been trumpeting his legislative victory. In a statement following the House vote on the bill in May, he lauded the legislation's border security and tax provisions, but failed to mention the provision he succeeded in inserting. When asked if that was an oversight, he responded simply, 'Yeah.'
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Musk joins Trump in playing legislative arsonist
For years, congressional Republicans have dealt with a president in Donald Trump who isn't terribly engaged in (or often seemingly aware of) the day-to-day legislative battles – right up until the point he decides to make a splash. Sometimes, they'll gently suggest he might get involved in the process a little earlier. Often, he waits and then just blows up the whole thing, forcing lawmakers to scramble to address his whims. As far back as 2018, I compared Trump to a legislative 'arsonist.' It's a tough enough situation for GOP lawmakers as it is. But now they apparently have two billionaire legislative arsonists leading their movement. Elon Musk on Tuesday afternoon lit into what Trump's calling his 'Big, Beautiful Bill,' which is largely devoted to extending his tax cuts. The bill has tested the tolerance of both fiscal conservatives who are worried about it ballooning the national debt and Republicans who want to protect Medicaid, which the House GOP's version targets for significant cuts. And Musk wasn't content to just express his opposition. He went so far as to call it a 'disgusting abomination' that explodes the debt – contrary to GOP leaders' and the White House's claims. He accused Republicans who support it of knowing better. And he even suggested those who run afoul of him could find themselves targeted in the 2026 election. 'It will massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit to $2.5 trillion (!!!) and burden America citizens with crushingly unsustainable debt,' Musk posted on his social media platform X. He also wrote: 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' While Musk has gently expressed his concerns about Trump's tariffs, broken with some Trump allies on visas for highly skilled workers, and even said he was 'disappointed' by the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' before, this is something else entirely. It's Musk taking his chainsaw to what is likely to be the GOP's most significant legislative effort of the current Congress – and Trump's agenda – out of nowhere. Musk, who left his role as a special government employee just days ago, has a lot at stake as a businessman — something House Speaker Mike Johnson suggested could be behind the Tesla CEO's outburst. 'I know that the [electric vehicle] mandate – very important to him. That is going away, because the government should not be subsidizing these things as part of the Green New Deal. And I know that has an effect on his business. And I lament that,' he said. This is the second time Musk has done something like this. After Trump's election in November, Musk played perhaps the biggest role in abruptly torpedoing a bipartisan bill to prevent a government shutdown. The billionaire did this even as Trump had been keeping his powder dry up until that point. It led plenty to wonder who was really in charge. The Trump team claimed it was aligned with Musk, but why had Musk suddenly taken the lead on this? Musk's missive back then was remarkable for how quickly it marshalled conservative opposition and caused Republican officeholders to respond – often pleadingly. It called to mind the many instances in which Trump suddenly inserted himself into legislative battles at the 11th hour and shook them up. (Indeed, even on that specific bill, Trump decided very late in the process to demand the package include a debt-ceiling increase – a request that came out of left field and left Republicans wondering why he didn't speak up earlier.) But this is different than in December. This time, Republicans have pursued their own bill focused on Trump's tax cuts (rather than a must-pass bill to keep the government open) that is aimed at winning the president's approval. And Trump has praised their efforts. Earlier on Tuesday, he saw fit to go hard after one of the bill's chief GOP critics, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, whose concerns align with Musk's. Trump's push for the bill has created a situation in which there is a much more in-your-face tension between his and Musk's positions than ever before – with no obvious way forward for the MAGA movement. There is plenty to play out with the bill, and virtually nobody thought the House-passed package that Musk was criticizing Tuesday would be the final result. But his fiery rhetoric suggests modest changes around the edges won't be enough for him. Musk's opposition comes at a particularly inopportune time, after House Republicans mustered the votes and Senate Republicans were just starting to take up the issue in earnest. And it makes it a whole lot harder for the GOP to argue this is somehow fiscally responsible. Musk's opposition is also a big deal because it provides a high-profile face to the existing conservative concerns about the cost of the package. A handful of Republicans like Paul, Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and House Freedom Caucus members have been making that case, but none of them come close to Musk's heft. It's not difficult to see this awakening some of what remains of the GOP's recent tea party past. Similar to the December showdown, on Tuesday we saw all kinds of Republicans suddenly feel compelled to reckon with Musk's attack. A few critics and skeptics of the bill doubled down. It remains to be seen how much pull Musk's efforts have with individual senators, given his and DOGE's unpopularity and the fact that he's no longer officially part of the administration. He's also a relative newcomer to conservative politics, and his effort to go at Trump could alienate some of his newfound allies. But polling also shows he retains significant pull within the GOP base; a late-April New York Times/Siena College poll showed 77% of Republicans had a favorable opinion of him, and 44% were 'very favorable.' He has also proven willing to unleash many tens of millions of dollars on political campaigns. It certainly throws a wrench in the GOP's attempts to unify behind Trump's legislative agenda. Republicans already have narrow majorities, especially in the House. But they seemed to be moving past the gridlock that dogged their side during the Biden administration (see: ousting then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy), thanks to the common causes that are loyalty to Trump and their fear of running afoul of him. Now, though, they have two rather unwieldy and unpredictable billionaires with relatively little legislative know-how, huge followings and unsteady whims to worry about. (A case in point: Musk called the package a 'pork-filled Congressional spending bill,' but the reason the bill is expensive isn't earmarks or 'pork,' but rather the tax-cut extension.) And those two figures' goals increasingly appear to be at cross purposes. It was always a somewhat uneasy marriage between Trump and Musk. Musk's whole thing is cutting spending and reining in the federal government; he's basically fashioned himself a throwback to the tea party conservatives of the 2010 era. But that's never been much of a priority for Trump, who talks about cutting spending but rarely makes it a priority. (Even while saying goodbye to Musk last week, Trump decided to talk about abolishing the debt ceiling.) The two seemed to meet in the middle because Musk's efforts to wreck shop with his DOGE cuts overlapped with Trump's efforts to transform the federal government into a more Trump-loyal institution. But DOGE quickly became a liability, and now the two men's relationship is being tested. Musk hasn't been terribly subtle about the fact that he disagrees with much of what Trump is doing. In a CBS News interview that aired Sunday, he suggested he was holding back on saying too much. 'I'm a little stuck in a bind, where I'm like, well, I don't want to, you know, speak up against the administration,' Musk said, 'but I also don't want to take responsibility for everything this administration's doing.' In the course of a few days, Musk decided not just to speak up, but to severely complicate the GOP's legislative prospects. And to the extent he plans to keep wielding his influence like this, the party now needs contend with two huge variables that can suddenly change the calculation at any given time. And it was hard enough with just one.
