Manchin’s ‘no’ vote on Build Back Better bill undercuts Biden’s climate agenda

President Joe Biden’s climate agenda suffered a massive setback Sunday after Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., pulled his support from Democrats’ spending bill, potentially dooming the legislation amid warnings from scientists that the world is running out of time to prevent climate change’s most catastrophic effects.

Manchin’s comments on “Fox News Sunday” put at risk a $555 billion package of tax credits, grants and other policies aimed at lowering greenhouse gas emissions that would rank as the largest clean-energy investment in U.S. history. The legislation’s passage would have helped Biden meet his goal of cutting America’s greenhouse gas emissions in half compared with 2005 levels by 2030.

The senator, who had been the chief Democratic obstacle to the White House’s sweeping policy initiative for nearly six months, said he could not support the bill because of his concerns about inflation, the growing deficit and the need to focus on the omicron coronavirus variant.

Without a reduction of that speed and scale, the United States would fall short of the targets it committed to under the 2015 Paris agreement, potentially locking in a future of increasingly destructive forest fires, deadly floods and droughts. Already, record-breaking hurricanes and fires are testing the federal government’s ability to respond to overlapping disasters.

The administration has already adopted several policies to limit climate pollutants: This week it will tighten mileage standards for cars and light trucks, and it has adopted rules that would curb potent greenhouse gases used in refrigeration and air conditioning. But several analyses have shown that these executive actions will not make deep enough emissions cuts to meet the president’s global climate pledge.

“Without Build Back Better, the 2030 target is certainly still feasible, but it’s going to be a lot harder to reach,” said John Larsen, a director at the Rhodium Group, an independent energy research firm. “In one action, the federal government was going to get halfway there.”

The president and his deputies can still write new regulations to encourage utilities and auto companies to shift away from fossil fuels, while tightening energy efficiency standards, Larsen said, and state actions can also accelerate greenhouse gas reductions. But without the bill’s generous tax incentives and spending to ease the transition, industry groups will be less likely to accept those changes without a fight. And a future administration could unravel these rules more easily than an existing law.

Democrats urged Manchin to return to talks on Sunday, describing their fellow party member in harsh terms and emphasizing that many of the spending bill’s details had been negotiated for months. They said that the legislation would create thousands of jobs in the clean-energy sector and auto manufacturing, and help America compete with China and the European Union.

“Failing to pass Build Back Better condemns us to higher energy prices, fewer jobs and a back seat to those that take action and lead on technology and innovation,” said Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn. Manchin’s position “is downright unpatriotic, and it utterly fails to address the climate crisis,” she said.

In a separate statement Sunday, Manchin countered, “The energy transition my colleagues seek is already well underway in the United States of America.”

Left-leaning environmentalists blamed Manchin for walking away from negotiations. But they also directed their criticism toward Biden and Democratic leaders, who they said had allowed a single senator to hold major legislation hostage.

The bill’s death “isn’t just Joe Manchin’s fault,” said Varshini Prakash, executive director of Sunrise Movement, a youth-led organization fighting to stop climate change. Its failure “is also on Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. They had a moral obligation to play hardball with Joe Manchin, and chose not to.”

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, however, praised Manchin for bucking his party. “I very much appreciate Senator Manchin’s decision not to support Build Back Better, which stems from his understanding of the Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of the bill,” he tweeted.

Manchin signaled that he still could continue negotiating with Biden and other top Democrats on a scaled-back version of the bill in his later statement. But the senator otherwise said he could not “vote to move forward with this mammoth piece of legislation.”

He said the effort would “dramatically reshape our society in a way that leaves our country even more vulnerable to the threats we face,” explaining that the country’s rising debt would complicate its ability to respond to “geopolitical uncertainty.”

Manchin, who earns millions from his family’s waste coal business, earlier this year had succeeded in killing a key piece of the climate proposal—a $150 billion plan to push power companies toward cleaner energy. The senator had also objected to parts of the Build Back Better bill that the oil and gas industry opposed, including measures designed to reduce methane emissions, promote electric cars, and ban new drilling in America’s offshore waters.

Even after the clean-energy program was dropped, the bill’s remaining climate measures would have gone a long way toward accelerating the country’s pivot away from burning fossil fuels.

The bill contained $320 billion in tax credits for producers and buyers of wind, solar and nuclear power. This would have made generating electricity from coal and gas increasingly uneconomical and spurred the construction of new solar arrays and wind turbines across the country.

Other measures would have made it easier to build transmission lines, purchase electric vehicles and expand clean-energy infrastructure. A “green bank” would have made it simpler for a variety of firms to obtain financing.

Homeowners would have benefited from a variety of credits. One that would have cut the cost of installing solar on a residential rooftop by 30%, according to a White House estimate. Others would have made switching from gas or oil-burning appliances to electric heat pumps and water heaters more affordable. About $6 billion would have supported home energy-efficiency retrofits.

Biden also planned to create a Civilian Climate Corps to hire 300,000 young people to restore forests and wetlands, lowering the country’s emissions and guarding against the effects of rising temperatures.

Manchin’s pronouncement Sunday that he “could not” vote for the bill has also jeopardized a provision that would extend benefits for coal miners with black lung disease for another decade, an important issue in West Virginia. If the bill does not pass by the end of the year, funding for those benefits will drop by half.

It remains unclear whether Democrats can pass a stand-alone climate bill next year. Senators vowed to press ahead, but held back from divulging details on whether they would scale back their ambitions to further address Manchin’s concerns.

Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, called on lawmakers not to give up on their efforts to address global warming, despite the fact that Manchin’s support remains critical in the 50-50 Senate.

“The planet is not going to pause its warming process while we sort our politics out. We owe it to future generations to figure out what can pass, and pass it,” Schatz said in a statement. “Despair is not an option.”

And Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm tweeted Sunday afternoon that the administration was not accepting defeat. “This is not over, folks.”

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Story Continues Below

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our updated comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

14 thoughts on “Manchin’s ‘no’ vote on Build Back Better bill undercuts Biden’s climate agenda

  1. Republicans only care about deficits when there is a Democratic president. The impact on the deficit never stopped Republicans from passing a tax cut , especially since their tax cuts are based on the lie that trickle down economics work…

    1. Inflation is close to 10%, more realistically 20-30% annually if you ignore the manipulated basket of goods in the CPI.

  2. Boy, does this article testify to the left-leaning agenda of The Washington Post. You’d think the country was going to collapse the day after this pork-barrel bill fails to pass. (Is Chicken Little the shadow Managing Editor of The Washngton Post?)

    1. Bob, continually blaming the source is just as annoying as (name any NBA player) who continually whines and cries to the referee instead of just being quiet and playing basketball….

  3. Why does this WAPO article continue to perpetuate the lie that “1” senator is holding up this legislation? Is the truth not that “51” votes are killing this legislation? Media is DEAD! I remember when it reported facts and not propaganda.

    1. Republicans wouldn’t vote for a tax cut if the Democrats proposed it. That’s not how they roll. They would rather vote NO than be accused of being a RINO and getting primaried. Their loyalty is to their party, not their country. They don’t have anything to offer but tax cuts for their rich donors and abortion restrictions to keep the evangelical sheep in line.

      I mean, they didn’t vote for the Affordable Care Act and the Democrats fashioned it from one of their own healthcare proposals. Look at how they crucified John McCain for not supporting their “repeal and replace” sham. (Where is the Republican alternative to the ACA, anyway?) Look at who they punished for the insurrection on January 6th – Liz Cheney for not going along with the Big Lie.

      It’s a heck of a time to be a conservative voter with loyalties to the United States of America.

  4. Obviously, this is another IBJ and other media’s one sided approach to try and sway public opinion away from the huge debt we are incurring knowing full well this bill has a $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ that has nothing to do with the preservation of and our responsibility to our planet.

  5. All of these do-gooders on climate change ought to expand their focus to include China. I hear nothing about demanding that polluting country to change.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}