GOP sellouts fight to keep Biden’s Green New Deal cash flowing

The American people overwhelmingly rejected Joe Biden’s presidency. His signature legislative agenda, the Green New Deal, subsidizes inefficient energy sources while driving up costs for affordable, reliable alternatives. This policy enriches a select few at the expense of taxpayers, who essentially fund their own economic suicide. Unfortunately, a group of lukewarm Republicans — whose donors profit from these terrible subsidies — are working to keep them in place.

The Green New Deal should be the first target for repeal through budget reconciliation. Since Republicans hesitate to cut individual welfare programs, eliminating corporate welfare for the most expensive energy scheme in U.S. history is the obvious alternative — especially since it passed through reconciliation in the first place.

Trump should make it clear to Republicans: Undoing Biden’s presidency requires fully dismantling his signature legislative achievement. The green grift must end.

Yet a group of 21 House Republicans, likely backed by others unwilling to go on record, now oppose rolling back these subsidies. Because of course they do.

Without directly mentioning Biden, the legislation, or the fact that these credits amount to corporate welfare rather than “tax incentives,” these Republicans urged Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.) to take a “targeted and pragmatic” approach to tax code changes.

“Countless American companies are utilizing sector-wide energy tax credits — many of which have enjoyed broad congressional support — to invest in domestic energy production and infrastructure for both traditional and renewable sources,” wrote the 21 House members, led by Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.), in a March 9 letter. “Both our constituencies and the energy industry remain concerned about disruptive changes to the nation’s energy tax structure. Many of these credits were enacted over a ten-year period, allowing energy developers to plan with these incentives in mind.”

In simpler terms, they want to preserve massive subsidies for solar, wind, electric vehicles, and “carbon capture,” which could cost up to $1.2 trillion. Knowing these terms carry negative connotations for Trump voters and the president himself, they instead framed their request as support for “energy production,” as if referring to oil, gas, and coal.

“To meet President Trump’s campaign promises of reviving manufacturing and strengthening domestic energy production, we need an all-of-the-above approach,” Garbarino said in an interview. “These credits have helped make that happen.”

An unbalanced strategy

Unlike natural energy sources, which do not rely on government subsidies to serve consumers, solar and wind power cannot survive without them — an admission the industry itself has made. These industries require constant government support while policymakers simultaneously impose burdens on fossil fuels, forcing businesses to adopt unreliable alternatives.

Wind power, in particular, depends on a factor entirely beyond human control — the wind itself. Texas poured billions into subsidizing wind energy and made its grid increasingly reliant on it, only for it to fail when it was needed most during the Great Texas Freeze of 2021. This year, Texas grid operators had to postpone maintenance on power plants to generate more coal and natural gas after wind production dropped by 18% due to low wind conditions in February.

In short, the so-called “all-of-the-above” energy approach is not a balanced strategy. Fossil fuels repeatedly bail out wind and solar when they fall short — but never the other way around.

Far from free money

The push for unreliable energy schemes has become so indefensible that the industry is now shifting its messaging. Instead of emphasizing climate change, it now frames itself as a driver of job creation. In December, Reuters reported that the solar industry had rebranded its pitch to the Trump administration, promoting itself as a “domestic jobs engine that can help meet soaring power demand” while avoiding any mention of climate change.

This strategy aims to lure more Republicans into supporting green energy subsidies. Given the geographic distribution of these projects, about 80% of the subsidies tied to the Green New Deal scam have gone to Republican congressional districts.

But these subsidies are far from free money. Funding them requires taking on more debt, driving inflation, while backing energy schemes that are impractical, environmentally questionable, and a poor use of land.

Climate fascism continues to be a loser for Democrats. In a recent poll, 84% of respondents said the cost of living and inflation mattered more than addressing climate change. This is a winning issue for Republicans — but only if Trump takes a hard stance against RINOs who enable these subsidies.

Courts have already blocked his efforts to terminate them through executive action, meaning only Congress can fully repeal them. Trump should make it clear to Republicans: Undoing Biden’s presidency requires fully dismantling his signature legislative achievement. The green grift must end.