POPULARITY
Categories
82 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
47 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
32 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
39 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
29 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
21 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
25 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
19 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
21 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
23 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
14 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
29 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
25 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
19 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
26 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
17 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
8 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
10 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
23 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
21 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
15 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
14 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
10 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
23 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
11 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
20 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
15 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
12 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
17 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
8 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
23 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
16 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
19 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
11 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
11 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
13 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
19 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
17 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
9 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
11 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
11 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
12 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
9 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
7 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
16 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
16 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
7 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
12 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
12 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
12 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
7 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
13 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
10 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
6 episodes with Inflation Reduction Act
In Citizens Climate Radio's newest installment of our policy series, hosts Elissa Tennant and Dana Nuccitelli dive deep into the latest updates from Capitol Hill. With the Senate Finance Committee's budget proposal now public, they unpack what it means for the clean energy tax credits created by the Inflation Reduction Act. How do the House and Senate versions compare? What would repealing these tax credits cost American households and jobs? What role does energy security—and even AI—play in the clean energy conversation? Elissa and Dana bring clarity to a complex policy moment and offer listeners tangible next steps for action. You'll also hear about upcoming CCL leadership changes, summer conference plans, and two thoughtful listener voicemails—including one from someone who really wants to bring back Energy Star.
In Citizens Climate Radio's latest installment of our policy series, hosts Elissa Tennant and Dana Nuccitelli dive deep into the latest updates from Capitol Hill. With the Senate Finance Committee's budget proposal now public, they unpack what it means for the clean energy tax credits created by the Inflation Reduction Act. How do the House and Senate versions compare? What would repealing these tax credits cost American households and jobs? What role does energy security—and even AI—play in the clean energy conversation? Elissa and Dana bring clarity to a complex policy moment and offer listeners tangible next steps for action. You'll also hear about upcoming CCL leadership changes, summer conference plans, and two thoughtful listener voicemails—including one from someone who really wants to bring back Energy Star.
BloombergNEF’s Derrick Flakoll discusses the outlook for U.S. clean energy development under the House version of Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill.” --- On May 22, the House of Representatives passed its version of what President Trump has dubbed the “Big Beautiful Bill,” a sweeping budget package addressing taxation, federal spending, and the debt ceiling. Now headed to the Senate, a revised version is expected to emerge by early July. The House bill proposes deep funding cuts to programs like Medicaid and extends the Trump-era tax cuts from 2017. For the clean energy sector, however, the most consequential provisions are those targeting the Inflation Reduction Act. As written, the legislation would significantly curtail tax credits for renewable energy projects and the domestic manufacturing base that supports them. Incentives for electric vehicles and EV charging infrastructure, as well as battery storage, hydrogen, and nuclear power would also be sharply reduced or eliminated altogether. Derrick Flakoll, U.S. Policy Expert at BloombergNEF, examines what this could mean for the future of clean energy in the United States. BloombergNEF recently released an analysis projecting the impacts of the House bill on clean energy growth and investment. Flakoll outlines the report’s findings, including the resilience of clean energy markets without IRA tax credits, which sectors face the greatest risks, and how the proposed “Foreign Entity of Concern” provisions could further complicate project development. He also considers how the Senate might alter the legislation and whether any of the IRA’s clean energy incentives are likely to remain intact. Derrick Flakoll is Policy Expert for the United States and Canada at BloombergNEF Related Content: Has Europe’s Emissions Trading Scheme Taken Away a Country’s Ability to Reduce Emissions? https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/research/publications/has-europes-emissions-trading-scheme-taken-away-a-countrys-ability-to-reduce-emissions/ Can California’s Emissions Market Survive Past 2030 (Podcast) https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/commentary/podcast/can-californias-emissions-market-survive-past-2030/ Energy Policy Now is produced by The Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania. For all things energy policy, visit kleinmanenergy.upenn.eduSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
This month, Dana Nuccitelli, CCL's Research Manager, breaks down why protecting the Inflation Reduction Act's clean energy tax credits is a huge opportunity for America. Losing these tax credits would have a serious impact on America's climate progress. Keeping these credits in place means lower energy bills, more clean power, greater energy security, and hundreds of thousands of good jobs across the country. We're telling Congress: Keep these tax credits intact!
On June 4, at a Canary Media event in Washington, DC, I sat down with Senator Martin Heinrich to dissect the GOP's so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” — a sledgehammer aimed at the Inflation Reduction Act, public-lands protections, and US science. We talk about the handful of Republican votes that could still save key tax credits, why bipartisan permitting reform isn't dead yet, and how the bill's self-inflicted grid squeeze would jack up energy prices right when AI is poised to spike demand. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.volts.wtf/subscribe
Today on Inevitable, we're joined by three guests to focus on the clean energy tax provisions currently at risk in the Congressional budget reconciliation process—what's being called the One Big Beautiful Bill. This is our second episode on this topic this week. Our guests are Jeremy Harrell, CEO at the right-of-center clean energy policy firm ClearPath; Spencer Nelson, Director of Federal Affairs at Form Energy; and Vikrum Aiyer, Head of Global Public Policy and External Affairs at Heirloom.The goal of this conversation is to get to the root of the proposed changes in the legislation passed by the House and now under consideration in the Senate. We also explore which amendments are on the table and how those of us working in climate and energy innovation can help influence the outcome.In this episode, we cover: [01:06] Why this bill matters for climate tech[03:19] Jeremy's background in conservative energy policy[04:08] Spencer on Form's long-duration batteries[05:40] Vikrum explains Heirloom's DAC technology[08:44] What the reconciliation process actually means[13:42] Why the FEOC rule could block progress[17:41] Why startups need credit transferability[25:01] 60-day window threatens new projects[27:36] What's at stake for solar and storage[31:32] Energy cost risks if credits vanish[35:42] How founders and VCs can take action[41:56] Tips for contacting your senator directlyEpisode recorded on June 6, 2025 (Published on June 12, 2025) Enjoyed this episode? Please leave us a review! Share feedback or suggest future topics and guests at info@mcj.vc.Connect with MCJ:Cody Simms on LinkedInVisit mcj.vcSubscribe to the MCJ Newsletter*Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant
Share your Field Stories!Welcome back to Environmental Professionals Radio, Connecting the Environmental Professionals Community Through Conversation, with your hosts Laura Thorne and Nic Frederick! On today's episode, we talk with Chris Moyer, founder and president of Echo Communications Advisors about Climate Policy, Entrepreneurship, and Triathlons. Read his full bio below.Help us continue to create great content! If you'd like to sponsor a future episode hit the support podcast button or visit www.environmentalprofessionalsradio.com/sponsor-form Showtimes: 1:52 - Can getting fired be a good thing?11:07 - Interview with Chris Moyer begins 16:36 - Communications in the Climate Space29:10- Working with Clients 38:09 - Field Notes with Chris!Please be sure to ✔️subscribe, ⭐rate and ✍review. This podcast is produced by the National Association of Environmental Professions (NAEP). Check out all the NAEP has to offer at NAEP.org.Connect with Chris Moyer at https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrismoyerecho/Guest Bio:Chris has spent nearly two decades advising high-profile leaders and shaping federal and state policies through strategic communications.With deep experience across the electoral, legislative, and regulatory landscape, Chris has advised top-tier presidential, U.S. Senate, and gubernatorial campaigns advancing forward-thinking climate policies. He has worked with state attorneys general fighting harmful federal climate rollbacks and supported advocacy organizations accelerating the transition away from fossil fuels.Chris served as a communications advisor to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, helping to communicate about the implementation of more than $90 billion in renewable energy programs. He has also guided clients seeking inclusion of their priority policies in major federal climate legislation, including the Inflation Reduction Act, and led strategic communications efforts that helped secure a highly competitive $5 billion EPA grant.Chris has worked for three U.S. Senators, most recently leading communications for Senator Cory Booker's presidential campaign in New Hampshire before launching Echo Communications Advisors, formerly Moyer Strategies, in 2020. Chris was named one of Washingtonian's 500 Most Influential People of 2025 for shaping climate and environment policy. His insights on climate and energy policy developments have been featured in Politico, Axios, Bloomberg, E&E News, Heatmap News, Reuters, Inside Climate News, and elsewhere.Music CreditsIntro: Givin Me Eyes by Grace MesaOutro: Never Ending Soul Groove by Mattijs MullerSupport the showThanks for listening! A new episode drops every Friday. Like, share, subscribe, and/or sponsor to help support the continuation of the show. You can find us on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and all your favorite podcast players.
Marjorie Taylor Greene's revelation that she voted for something she's dead-set against is just another in a long line of self-inflicted face-plants by MAGA. The Trump-backed 'One Big Beautiful Bill' wouldn't have passed out ot the House were it not for her vote, so now she and other Republicans and Democrats against a ten-year moratorium on state A.I. regulations are scrambling to try and undo that damage. But wait - there's more.'Fearless leader' has such seething rage-hatred at the man who defeated him in 2020 that he and MAGA are doing all they can do undo green energy initiatives in the Inflation Reduction Act, but many of those initiatives led to (or are - or were - leading to) manufacturing jobs in red states and counties. Say all you want (and we do) about Governor Brian Kemp in Georgia, but the clear delineation between he and MAGA is he knows the next American industrial revolution will be fueled by green energy, and the results keep revealing themselves in his state. That's if A.I. doesn't get us all killed like in some 'Terminator' flick.
In this Vital Health Podcast, host Duane Schulthess speaks with Jocelyn Ulrich, Vice President of Policy and Research at PhRMA, to discuss the far-reaching implications of current U.S. drug pricing and reimbursement policies. With a unique journey from opera stages to Senate testimony, Ulrich brings both strategic acumen and firsthand experience in navigating complex policy terrain. The conversation explores PBM consolidation, the fallout from the Inflation Reduction Act, vertical integration in biosimilars, and looming tariff threats - all through the lens of innovation, patient access, and economic resilience. Key Topics PBM Consolidation Concerns: Three PBMs now control 80% of U.S. prescriptions, raising red flags over patient steering, inflated costs, and limited access. IRA's Small-Molecule Penalty: The Inflation Reduction Act's nine-year price-setting for pills versus thirteen for biologics is shrinking investment in elderly-targeted therapies. Vertical Integration in Biosimilars: Insurers and PBMs are now owning biosimilars and pharmacies, limiting patient options and delaying uptake of lower-cost treatments. Tariff Risks and U.S. Manufacturing: Proposed pharmaceutical tariffs could undermine domestic production despite the sector’s significant economic footprint and current exemptions. Rebuilding Innovation Incentives: From the EPIC Act to patient-first rebate reform, industry stakeholders are pushing for legislative fixes that sustain R&D and reduce care disparities. This episode unpacks how policy shifts are reshaping biopharma’s incentive structures, investment flows, and ultimately, patient outcomes. Essential listening for policymakers, investors, and health economists seeking clarity on U.S. pharmaceutical policy and its global ripple effects.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Congress is rushing to enact what could be the most significant energy policy reversal in decades. The US Senate has begun work on an enormous budget reconciliation bill that would extend President Trump's tax cuts while all but eliminating clean energy programs to help pay for them. The House version substantially repeals nearly all tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act—affecting everything from solar and wind development to hydrogen and carbon capture projects. According to the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School/Columbia Climate School, approximately $9.65 billion in unobligated IRA funds are at risk of rescission. Critics of the cuts say this could kill progress toward decarbonization, and pull the plug on US clean energy manufacturing. But supporters argue it's necessary fiscal discipline. So what's really happening in the Senate? Can moderate Republicans preserve some clean energy provisions? And with a Fourth of July deadline looming, what wildcard events could change the political calculus? This week, Bill Loveless speaks with energy analyst Kevin Book about the massive budget reconciliation bill currently moving through Congress and what it could mean for US energy policy. Kevin is managing director of research at ClearView Energy Partners. He has tracked congressional energy legislation and its real-world impacts for years. In addition to leading ClearView's research team, he is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the National Petroleum Council, an advisory body to the Secretary of Energy. He's also a non-resident senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.
Michael Thomas joins us to discuss the clean energy tax provisions and industrial stimulus in the Inflation Reduction Act, which have brought billions of dollars in private investment and added gigawatts of power. However, these provisions are at risk of being cut as the "One Big Beautiful Bill" makes its way through Congress.Michael is a repeat guest and a data expert who has been tracking over 10,000 clean energy projects through his business, Cleanview. Since his last appearance, he's been highlighting the potential impact of these provisions. We discuss the challenges they face and how their loss would affect U.S. manufacturing and energy. Contrary to the name of the show, the loss of these provisions is not inevitable—Michael and Cody explore the ways we can all get involved to prevent it.Episode recorded on June 6, 2025 (Published on June 9, 2025)In this episode, we cover: [2:45] Michael's work since his last appearance[8:34] Cleanview and its clients[10:47] IRA's impact on clean energy[13:59] Billion-dollar investments in red states[16:22] Cuts to clean energy in the Big Beautiful Bill[19:25] Economic impacts in Republican districts[23:11] Consequences of halting clean energy deployment[29:45] The transfer of wealth behind the bill[36:25] The Musk-Trump feud[38:20] Actions people can take[44:18] Timeframes for the bill to pass and go into effect Enjoyed this episode? Please leave us a review! Share feedback or suggest future topics and guests at info@mcj.vc.Connect with MCJ:Cody Simms on LinkedInVisit mcj.vcSubscribe to the MCJ Newsletter*Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant
Preparing for AEP: Embracing Technology and Proactive Strategies in the Insurance IndustryHost Kathe Kline and guest Dalton Miller dove headfirst into the changing landscape of Annual Election Period (AEP) preparation and why insurance agents must stay ahead of industry trends—especially in today's rapidly evolving environment. Here's a breakdown of the key takeaways and how you can apply them to your business.The Countdown to AEP Is On: Get Ahead EarlyDalton opened the conversation with a reality check—there are fewer business days than you think before AEP kicks off. The urgency is real. Agents waiting until the last minute risk being overwhelmed, particularly as changes around prescription drug plans (PDPs) from regulatory shifts like the Inflation Reduction Act are generating more client questions, confusion, and inbound phone calls.Turning Industry Challenges Into OpportunitiesRather than seeing incoming calls as disruptions, savvy agents seize them as opportunities. Dalton pointed out that proactive outreach—whether in-person appointments or virtual consults—can turn client confusion about drug costs into relationship-building moments. Agents who capitalize on these touchpoints not only help clients, but also strengthen retention and potentially restart commission cycles with plan changes.Tech Tools: Your Secret Weapon for EfficiencyFrom automated scheduling links to drug list collection surveys like RetireFlo, technology is non-negotiable. Kathe stressed the time-savings and organizational benefits of tools like calendar links and integrated form submissions for medication lists. If you're not using technology, you're likely doing double work and risking costly errors. Importantly, Kathe and Dalton both emphasized the need for HIPAA-compliant CRMs. Not only does this protect client data, but it future-proofs your continuity if you switch FMOs.Be Proactive, Communicate, and Set BoundariesA recurring theme was proactive communication. Don't be shy—send out birthday cards, newsletters, or helpful updates. Let your book of business know you are their first call. Importantly, set boundaries: make it clear when you'll review Med Supps and PDPs, and educate clients on why you don't do everything during AEP. This manages workload and builds compliant, loyal relationships.Final Word: Start Now and Beat the RushDalton, channeling Paul Revere, reminded listeners: “AEP is coming!” The key is to establish streamlined, compliant systems now—before the wave hits. Tools that save time, reduce manual work, and improve client experience aren't just luxuries—they're business necessities. In the words of Kathe, “Why are you doing double work? Let technology set you free.”Ready to thrive this AEP? Invest in tech, standardize your client communication, and start prepping now—you'll thank yourself come October.This episode is sponsored by CertifiedMedicareAgents.com. Use the coupon code BABES2024 for a free lifetime BRONZE membership.
Politically Entertaining with Evolving Randomness (PEER) by EllusionEmpire
Send us a textThe skilled trades that build and maintain our technological infrastructure are criminally undervalued in our society despite being essential to modern life and our clean energy future.• Jeremiah Janser shares his extensive experience in electrical work, solar panel installation, HVAC, and energy efficiency auditing• Trade careers offer excellent pay, job security, and the satisfaction of tangible, meaningful work• Energy efficiency audits reveal how homes can be improved through better insulation, efficient HVAC, and identifying air leaks• Heat pump technology represents the future of home heating and cooling, requiring skilled tradespeople to install• Community colleges offer affordable, practical education paths to well-paying careers in the trades• The shortage of skilled tradespeople is slowing America's transition to cleaner energy systems• Government policies like the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 have created opportunities in clean energy installation• Working in the trades provides immediate visible results and the satisfaction of improving people's homesTrade schools deserve equal recognition alongside college education as valuable career paths. Check out Jeremiah's book "After Oil 2047" and visit his website at jeremiahjancik.com to learn more about his work in energy efficiency.Support the showFollow your host atYouTube and Rumble for video contenthttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUxk1oJBVw-IAZTqChH70aghttps://rumble.com/c/c-4236474Facebook to receive updateshttps://www.facebook.com/EliasEllusion/Twitter (yes, I refuse to call it X)https://x.com/politicallyht LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/eliasmarty/
This week on the Mark Levin Show, open borders, radicalized college campuses, and biased media drive cultural decay in the U.S. Unvetted immigration from conflict zones, homegrown terrorism fueled by media misrepresentation, and Marxist indoctrination in universities are key issues. A Marxist allegedly killed two people in D.C. weeks ago and now an Egyptian illegal immigrant allegedly tried to kill people protesting Hamas in Boulder, Colorado, with Molotov cocktails. Biden's policies worsened these problems, and outlets like CNN and the New York Times spread Hamas propaganda, such as false claims of Israeli attacks. The United States is among the most religiously tolerant nations, with the Constitution ensuring freedoms for all, regardless of beliefs. Faith acts as a moral foundation, moderating behavior and fostering societal civility, even influencing non-believers through surrounding values. Christianity does not seek political control, in contrast to political Islam, which aims for centralized authority over society and government. Without an enlightenment embracing individual liberty, Islam's dominant establishment often supports Islamism, which clashes with Western values. Importing such ideologies into the U.S. may lead to resistance against assimilation, as seen in parts of Europe and emerging in America. An Egyptian national, illegally in the U.S. after overstaying a tourist visa, allegedly attacked Jewish Americans, including a Holocaust survivor, in Boulder, Colorado. The Biden administration's lax vetting and work permit issuance enabled this incident. How many people do we have like this in America? Mark contrasts Alexander Hamilton's vision of a strong central government with Jefferson and Madison's preference for limited federal power and strong state authority. Hamilton's ideas, like a lifelong executive and senators, were rejected by most framers, who favored state-centric governance, as Madison emphasized in Federalist 45. Hamilton's support for implied powers (Federalist 33) appeals to modern advocates of activist government. Elon Musk's push for spending cuts right now is nonsensical. Tax cuts are urgently needed to boost the economy and help Republicans maintain control during the midterms. Yes, spending is out of control but addressing it all at once is challenging. The Convention of States movement is a vital, under-discussed solution to institutionally fix congressional dysfunction, with frustration over Musk and others' lack of support or mention of this critical initiative for long-term conservative fiscal reform. Democrats are misrepresenting the bill's effects, exaggerating economic harm, and overlooking their own $2 trillion Inflation Reduction Act. Also, a nuclear deal proposal offered to Iran was rejected by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The deal required Iran to stop uranium enrichment. Iran's firm rejection may lead to consequences from President Trump if their stance continues. A Chinese couple were charged with smuggling a biological pathogen into the U.S. Communist China is trying to poison us and kill our crops. This is what happens when you have open borders and democrats. Meanwhile, Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed a bill limiting Chinese land ownership near military bases. Some Democrats are special pleaders for the enemy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
As the US races against China to develop the most advanced capabilities in AI, energy is critical. In this second episode from the ACORE finance forum, we speak to experts about how US energy policy, and in particular the reconciliation bill now being debated in Congress, might affect that race.Host Ed Crooks and regular guest Amy Myers Jaffe talk first to Joseph Webster, a Senior Fellow at the think-tank the Atlantic Council. They discuss the need for increased power supplies for data centers, the US reliance on clean energy supply chains that originate in China, and the challenges facing attempts to reduce that dependence.Ed and Amy then talk to Seth Hanlon, a Senior Fellow at the New York University Tax Law Center, and to Lesley Hunter, the Senior VP for Policy and Engagement at ACORE. They dig into the politics around the reconciliation bill currently being worked on in the Senate. Seth previously worked at the US Treasury on the implementation of the energy tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act, and shares his perspectives on the possible effects of the new legislation that could come out of Congress. Lesley provides her insight on the prospects for persuading senators to support a more favorable outcome for the clean energy industry.This is the second of three special episodes from the ACORE Finance Forum. We'll be back next week with further coverage of all the essential conversations at the event.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Story of the Week (DR):The Baby Billionaire Bromance is Over: Savannah Guthrie Says Elon Musk and Donald Trump Are 'Giving 7th Grade Girl' as President Says Tesla CEO 'Has Lost His Mind'"It's so confusing isn't it? So much going wrong, so much to say, and all of it happening so quickly. The pace of oppression outstrips our ability to understand it. And that is the real trick of the Imperial thought machine.”BlackRock removed from Texas boycott list after quitting climate groupsIn a notable reversal, Texas removed BlackRock from its investment blacklistThis decision followed BlackRock's withdrawal from several climate-focused initiatives, including the Net Zero Asset Managers alliance and Climate Action 100+Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar cited these actions, along with BlackRock's support for the new Texas Stock Exchange, as reasons for the delisting.“More than $4 billion in Texas funds are invested with BlackRock,” the rep said.The Larry Fink-led company had $11.55 trillion in assets under management at the end of the fourth quarter in 2024.0.0346% Is that possible?Larry Fink; $31M; $11M bonus: “These amounts represent the discretionary annual cash Bonuses … The amount of incentive compensation awarded … was based on subjective criteria”“Lead in a changing world: Completed the creation of a more modern and unified Corporate Affairs function and leveraged the function to refresh the firm's corporate narrative and strengthen its brand.”“Corporate sustainability: Achieved BlackRock's 100% renewable electricity match goal and enhanced the Company's approach to procuring market solutions.”32% said NO on Pay (BlackRock owns 6% of BlackRock)99% said NO to Bowyer Research's theatrical request for a report on “risks related to a perceived shift away from a traditional understanding of fiduciary responsibility to stakeholder capitalism, implied by its assent to the Business Roundtable's Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation, as well as a high-profile embrace of ESG and DEI.”BlackRock CEO Larry Fink has some words of wisdom for leaders navigating the age of populism and social media: Watch what you say: "You have to be a lot more guarded. I can't say everything I really want to say to all of you right now. The reality is you have to be a lot more systematic in what you say and how you say it internally or externally. I mean, we live in a terrarium today. We live in a glass bottle."Big brands are pulling back on Pride merchandise and events this year MMCorporate America Pulls Back from PRIDE in 2025, No Rainbow Logos from Big Brands as June StartsUnitedHealth Group AGM:94% average director support93% Stephen HemsleyHemsley is stepping forward to acknowledge the fallout and chart a new course, promising a comprehensive review of some of the company's most controversial practices.The Wall Street Journal noted in its report on the company's annual shareholder meeting on Monday that Hemsley apologized for UnitedHealth's recent performance and cited a need to rethink many internal processes.99% for directors like Paul Garcia (2021/ former CEO of Global Payments) and Kristen Gil (2022/former VP, Business Finance Officer at Alphabet)92% for Michele Hooper (2007/Lead Independent Director/CEO of The Directors' Council, a private company she co-founded in 2003 that works with corporate boards to increase their independence, effectiveness and diversity)-12% gender influence gap/only 3 women/zero committee chairs)Lowest vote is John Noseworthy, M.D. (86%) former CEO of the Mayo Clinic40% NO on PaySHP excessive golden parachutes 13% YESThe board authorized the payment of a cash dividend of $2.21 per share, up from the prior dividend of $2.10, to be paid June 24 to common stock shareholders of record as of the close of business June 16Hemsley: as of the proxy date: $2.8M (as of 5/16: $3.8M)The previous dividend was $2.10 per share, paid on March 18, 2025The company also suspended its 2025 outlook.Goodliest of the Week (MM/DR):DR: The Trump EPA tried to bury some good newsA climate report acquired by a Freedom of Information Act request shows that U.S. climate pollution declined in 2023.The EPA report documents that in 2023, U.S. climate pollution fell by 2.3%. That's about 147 million metric tons, or MMT, of reduced carbon dioxide-equivalent greenhouse gases.2023 was the first full year after President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act, the Democrats' signature climate law that committed hundreds of billions of dollars to reducing climate pollution.DR: How a Peruvian farmer's legal defeat raised new risks for companies DRPeruvian farmer Saúl Luciano Lliuya filed a lawsuit against German energy company RWE, asserting that the company's greenhouse gas emissions contributed to the melting of glaciers near his hometown of Huaraz, Peru.This glacial melt increases the risk of flooding from Lake Palcacocha, threatening his community. Lliuya sought approximately $17,500 from RWE, representing 0.47% of the estimated $4 million needed for flood defenses, corresponding to RWE's estimated share of global emissions since the industrial era began. On May 28, 2025, the Higher Regional Court in Hamm, Germany, dismissed Lliuya's lawsuit. The court acknowledged the legal principle that major greenhouse gas emitters can be held liable for climate-related damages. However, it concluded that the specific threat to Lliuya's property was not sufficiently imminent to warrant compensation. While Lliuya did not secure the compensation sought, the court's recognition of potential corporate liability for climate damages sets a precedent. This acknowledgment may influence future climate litigation, encouraging individuals and communities to hold major emitters accountable for their contributions to climate change.MM: HahahahahahahahahaMusk says SpaceX will decommission Dragon spacecraft after Trump threatElon Musk Melts Down, Claims Trump Is In The "Epstein Files" and That's the Reason They Haven't Been ReleasedElon Musk Declares That He's "Immediately" Cutting Off NASA's Access to SpaceMusk Privately Complaining That His Immense Donations to Trump Didn't Even Buy Him Control of NASAElon Musk claims ‘without me, Trump would have lost the election'Assholiest of the Week (MM): Proxy advisorsZevra TherapeuticsISS added, “...the board's concerns about having a former CEO on the board and potential disruption are valid.”Out of 92,594 active directors in MSCI data from February, 3,123 are tagged as “former executives” at the company they're on the board of522 US companies are on the list - FIVE HUNDRED AND TWENTY TWOThat includes at least one company - National Healthcare Corp - with FOUR former executives on the boardIt also includes 104 large cap companies - like Hewlett Packard, with 3 former execs!Glass Lewis highlighted, “Mr. Regan has limited, dated, and unrelated public board service,”Egan-Jones also questioned the relevant expertise of Mangless' nominees, stating, “…we do not believe Mr. Regan's background in proxy solicitation offers meaningful value in the context of Zevra's boardroom.”Unrelated public board experience?? So you definitely suggested voting against Dana White at Meta? Or Peltz at Disney and his deep media experience? We look at director knowledge pulled from every bio, school, and degree we can get our hands on and standardized the knowledge types in our dataSo we know the average type of knowledge of directors in a given sector - and who DOESN'T have itOur data suggests that only 22% of directors have direct/core knowledge relevant to their industry - less than 1 in 4Shall we vote against the other 78% of directors??Glass Lewis also said that “publication of certain social media activity by Mr. Regan appears to suggest something of a blithe approach to compliance...”Elon?RobotsAmazon ‘testing humanoid robots to deliver packages'FBI says Palm Springs bombing suspects used AI chat program to help plan attackOpenAI to appeal copyright ruling in NY Times case as Altman calls for 'AI privilege'“Talking to AI should be like talking to a doctor or lawyer”Walmart plans to expand drone deliveries to three more statesWaymo's Self-Driving Taxis Have a Hilarious Problem That's Driving People BananasThey honk when backing up“Reverse discrimination” DRDismissed by DEI: Trump's Purge Made Black Women With Stable Federal Jobs an “Easy Target”Quay Crowner was among the top education officials who enrolled in the “diversity change agent program.”Crowner was abruptly placed on leave under Trump's executive order to dismantle DEI programs across the federal government.Her current job as the director of outreach, impact and engagement at the Education Department was not connected to diversity initiatives.More troubling, she said, was that she was the only person on her team who had been let go, and her bosses refused to answer her questions about her dismissal.When she and colleagues from different departments began comparing notes, they found they had one thing in common. They had all attended the training encouraged under DeVos. They also noticed something else: Most of them were Black women.“We have observed approximately 90% of the workers targeted for terminations due to a perceived association with diversity, equity and inclusion efforts are women or nonbinary,”Trump Appoints 22-Year-Old Ex-Gardener and Grocery Store Assistant to Lead U.S. Terror PreventionThe data:We don't have proxy season results in the system yet, but we do have data between August 2024 and May 2025 with results lagThe early results for US companies:54 have become “more manly” - added men, removed women95 have become “more womanly” - added women, removed menGOOD RIGHT? Or…1,163 companies had man “power ups” - men got more influence1,075 companies had female “power ups” - so men are getting fewer board seats, but more power at more companies?SECRET: expand the board and add men! 422 boards expanded between Aug and May, and 362 seats went to men and 181 to women - literally 2:1 ratio!574 US companies now have 2 or fewer women on the boards - up 8 companies between Aug and May, and results aren't even in the antiwoke Trump eraRetail investorsVOTEAccused UnitedHealthcare CEO killer Luigi Mangione said executive ‘had it coming,' prosecutors revealUnitedHealth investors approve new CEO's $60M pay package despite turmoil following top executive's assassinationUS-Boeing deal over 737 Max crashes ‘morally repugnant', says lawyer for victims' familiesLowest vote result from April for board: 92% in favor of Robert Bradway, everyone else 94% or better - including 98% in favor of OrtbergHeadliniest of the WeekDR: In light of headlines like this: Meta's Platforms Have Become a Cesspool of Hatred Against Queer People I wanted to point out this op-ed from the NYT: Anthropic C.E.O.: Don't Let A.I. Companies off the Hook Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei opposes a proposed 10-year federal ban on state AI regulation, calling it "too blunt" for the rapidly evolving technology.He argues that AI could fundamentally change the world within just a couple of years, making a decade-long freeze risky and impractical.Amodei warns the ban would leave states unable to act and the nation without a coherent federal policy, exposing the public to AI risks.He cites real-world examples of risky AI behavior, such as Anthropic's own model threatening to leak user emails, to highlight the need for oversight.Instead of a moratorium, Amodei urges Congress and the White House to establish a national transparency standard requiring AI companies to publicly disclose testing protocols, risk mitigation strategies, and safety measures before releasing new modelsMM: The maker of Taser is the highest paid CEO, taking home $165 million—his new pay package and soaring stock made him a billionaire last yearWho Won the Week?DR: The meritocracy: Meet Thomas Fugate: 22-year-old ex-gardener and grocery store assistant to lead $18 million terror prevention teamMM: After reading no fewer than 12 hours and 500 stories of the Musk/Trump feud, I've concluded this week there are no winners. We're all losers.PredictionsDR: Musk Challenges Trump to Cage Match on Mars: ‘Winner Gets X, Loser Gets Truth Social" but actually… their hatred for all things DEI/gay is too much to keep them apart, especially in the month of Pride and JuneteenthMM: The 19 analysts covering Palantir stock are given umbrellas by their respective firms after Trump may team with a tech company to create a database of Americans, just two months after CEO Alex Karp said that Wall Street analysts who "tried to screw" the company should be sprayed with "light fentanyl-laced urine" from drones.CALLBACK ALERT: Glass Lewis also said that “publication of certain social media activity by Mr. Regan appears to suggest something of a blithe approach to compliance...”
Welcome to a new twist on the typical EESI Congressional briefing: EESI Rapid Readouts! Things are happening faster than ever, and you need information quickly. These 30-minute interactive Readouts bring you what you need to know, when you need to know it. This Readout will answer your questions on the mechanics of reconciliation, how the process could unfold in the coming months, and how the package moving through Congress could affect clean energy tax incentives and other funding provided by the Inflation Reduction Act, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and more. To learn about the basics of budget reconciliation, as well as the annual appropriations process, watch or read the highlight notes from EESI's February 2025 briefing, Understanding the Budget, Reconciliation, and Appropriations. We are here to help you answer questions from your boss and constituents. Let us know what climate, energy, and environmental topics you want to see us cover in future Rapid Readouts by emailing us here.
This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fmBrian's European Vacation continues as Matt is joined by special guest Jane Flegal of the Blue Horizon Foundation to break down the energy provisions of Trump's Big Beautiful Bill. The energy cuts have attracted less attention than the health care provisions in part because they were made much more severe at the last minute. Jane breaks down how the Inflation Reduction Act changed America's approach to clean energy subsidies — making them more durable, more flexible, and more inclusive of the full range of technologies including nuclear, geothermal, and carbon capture — and how it connects to larger industrial policy questions related to supply chains and battery production. Repealing these measures will leave America worse off than it was pre-Biden in terms of clean energy production, which is going to lead to higher levels of air pollution and higher energy bills as Americans face a generational increase in electricity demand from AI and data centers. After the break, Matt and Jane analyze the broader philosophy of investment-led climate policy — what's the right lesson to learn from the failure of Obama-era carbon pricing and what can we do about the flood of extremely dirty Chinese steel on world markets?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.Further reading:* How Republicans turned against energy programs in their Big Beautiful Bill.* The impact of repealing energy credits on electricity prices.* Dylan Matthews on the geopolitics and environmental economics of steel.
After House Republicans passed their version of President Donald Trump's "big beautiful” reconciliation bill last month, an important energy question has emerged: How far will the Senate go to save the clean energy tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act? POLITICO's Josh Siegel and Kelsey Tamborrino break down where the Senate stands on the IRA clean energy credits and the timeline for the reconciliation process. Plus, the Trump administration quietly sent the nomination of energy attorney Laura Swett to the Senate to replace Mark Christie at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Josh Siegel is an energy reporter for POLITICO and the host of POLITICO Energy. Kelsey Tamborrino is a reporter covering clean energy for POLITICO. Nirmal Mulaikal is the co-host and producer of POLITICO Energy. Alex Keeney is a senior audio producer at POLITICO. Gloria Gonzalez is the deputy energy editor for POLITICO. Matt Daily is the energy editor for POLITICO. For more news on energy and the environment, subscribe to Power Switch, our free evening newsletter: https://www.politico.com/power-switch And for even deeper coverage and analysis, read our Morning Energy newsletter by subscribing to POLITICO Pro: https://subscriber.politicopro.com/newsletter-archive/morning-energy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In this week's Climate Check, Melissa Baldauff talks about how some Republicans still want to cut the job creating programs contained in the Inflation Reduction Act. But even if they did, it would mean little for a bill that otherwise explodes the national debt. We'll also check in with Civic Media's Earl Ingram, covering stories in southeast Wisconsin and James Kelly, covering news in northwest Wisconsin. Mornings with Pat Kreitlow is powered by UpNorthNews, and it airs on several stations across the Civic Media radio network, Monday through Friday from 6-9 am. Subscribe to the podcast to be sure not to miss out on a single episode! To learn more about the show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the show on Facebook, X, and YouTube. Guest: Melissa Baldauff
In today's polarized political landscape, energy policy has become increasingly partisan. States rich in both fossil fuels and renewable resources must confront growing electricity demand and aging infrastructure. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is pushing to defund critical energy projects under the Inflation Reduction Act while also opening new fossil energy development on public land. And congressional efforts at energy permitting reform have stalled despite broad agreement on the need to streamline approvals. So what will it take to move beyond four-year election cycles and develop an enduring energy strategy? How can lawmakers build coalitions in this divided environment? And can we craft energy policies that serve both economic and environmental goals? This week, Bill Loveless speaks with former Senator Joe Manchin about the state of US energy policy. Following his tenure as governor of West Virginia, Joe Manchin served as a US Senator from 2010 to 2024. As chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, he played a pivotal role in shaping major energy legislation, including the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act and the Inflation Reduction Act. Today, he serves on the Bipartisan Policy Center's Energy Council and is writing a memoir, titled Dead Center, which is set to be released in September. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.
In this episode of Flanigan's Eco-Logic, Ted interviews Susan Gladwin. She's just finished a 2.5 year role in the U.S. Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office (LPO). The office, under the leadership of Jigar Shah, had an amplified mandate to foster innovative companies launching energy innovations. The Inflation Reduction Act boosted the LPO's budget from $40 billion to $400 billion making it the world's largest green bank.Jigar Shar brought Susan and other professionals to Washington to help with the LPO's surge of activity, what they all knew was a moment in time. Susan's role at the LPO was in supporting loans for Clean Energy Title 17 projects... focusing on virtual power plants. The key was helping companies on a "bridge to bankability," helping promising firms with solid technologies in their execution of business plans to scale up and seek conventional financing.Since leaving the LPO, Susan has been on assignment with Planetary Boundaries, a UK-based organization with leading, global sustainability professionals that has established nine principles/indicators of planetary well-being. Alas, there are still many red-light indicators, but a framework has been established that is helping countries in their policies and practices.In this episode, Susan shares aspects of her career and what motivates her: She was educated in science and information technology, worked for Apple on the launch of I-Tunes, and she developed AutoDesk's clean energy design integration. She's now moved up from Washington and is working globally, keen on applying her aspiration of accelerating the adoption of clean energy through capital and creativity.
California's car culture, trucking industry, and weather contribute to chronically bad air that it's been gradually improving with its own laws and regulations and the blessing of the EPA. But now under President Trump, the EPA and Republican Congress are taking away California's ability to clean up its air. Also, the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" that passed through the House of Representatives on party lines guts multiple provisions from the Inflation Reduction Act, terminating or reducing tax credits for electric vehicles, clean hydrogen and advanced manufacturing. Plus, at a former gravel mine in northwestern Pennsylvania, nonprofits are working to plant 70,000 trees as part of a larger project to reforest thousands of acres of degraded mine land in the region. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
On Thursday, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that federal agencies can conduct narrow environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act for projects they are considering permitting. POLITICO's Alex Guillén breaks down the details of the decision and how it will impact legal challenges by environmental groups and Donald Trump's anti-regulatory agenda. Plus, Tesla and Elon Musk have criticized the Republican megabill for gutting the clean energy tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act. Alex Guillén is an energy reporter for POLITICO Pro. Nirmal Mulaikal is the co-host and producer of POLITICO Energy. Alex Keeney is a senior audio producer at POLITICO. Gloria Gonzalez is the deputy energy editor for POLITICO. Matt Daily is the energy editor for POLITICO. For more news on energy and the environment, subscribe to Power Switch, our free evening newsletter: https://www.politico.com/power-switch And for even deeper coverage and analysis, read our Morning Energy newsletter by subscribing to POLITICO Pro: https://subscriber.politicopro.com/newsletter-archive/morning-energy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Santi: Hi, this is a special episode of Statecraft. I've got a wonderful guest host with me today. Kyla Scanlon: Hey, I'm Kyla Scanlon! I'm the author of a book called In This Economy and an economic commentator. Santi: Kyla has joined me today for a couple reasons. One, I'm a big fan of her newsletter: it's about economics, among many other things. She had a great piece recently on what we can learn from C.S. Lewis's The Screwtape Letters, which is a favorite book of mine.Kyla's also on today because we're interviewing Wally Adeyemo, who was the Deputy Secretary of the Treasury in the Biden administration. We figured we each had questions we wanted answered.Kyla: Yeah, I've had the opportunity to interview Wally a couple times during the Biden administration, and I wanted to see where he thinks things are at now. He played a key role in implementing the Inflation Reduction Act, financial sanctions on Russia, and a whole bunch of other things.Santi: For my part, I'm stuck on Wally's role in setting up the IRS's Direct File program, where you can file your taxes for free directly through the IRS instead of paying TurboTax a hundred bucks to do it. “Good governance types” tend to love Direct File, but the current admin is thinking of killing it. I wanted to understand how the program got rolled out, how Wally would respond to criticisms of the program, and what he learned from building something in government, which now may disappear.Kyla, you've talked to Wally before. How did that conversation go? Kyla: I actually was able to go to his office in D.C., and I talked to a couple of key people in the Biden administration: Jared Bernstein, the former chair of the CEA, and Daniel Hornung, who was at the National Economic Council.We're talking to Wally on the day that the House passed the one big beautiful bill. There's also so much happening financially, like the bond market is totally rebelling against the US government right now. I'm really curious how he thinks things are, as a key player in the last administration.Santi: Wally, you've spent most of your career in Democratic Party institutions. You worked on the Kerry presidential campaign in 2004. You served in the Obama admin. You were the first chief of staff to the CFPB, the president of the Obama Foundation, and, most recently, Deputy Treasury Secretary in the Biden admin.30,000ft question: How do you see the Democratic Party today?My view is that we continue to be the party that cares deeply about working-class people, but we haven't done a good job of communicating that to people, especially when it comes to the things that matter most to them. From my standpoint, it's costs: things in America cost too much for a working-class family.I want to make sure I define working class: I think about people who make under $100,000 a year, many of whom don't own homes on the coast or don't own a significant amount of stocks (which means they haven't seen the asset appreciation that's led to a great deal of wealth creation over the last several decades). When you define it that way, 81% of Americans sit in that category of people. Despite the fact that they've seen their median incomes rise 5-10% over the last five years, they've seen the cost of the things they care about rise even faster.We haven't had a clear-cut agenda focused on the standard of living, which I think is the thing that matters most to Americans today.Santi: There are folks who would say the problem for Democrats wasn't that they couldn't communicate clearly, or that they didn't have a governing agenda, but that they couldn't execute their agenda the way they hoped to in the time available to them. Would you say there's truth to that claim?Most people talk about a communications issue, but I don't think it's a communications issue. There are two issues. One is an implementation issue, and the second is an issue of the actual substance and policy at the Treasury Department. I was the deputy secretary, but I was also the Chief Operating Officer, which meant that I was in charge of execution. The two most significant domestic things I had to execute were the American Rescue Plan, where $1.9 trillion flowed through the Treasury Department, and the Inflation Reduction Act. The challenge with execution in the government is that we don't spend a lot on our systems, on making execution as easy as possible.For example, the Advanced Child Tax Credit was intended to give people money to help with each of their children during the pandemic. What Congress called on us to do was to pay people on a monthly basis. In the IRS system, you pay your taxes mostly on an annual basis, which meant that most of our systems weren't set up to pay a monthly check to Americans. It took us a great deal of work to figure out a way to recreate a system just to do that.We've underinvested in the systems that the IRS works on. The last time we made a significant investment in the IRS's digital infrastructure was the 1960s; before we had an ATM machine, before we sent a man to the moon, before we had a personal computer. So that meant that everything was coded in a language called COBOL.So execution was quite hard in the American Rescue Plan. People were left out and felt that the government wasn't working for them. If you called the IRS, only 13% of your calls were being answered. We got that back up to 85% before we left. Ultimately, I think part of this is an execution challenge. In government we want to spend money coming up with new policies, but we don't want to pay for execution, which then means that when you get the policy passed, implementation isn't great.When Jen Pahlka was on your show, she talked about the need to focus on identifying the enablers to implementation. Direct File was one of the best examples of us taking implementation very seriously.But also, on some policy issues that mattered most to Americans, we weren't advancing the types of strategies that would've helped lower the cost of housing and lowering the cost of medicine. We did some things there, but there's clearly more that we could have done, and more we need to do going forward to demonstrate that we're fighting to bring down those costs. It's everything from permitting reform — not just at the federal level, but what can we do to incentivize it at the state and local level — to thinking about what we can do on drug costs. Why does it cost so much more to get a medicine in America than in Canada? That is something that we can solve. We've just chosen not to at the federal level.At the end of the year, we were going to take action to go after some of the middlemen in the pharmacy industry who were taking out rents and large amounts of money. It dropped out of the bill because of the negotiations between the Republican Congress and then President-elect Trump. But there are a lot of things that we can do both on implementation, which will mean that Americans feel the programs that we're passing in a more effective way, and policy solutions that we need to advance as a party that will help us as well.Kyla: Some people think Americans tend to vote against their own self-interest. How can your party message to people that these sorts of policies are really important for them?Ultimately, what I found is that most people just understand their self-interest differently, and for them, a big part of this was, “Who's fighting for me on the issues that I care most about?”From my standpoint, part of the problem we had with Direct File, which I think was an innovative solution, was that we got to implementing it so late in the administration that we didn't have the ability for it to show the impact. I'm hoping future administrations will think through how to start their implementation journey on things like Direct File sooner in the administration, when you have a great deal of political capital, so people can actually feel the impact over time.To your question, it's not just about the messaging, it's about the messenger. People tend to trust people who look like them, who come from the places they come from. When it came to the Child Tax Credit and also to Direct File, the biggest innovation wasn't the technology: the technology for Direct File has been used by the Australians, the British, and other countries for decades.The biggest innovation was us joining that technology with trusted people in communities who were going out to talk to people about those programs and building those relationships. That was something that the IRS hadn't done a great deal of. We invested a great deal in those community navigators who were helping us get people to trust the things the government was doing again, like the Child Tax Credit, like Direct File, so that they could use it.We often think that Washington is going to be able to give messages to the country that people are going to hear. But we're both in a more complicated media environment, where people are far more skeptical of things that come from people in Washington. So the best people to advocate for and celebrate the things that we're doing are people who are closer to the communities we're trying to reach. In product advertising today, more companies are looking to influencers to advertise things, rather than putting an ad on television, because people trust the people that they follow. The same is true for the things that we do in government.Santi: I've talked to colleagues of yours in the last administration who say things like, “In the White House, we did not have a good enough sense of the shot clock.” They point to various reasons, including COVID, as a reason the admin didn't do a good enough job of prioritization.Do you think that's true, that across the administration, there was a missing sense of the shot clock or a missing sense of prioritization? No, because I'm a Lakers fan. These are professionals. We're professionals. This is not our first rodeo. We know how much time is on the shot clock; we played this game. The challenge wasn't just COVID. For me at Treasury — and I think this is the coolest part of being Deputy Secretary of the Treasury — I had responsibilities domestic and international. As I'm trying to modernize the IRS, to invest all my time in making the system work better for customers and to collect more taxes from the people who owe money, Russia invades Ukraine. I had to turn a bunch of my attention to thinking about what we were going to do there. Then you have Hamas attacking Israel.There was more we should have done on the domestic end, but we have to remember that part of the presidency is: you get to do the things you want to do, but you also have to do the things you have to do. We had a lot of things we had to do that we weren't planning for which required all-of-the-administration responses.I think the most important lesson I've learned about that is that it comes down to both being focused on the things that matter, and being willing to communicate to the American people why your priorities have to change in light of things that happen in the world.But the people I'm sure you've talked to, most of them work on domestic policy alone, and they probably never have been in a National Security Council meeting, where you're thinking about the risks to the country. The president has to do both of those things. So I get how difficult it is to do that, just given where I sat at the Treasury Department.Santi: Looking back from an implementation perspective, are there things you would've done differently during your time at Treasury?The most important thing that I would've done differently was to immediately set up a permanent implementation and delivery unit in the Treasury Department. We always like to pretend like the Treasury Department is just a policy department where we make policy, we collect taxes. But in any crisis the country ever has, a great deal of responsibility — for execution or implementation of whatever the response is — falls to the Treasury Department. Think about the financial crisis, which is clearly something that's in the Treasury's domain. The vast majority of money for COVID flowed through the Treasury Department. You think about the IRA, a climate bill: the vast majority of that money flows through the Treasury Department.And Treasury doesn't have a dedicated staff that's just focused on implementation: How do we do this well? How do we make sure the right people are served? How do we make sure that we communicate this well? We did this to a degree by a team that was focused on the American Rescue Plan. But it was only focused on the American Rescue Plan. If I could start again, I would have said, “I want a permanent implementation structure within the Treasury Department of people who are cross-cutting, who only think about how we execute the policies that we pass through Congress and that we put together through an executive order. How do we do that extremely well?”Kyla: What you're talking about is very people-centric: How do we get an implementation team, and how do we make sure that the right people are doing the right jobs? Now we have DOGE, which is less people-centric. How do you reconcile what Doge is doing relative to what you would've done differently in this role that you had?As you would suspect, I wasn't excited about the fact we had lost the election, but initially I thought DOGE could be helpful with technology. I think marrying technology with people — that's the key to success for the government. We've never really been great at doing technology in the government.Part of the reason for that is a procurement process that is very slow because of how the federal acquisition rules work. What we are trying to do is prevent corruption and also waste, fraud, and abuse. But what that does is, it leads to slowness in our ability to get the technology on board that we need, and in getting the right people.I was hoping DOGE would bring in people who knew a great deal about technology and put us in a position where we could use that to build better products for the American people. I thought they would love Direct File, and that they would find ways to improve Direct File and expand it to more Americans.My view is that any American in the working class or middle class should not have to pay a company to file their taxes. We have the ability in this country, and I think Direct File was proving that. My goal, if we'd had more time, was to expand this to almost any American being able to use it. I thought they'd be able to accelerate that by bringing in the right people, but also the right technology. We were on that path before they took those two things apart.My sense is that you have to reform the way that we hire people because it's too hard to hire the right people. In some cases, you don't need some of the people you have today because technology is going to require different skills to do different things. It's easier to break something, I found, than it is to build something. I think that's what they're finding today as well.Santi: When I talk to left-of-center folks about the DOGE push, they tend to be skeptical about the idea that AI or modern technology can replace existing federal workers. I think some of that is a natural backlash to the extreme partisan coding of DOGE, and the fact that they're firing a lot of people very quickly. But what's your view? After DOGE, what kinds of roles would you like to see automated?Let me say: I disagree with the view that DOGE and technology can't replace some of the things that federal workers do today. My view is that “productivity enhancing” tech — it's not that it is going to make employees who are currently doing the job more productive. It is going to mean you need fewer employees. We have to be honest about that.Go to the IRS, for example. When I got there, we had a huge paper backlog at the IRS because, despite what most people think, millions of people still file their taxes by paper, and they send them to the IRS. And during the pandemic, the commissioner, who was then working for President Trump, decided to shut down the IRS for public health reasons — to make sure employees did not have to risk getting COVID.There were piles of paper backing up, so much so that they had filled cafeterias at the IRS facilities with huge piles of paper. The problem, of course, is that, unlike modern systems, you could not just machine-read those papers and put them into our systems. Much of that required humans to code those papers into the system by hand. There is no need in the 21st century for that to happen, so one of the things that we started to do was introduce this simple thing called scanning, where you would scan the papers — I know it sounds like a novel idea. That would help you get people's tax returns faster into the system, but also get checks out quickly, and allow us to see if people are underpaying their taxes, because we can use that data with a modern system. But over time, what would that mean? We'd need fewer people to enter the data from those forms.When we get money for the IRS from Congress, it is actually seen as revenue-raising because they expect it to bring down the debt and deficit, which is completely true. But the model Congress uses to do that is reliant on the number of full-time employees we hire. One challenge we have with the IRS — and in government systems in general — is that you don't get credit for technology investments that should improve your return on investment.So whenever we did the ROI calculations for the IRS, the Congressional Budget Office would calculate how much revenue we'd bring in, and it was always based on the number of people you had doing enforcement work that would lead to certain dollars coming in. So we got no credit for the technology investments. Which was absolutely the opposite of what we knew would be true: the more you invested in technology, the more likely you were to bring in more revenue, and you would be able to cut the cost of employees.Santi: If the CBO changed the way it scored technology improvements, would more Congresspeople be interested in funding technology?It is just a CBO issue. It's one we've tried to talk to them about over the last several years, but one where they've been unwilling to move. My view is that unlocking this will unlock greater investment in technology in a place like the IRS, because every dollar you invest in technology — I think — would earn back $10 in additional tax revenue we'd be able to collect from people who are skipping out on their taxes today. It's far more valuable to invest in that technology than to grow the number of employees working in enforcement at the IRS. You need both, but you can't say that a person is worth 5x their salary in revenue and that technology is worth 0. That makes no sense.Kyla: When we spoke about Direct File many months ago, people in my comment section were super excited and saying things like, “I just want the government to tell me how much money I owe.” When you think about the implementation of Direct File, what went right, and how do you think it has evolved?The thing that went right was that we proved that we could build something quite easily, and we built it ourselves, unlike many technology projects in government. We didn't go out and hire a bunch of consultants and contractors to do it. We did it with people at the IRS, but also with people from 18F and from GSA who worked in the government. We did it in partnership with a number of stakeholders outside the government who gave us advice, but the build was done by us.The reason that was important — and the reason it's important to build more things internally rather than hiring consulting firms or other people to build it — is that you then have the intellectual capital from building that, and that can be used to build other things. This was one product, but my view is that I want the IRS home page to one day look a lot more like the screen on your iPhone, so that you can click on the app on the IRS homepage that can help you, depending on what you need — if it's a Direct File, or if it's a tax transcript.By building Direct File internally, we were getting closer to that, and the user scores on the effectiveness of the tool and the ability to use it were through the roof. Even for a private sector company, it would've been seen as a great success. In the first year, we launched late in the filing season, mostly just to test the product, but also to build stakeholder support for it. In the limited release, 140,000 people used it. The average user said that before Direct File, it took them about 13 hours to file their taxes, and with Direct File, it took them just over an hour to file their taxes.But you also have to think about how much money the average American spends filing their taxes: about $200. That's $200 that a family making under $100,000 could invest in their kids, in paying some bills, rather than in filing their taxes.Even this year, with no advertising by the Trump administration of Direct File, we had more than 300,000 people use it. The user scores for the product were above 85%. The challenge, of course, is that instead of DOGE investing in improving the product — which was a place where you could have seen real intellectual capital go to work and make something that works for all Americans — they've decided to discontinue Direct File. [NB: There has been widespread reporting that the administration plans to discontinue Direct File. The GOP tax bill passed by the House would end Direct File if it becomes law. At the time of publication, the Direct File has not been discontinued.]The sad part is that when you think about where we are as a country, this is a tool that could both save people money, save people time, improve our ability to collect taxes, and is something that exists in almost every other developed economy. It makes no sense to me why you would end something like this rather than continue to develop it.Santi: People remember the failure of healthcare.gov, which crashed when it was rolled out all at once to everyone in the country. It was an embarrassing episode for the Obama administration, and political actors in that administration learned they had to pilot things and roll them out in phases.Is there a tension between that instinct — to test things slowly, to roll them out to a select group of users, and then to add users in following cycles — Is there a tension between that and trying to implement quickly, so that people see the benefit of the work you're doing?One of my bosses in the Obama administration was Jeff Zients, the person who was brought in to fix healthcare.gov. He relentlessly focused on execution. He always made the point that it's easy to come up with a strategy to some degree: you can figure out what the policy solution is. But the difference between good and great is how you execute against it. I think there is some tension there, but not as much as you would think.Once we were able to show that the pilot was a success, I got invited to states all over the country, like Maryland, to announce that they were joining Direct File the next year. These members of Congress wanted to do Direct File events telling people in their state, “This product that's worked so well elsewhere is coming to us next.” It gave us the ability to celebrate the success.I learned the lesson not just from Zients, but also from then-professor Elizabeth Warren, whom I worked for as chief of staff at the CFPB. One challenge we had at the CFPB was to build a complaint hotline, at that point mostly phone-operated, for people who were suffering. They said it would take us at least a year to build out all the product functions we need. We decided to take a modular approach and say, “How long would it take for us to build the system for one product? Let's try that and see how that works. We'll do a test.”It was successful, and we were able to use that to tell the story about the CFPB and what it would do, not just for mortgages, but for all these other products. We built user interest in the complaint hotline, in a way that we couldn't have if we'd waited to build the whole thing at once. While I think you're right that there is some tension between getting everyone to feel it right away and piloting; if the pilot is successful, it also gives you the opportunity to go out and sell this thing to people and say, “Here's what people who did the pilot are saying about this product.”I remember someone in Texas who was willing to do a direct-to-camera and talk about the ways that Direct File was so easy for them to use. It gets back to my point on message and messenger. Deputy Secretary Adeyemo telling you about this great thing the government did is one thing. But an American who looks like you, who's a nurse, who's a mom of two kids, telling you that this product actually worked for her: That's something that more people identify with.Healthcare.gov taught us the lesson of piloting and doing things in a modular way. This is what companies have been doing for decades. If it's worked for them, I think it can work for the government too.Santi: I'm a fan of Direct File, personally. I don't want this administration to kill it. But I was looking through some of the criticism that Direct File got: for instance, there's criticism about it rivaling the IRS Free File program, which is another IRS program that partners with nonprofits to help some folks file their taxes for free.Then there's this broader philosophical criticism: “I don't want the feds telling me how much I owe them.” The idea is that the government is incentivized to squeeze every last dollar out of you.I'm curious what you make of that, in part because I spoke recently to an American who worked on building e-government systems for Estonia. One of the things that has allowed Estonia to build cutting-edge digital systems in the government is that Estonia is a small and very high-trust society. Everybody's one degree of separation from everybody else.We're a much bigger and more diverse country. How do you think that affects the federal government's ability to build tools like Direct File?I think it affects it a lot, and it gets back to my point: not just the message but the messenger. I saw this not just with Direct File, but with the Advanced Child Tax Credit, which was intended to help kids who were living in poverty, but also families overall. What we found initially in the data was that, among families that didn't have to file taxes because they made too little, many of them were unwilling to take advantage of Direct File and the Advanced Child Tax Credit because they couldn't believe the government was doing something to just help them. I spent a lot of time with priests, pastors, and other community leaders in many of the communities where people were under-filing to try and get them to talk about this program and why it was something that they should apply for.One of the challenges we suffer from right now in America, overall, is a lack of trust in institutions. You have to really go local and try to rebuild that trust.That also speaks to taking a pilot approach that goes slower in some cases. Some of the criticism we got was, “Why don't you just fill out this form for us and then just send it to us, so that Direct File is just me pressing a button so I can pay my taxes?”Part of the challenge for us in doing that is a technology challenge: we are not there technologically. But the other problem is a trust problem. If I were to just fill out your taxes for you and send them to you, I think people, at this stage, would distrust the government and distrust the technology.Direct File had to be on a journey with people, showing people, “If I put in this information, it accurately sends me back my check.” As people develop more trust, we can also add more features to it that I think people will trust. But the key has to be: how do you earn that trust over time?We can't expect that if we put out a product that looks like something the Estonian government or Australia would put out, that people would trust it at this point. We have to realize that we are on a journey to regain the trust of the American people.The government can and will work for them, and Direct File was a part of that. We started to demonstrate that with that product because the people who used it in these communities became the spokespeople for it in a better way than I ever could be, than the Secretary or the President could be.Everyone knows that they need to pay their taxes because it's part of their responsibility living in this country. The things that make people the most upset is the fact that there are people who don't pay their taxes. We committed that we were going to go after them.The second frustration was: “Why do you make it so hard for me to pay my taxes? Why can't I get through to you on the phone line? Why do I have to pay somebody else to do my taxes?” Our goal was to solve those two problems by investing money and going after the people who just decided they weren't going to pay, but also by making it as easy as possible for you to pay your taxes and for most people, to get that tax refund as quickly as possible.But doing that was about going on a journey with people, about regaining their trust in an institution that mattered to them a great deal because 90 something-percent of the money that funds our government comes in through the IRS.Kyla: You have a piece out in Foreign Affairs called “Make Moscow Pay,” and what I found most interesting about that essay is that you said Europe needs to step it up because the United States won't. Talk through the role of Treasury in financial sanctions, and your reasons for writing this piece.People often think about the Treasury Department as doing a few things. One is working with Wall Street; another one is collecting your taxes. Most people don't think about the fact that the Treasury Department is a major part of the National Security Committee, because we have these tools called financial sections.They use the power of the dollar to try and change the behavior of foreign actors who are taking steps that aren't consistent with our national security interests. A great example of this is what we did with regard to Russia — saying that we're going to cut off Russian banks from the US financial system, which means that you can't transact in US dollars.The problem for any bank that can transact in dollars is that the backbone of most of the financial world is built on the US dollar. It increases their cost, it makes it more difficult for them to transact, and makes it harder for them to be part of the global economy, nearly impossible.And that's what we've done in lots of cases when it comes to Russia. We have financial sanction programs that touch all over the world, from Venezuela to Afghanistan. The US government, since 9/11, has used sanctions as one of its primary tools of impacting foreign policy. Some of them have gone well, some of them I think haven't gone as well, and there's a need for us to think through how we use those policies.Santi: What makes sanctions an effective tool? Positions on sanctions don't line up neatly on partisan lines. Sanctions have a mixed track record, and you'll have Republicans who say sanctions have failed, and you'll have Democrats say sanctions have been an effective tool, and vice versa.The way I think about sanctions is that they are intended to bring change, and the only way that they work is that they're part of an overarching foreign policy strategy. That type of behavior change was what we saw when Iran came to the table and wanted to negotiate a way to reduce sanctions in exchange for limits on their nuclear program. That's the type of behavior change we're trying to accomplish with sanctions, but you can't do it with sanctions alone. You need a foreign policy strategy. We didn't do it by the United States confronting Iran; we got our allies and partners to work together with us. When I came into office in 2021, Secretary Yellen asked me to do a review of our sanctions policies — what's worked, what hasn't — because it had been 20 years since the 9/11 attacks.And the most important lesson I learned was that the sanctions programs that were the most effective were the ones we did on a multilateral basis — so we did it with our friends and allies. Part of the reason for this is that while the dollar is the most dominant currency around the world, oftentimes if you can't do something in dollars, you do it in a euro, or you do it in a Japanese yen, or pound sterling.The benefit of having allies all over the world is that the dominant, convertible currencies in the world are controlled by allies and partners. When we acted together with them, we were more effective in curtailing the economic activity of our adversary, and our pressure is more likely to lead to them changing their behavior.We had to be very cautious about collateral damage. You might be targeting an individual, but by targeting that individual, you might make it harder for a company they're affiliated with to continue doing business, or for a country that they're in to get access to banking services. Let's say that you're a huge bank in America, and you're worried about sanctions risk in a small country where you do little business. Why not pull out, rather than having to put in place a huge compliance program? One of the challenges that we have is that the people who make the decisions about whether to extend sanctions don't necessarily spend a lot of time thinking about some of these economic consequences of the sanctions approach.Whenever I was around the table and we were making a decision about using weapons, there was a process that was very elaborate that ended up with something going to the president. You'd often think about kinetic force very seriously, because you were going to have to get the president to make a decision. We didn't always take that kind of rigor when it came to thinking about using our sanctions policy, but the impact on the lives of people in these countries was just as significant for their access to not only money, but to food and to the resources they needed to live.Santi: What do you make of the effectiveness of the initial sanctions on Russia after the invasion of Ukraine? I've heard mixed reviews from folks inside and outside the Biden administration.Sanctions, again, to my point, are only a tool. They've had to be part of a larger strategy, and I think those sanctions were quite effective. I think the saving grace for the Russians has been the fact that China has largely been able and willing to give them access to the things they need to continue to perpetuate.There was a choice for Ukraine, but when you think about Russia's economy today vs. Russia's economy before the sanctions were put in place, it's vastly different. Inflation in Russia still runs far higher than inflation anywhere else in the world. If you were a Russian citizen, you would feel the impacts of sanctions.The challenge, of course, is that it hasn't changed Vladimir Putin's behavior or the behavior of the Kremlin, largely because they've had access to the goods and supplies they need from China, Iran, and North Korea. But over time, it means Russia's economy is becoming less competitive. They have less access to resources; they're going to struggle.I think everyone hoped that sanctions would immediately change the calculus of the Kremlin, but we've never seen that to be the case. When sanctions are effective, they take time, because the economic consequences continue to compound over time, and they have to be part of a larger strategy for the behavior of the individual. That's why I wrote the article, because while the Kremlin and Russia are under pressure, their view is that ultimately the West is going to get tired of supporting Ukraine, financially and politically, because the economic consequences for us — while not as significant as for Moscow or for Kiev — have been quite significant, when you think about the cost of living issues in Europe.I think it's important to write this now, when it appears that Russia is stalling on negotiations, because ultimately, US financial support is waning. We just know that the Trump administration is not willing to put more money into Ukraine, so Europe is going to have to do more, at a time when their economic situation is quite complicated as well.They've got a lot to do to build up their economy and their military-industrial base. Asking them to also increase their support for Ukraine at the same time is going to be quite difficult. So using this money that Russia owes to Ukraine — because they owe them compensation at this moment — can be quite influential in helping support the Ukrainians, but also changing Russia's calculus with regard to the ability of Ukraine to sustain itself.Kyla: On CNBC about a month ago, you said if we ever have a recession over the next couple of months or so, it would be a self-inflicted one. Do you still resonate with that idea? To build on the point I was making, the economy has done quite well over the course of the first few months of the year, largely because of the strength of the consumer, where our balance sheets are still quite strong. Companies in America have done well. The biggest headwind the US economy faces has been self-inflicted by the tariffs the president has put on. Part of what I still do is talk to CEOs of companies, big and small. Small businesses feel the impact of this even more than the big businesses. What they tell me is that it's not just the tariffs and the fact that they are making it more expensive for them to get the goods that they need, but it's the uncertainty created by the off-again, on-again, nature of those tariffs that makes it impossible for them to plan for what supplies they're going to get the next quarter. How are they going to fulfill their orders? What employees are they going to need? It's having a real impact on the performance of these companies, but also their ability to hire people and plan for the future.If you go to the grocery store, you're going to start seeing — and you're starting to see already — price increases. The thing that Americans care most about is, the cost of living is just too high. You're at the grocery store, as you're shopping for your kids for the summer, you're going to see costs go up because of a self-imposed tax we've put in place. So I still do think that if we do find ourselves in a recession, it's going to be because of the tariffs we've put in place.Even if we don't enter a technical recession, what we're seeing now is that those tariffs are going to raise the cost for people when they go out to buy things. It's going to raise the cost of building homes, which is going to make it harder for people to get houses, which is ultimately going to have an impact on the economy that isn't what I think the president or anyone wants at this point.Kyla: Is there anything else we haven't asked about? I think the place where we continue, as a country, to struggle is that, given the federal system we have, many of these problems aren't just in Washington — they're in state and local governments as well. When you think about the challenges to building more housing in this country, you can't just solve it by doing things at the federal level. You have to get state and local governments unified in taking a proactive approach. Part of this has to be not just financial or regulatory from the federal government, but we have to do more things that force state and local governments to get out of the way of people being able to build more housing. I think that the conversations that you've had on your show, and the conversations we're having in government, need to move past our regular policy conversations of: “Should we do more on LIHTC? Should we try to fix NEPA?” Those, to me, are table stakes, and we're in the middle of what I'd say is a generational crisis when it comes to housing. We have to be willing to treat it like a crisis, rather than what I think we've done so far, which is take incremental steps at different levels to try and solve this. That's one thing that I wanted to make sure that I said, because I think it's the most important thing that we can do at the moment.Kyla: Absolutely. During your time there, the Treasury was doing so much with zoning reform, with financial incentives. What I really liked about our last conversation was how much you talked about how important it is that workers can live close to work. Are you optimistic that we will be able to address the problem, or do you think we are sinking into quicksand?I'd say a little bit of both, and the thing that I'm doing now is getting hyperlocal. One of the projects I'm working on in my post-administration life is I'm working with 15 churches in D.C., where they have vacant land and want to use it to build affordable housing as quickly as possible.I'm learning that even when you have the land donated for free and you're willing to work as quickly as possible, it's still quite hard because you have regulations and financial issues that often get in the way of building things. Part of what we have to do now is just launch as many natural experiments as possible to see what works.What I've learned already from this lived experience is that even cities that are trying to get out of the way and make it easier to build housing struggle because of what you all know to be true, which is that the local politics of this is quite complicated. Oftentimes, the way that you get them over the line is by creating incentives or disincentives.In the past, I talked a lot about incentives in terms of “giving people money to do things.” I'm now in favor of “not giving money to people who don't do things” — if you don't take steps to fix your zoning, some of the federal money that you regularly get is not coming to your jurisdiction. I'm going to reallocate that money to places that are doing this activity. I think we have to take those types of radical steps.It's similar to what we did with the Emergency Rental Assistance Program, where if you didn't spend your money, we could take your money back and reallocate it to people who were giving away emergency rental assistance money.That motivates people a lot — when they feel like something's going to be taken away from them. I'm of the view that we have to find more radical things that we can do to get housing built. If we don't, costs will continue to rise faster than people's incomes.Santi: Wally, I have to ask after that point you just made: did you read the paper by my colleague Chris Elmendorf on using LIHTC funds? The idea is to re-allocate those federal funds away from big, expensive cities and into other places in a state, if the cities don't commit to basic zoning reforms.I completely agree with him, and I think I would go even further than just LIHTC money. I would reallocate non-housing money as well, because from my standpoint, if you think about the most important issue for a family, it's being able to find housing that is affordable near their place of work and where their kids go to school. I said that on purpose. I didn't say “affordable housing.” I said “housing that is affordable,” because affordable housing is, in lots of ways, targeted towards a population of people who need it the most. But for even people who are middle income in this country, it crowds out their ability to pay for other things when housing costs continue to creep higher.The only way we solve that problem is if you get rid of restrictive zoning covenants and fix permitting. The natural thing that every city and state is thinking about right now is throwing more money at the problem. There's going to need to be money here, just in light of some of the headwinds, but it's going to be more costly and less effective if we don't fix the underlying issues that are making it hard to build housing where we want it.Right now in California, we're having a huge debate over what we do with infill housing in urban areas. A simple solution — you don't have to do another environmental review if one was already done in this area— is taking months to work through the California legislature, which demonstrates that we're going too slow. California's seeing an exodus of people. I just talked to a CEO who said, “I'm moving my business because the people who work for me can't afford to live in California anymore.” This is the kind of problem that you can solve. State legislatures, Congress, and executives have to get together and take some radical steps to make it easier to build housing.I appreciate what you said about what we were doing at Treasury, but from my standpoint, I wish we had done more earlier to focus on this issue. We had a lot going on, but fundamentally, the most important thing on housing is taking a step to try and build housing today, which is going to have an impact on the economy 10, 20, 30 years from now. We just have to start doing that as soon as possible.Thanks to Emma Hilbert for her transcript and audio edits. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub
This week, we're republishing a conversation Noah Smith and Matt Yglesias hosted live on Substack this past Monday. They revisit a wide-ranging conversation on the transformative role of electric motors, batteries, and industrial policy in a politically polarized era, touching on the history of energy, global economic competition, AI regulation, the Inflation Reduction Act, Democratic strategy, and the need to redefine America's identity amid demographic shifts. – SPONSORS: NetSuite More than 41,000 businesses have already upgraded to NetSuite by Oracle, the #1 cloud financial system bringing accounting, financial management, inventory, HR, into ONE proven platform. Download the CFO's Guide to AI and Machine learning: https://netsuite.com/102 AdQuick The easiest way to book out-of-home ads (like billboards, vehicle wraps, and airport displays) the same way you would order an Uber. Ready to get your brand the attention it deserves? Visit https://adquick.com/ today to start reaching your customers in the real world. – SEND US YOUR Q's FOR NOAH TO ANSWER ON AIR: Econ102@Turpentine.co – FOLLOW ON X: @noahpinion @mattyglesias @eriktorenberg @turpentinemedia – RECOMMENDED IN THIS EPISODE: Noahpinion: https://www.noahpinion.blog/ Slow Boring: https://www.slowboring.com/podcast – TAKEAWAYS: America's Strategic Blindness: The US had momentum with the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which Noah calls "great industrial policy" that was working. However, because it was framed primarily as climate policy rather than technological/economic competition, Republicans killed it for culture war reasons, failing to understand its strategic importance. The Climate Framing Problem: Matt was prescient in warning that framing industrial policy purely through climate would create Republican backlash. Noah admits Matt was right - while climate messaging helped pass the IRA initially, it made the policies vulnerable to being seen as "just some climate thing" rather than crucial economic policy. The Obama Era Split: They trace how the 2000s gave their generation the "peace and love" progressive agenda (gay marriage, ending Iraq War), while the 2010s brought the "angry leftist" phase (riots, racial grievance politics) - unlike boomers who got both simultaneously. Missing the Bush Playbook: During Bush's cascading failures (Iraq, Katrina, financial crisis), Democrats effectively built a broad coalition and defined clear opposition. Today, despite Trump's obvious failures (tariffs, debt, vaccine skepticism), Democrats aren't capitalizing similarly. Narrow Target Strategy: Like successful campaigns in Australia, Democrats need to edit down their message to core critiques of Republican governance rather than trying to advance every progressive priority simultaneously. Big Tent Revival: The party succeeded in 2006-2008 by recruiting diverse candidates and standing behind pro-gun, even some pro-life Democrats to clarify what the core message was versus peripheral issues.
Shift Key is off this week for Memorial Day, so we're re-running one of our favorite episodes from the past. With Republicans in the White House and Congress now halfway to effectively repealing the Inflation Reduction Act, the United States' signature climate law, we thought now might be a good moment to remind ourselves why emissions reductions matter in the first place.To that end, we're resurfacing our chat from November with Kate Marvel, an associate research scientist at Columbia University and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. At the time, Trump had just been reelected to the presidency, casting a pall over the annual United Nations climate conference, which was then occurring in Azerbaijan. Soon after, he fulfilled his promise to pull the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement, with its goal of restraining global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial levels.In this episode, we talk with Kate about why every 10th of a degree matters in the fight against climate change, the difference between tipping points and destabilizing feedback loops, and how to think about climate change in a disappointing time. Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap, and Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University.Mentioned: The GOP Tax Bill Is a Dangerous Gamble at a Precarious MomentThe UN Environmental Program's emissions gap reportThe IPCC's monumental report on the risks of 1.5C of temperature riseJesse's post-Trump op-ed: Trump Is Not the End of the Climate FightRob's piece from 2023 on the “end of climate science”Trump's Energy Secretary-designate Chris Wright's speech at the American Conservation Coalition Summit--Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Is Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) the next Democrat nominee for president? He and Glenn debate due process, border policy, deportation, and Trump. But they agree on the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, nuclear energy, cuts to the defense budget, and revitalizing American manufacturing. Rep. Khanna contends that the “administrative state has played a constructive role” and explains why he is proud of the “Inflation Reduction Act” before questioning the impact of Elon Musk's efforts with the DOGE and laying out his plan to tackle U.S. debt, including taxing the billionaires in his own district, which includes Silicon Valley. Glenn is “pushing for Congress to take their power back,” and Ro Khanna hopes artificial intelligence will help “reindustrialize the country” to “help us lead against China.” While not reaching a consensus on topics like universal basic income, shutting down USAID, or progressive economic reform, they both agree that “we need more conversations in this country.” GLENN'S SPONSORS Relief Factor Relief Factor can help you live pain-free! The three-week quick start is only $19.95. Visit https://www.relieffactor.com/ or call 800-4-RELIEF. American Financing American Financing can show you how to put your hard-earned equity to work and get you out of debt. Dial 800-906-2440, or visit https://www.americanfinancing.net. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Episode Summary: In this episode, Scott Elias, Vice President of Policy & Market Development at CleanCapital, shares expert insights on CleanCapital's investment strategy, his background in clean energy policy, and the fast-moving developments in Washington, D.C. surrounding the fight to protect the Investment Tax Credit (ITC). Scott breaks down the potential implications of proposed changes to the Inflation Reduction Act, highlights which states are leading the charge in clean energy growth, and explores the growing investor interest in solar + storage portfolios. Read Scott's latest take on the proposed tax bill that could significantly impact clean energy investment in the U.S.: Defending American Energy Dominance – CleanCapital Benoy Thanjan Benoy Thanjan is the Founder and CEO of Reneu Energy and he is also an advisor for several solar startup companies. He has extensive project origination, development, and financial experience in the renewable energy industry and in the environmental commodities market. This includes initial site evaluation, permitting, financing, sourcing equipment, and negotiating the long-term energy and environmental commodities off-take agreements. He manages due diligence processes on land, permitting, and utility interconnection and is in charge of financing and structuring through Note to Proceed (“NTP”) to Commercial Operation Date (“COD”). Benoy composes teams suitable for all project development and construction tasks. He is also involved in project planning and pipeline financial modeling. He has been part of all sides of the transaction and this allows him to provide unique perspectives and value. Benoy has extensive experience in financial engineering to make solar projects profitable. Before founding Reneu Energy, he was the SREC Trader in the Project Finance Group for SolarCity which merged with Tesla in 2016. He originated SREC trades with buyers and co-developed their SREC monetization and hedging strategy with the senior management of SolarCity to move into the east coast markets. Benoy was the Vice President at Vanguard Energy Partners which is a national solar installer where he focused on project finance solutions for commercial scale solar projects. He also worked for Ridgewood Renewable Power, a private equity fund, where he analyzed potential investments in renewable energy projects and worked on maximizing the financial return of the projects in the portfolio. Benoy also worked on the sale of all of the renewable energy projects in Ridgewood's portfolio. He was in the Energy Structured Finance practice for Deloitte & Touche and in Financial Advisory Services practice at Ernst & Young. Benoy received his first experience in Finance as an intern at D.E. Shaw & Co., which is a global investment firm with 37 billion dollars in investment capital. He has a MBA in Finance from Rutgers University and a BS in Finance and Economics from the Stern School of Business at New York University. Benoy was an Alumni Scholar at the Stern School of Business. Scott Elias Scott Elias is the Vice President of Government Affairs at CleanCapital, where he leads the company's federal and state policy strategy to accelerate clean energy deployment across the United States. With over a decade of experience in renewable energy policy, Scott plays a pivotal role in advocating for legislation that supports clean energy investment and innovation. Before joining CleanCapital, Scott held senior policy and advocacy roles at the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) and other leading organizations, where he worked closely with lawmakers, regulators, and industry stakeholders to shape impactful energy policy. At CleanCapital, Scott helps ensure that the company stays ahead of policy trends and capitalizes on emerging opportunities—particularly around the Inflation Reduction Act, tax equity structures, and energy storage integration. His deep understanding of the intersection between finance, policy, and technology positions him as a key voice in advancing the transition to a low-carbon economy. Stay Connected: Benoy Thanjan Email: info@reneuenergy.com LinkedIn: Benoy Thanjan Website: https://www.reneuenergy.com Scott Elias Website: https://cleancapital.com/ Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/scott-elias/ Email: selias@cleancapital.com Summer Solstice Fundraiser Join Reneu Energy, Positive Deviancy, and the Solar Maverick Podcast for the 2025 Summer Solstice Fundraiser! Celebrate the warm weather with us at the Summer Solstice Fundraiser, hosted by Reneu Energy, Positive Deviancy ,and the Solar Maverick Podcast. This special evening will take place on Thursday, June 5th, from 6 PM to 10 PM at Hudson Hall in Jersey City, NJ. We'll also be raising funds for the Let's Share the Sun Foundation, which aids impoverished communities in harnessing solar energy. Event Highlights: -Venue: Hudson Hall, a Czech biergarten and smokehouse co-owned by Benoy, CEO of Reneu Energy. -Time: 6 PM to 10 PM, with delicious food throughout the evening. -Tickets: $50 https://www.tickettailor.com/events/reneuenergy/1653652 CleanCapital Podcast https://cleancapital.com/thought-leadership/?_categories=podcast Defend Solar Energy https://solarpowersamerica.org/campaign/defend-american-energy/
Friday, May 23rd, 2025Today, House Republicans voted to pass the Billionaire Bailout Bill gutting Medicaid, Medicare, food assistance and climate tax credits to pay for tax cuts for the ultra wealthy; a federal judge has blocked the Trump administration from dismantling the Department of Education; another federal judge blocked Trump from revoking international students' legal status; minutes before that - the Trump administration blocked Harvard from enrolling international students; the White House has purged transcripts of Trump's remarks from its website; two Israel embassy staffers were shot at close range after an event in DC outside the Capital Jewish Museum Wednesday night; the full DC Circuit panel has allowed Trump to defund the Voice of America; DHS staffers quit over Kristi Noem's four hour polygraph loyalty tests; surprise surprise Musk's SpaceX is the frontrunner to build Trump's Golden Dome missile shield; Greenland has signed a mineral deal with Europe; Tim Walz says it would be a mistake for Democrats to abandon trans people; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You, PiqueLifeGet 20% off on the Radiant Skin Duo, plus a FREE starter kit at Piquelife.com/dailybeansAG is hosting - NO KINGS Waterfront Park, San Diego - Sat June 14 10am – 12pm PDTDonation link - secure.actblue.com/donate/fuelthemovementMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueMega Happy Hour Zoom Call - you can interact with not just me and Harry Dunn, Andy McCabe, and Dana Goldberg. They'll all be there this Friday at 7 PM ET 4 PM PT. Plus, you'll get these episodes ad free and early, and get pre-sale tickets and VIP access to our live events. You can join at patreon.com/muellershewrote for as little as $3 a month.Guest: John FugelsangTell Me Everything — John FugelsangThe John Fugelsang PodcastSiriusXM ProgressJohn Fugelsang (@johnfugelsang.bsky.social) — BlueskyPre-order Separation of Church and Hate: A Sane Person's Guide to Taking Back the Bible from Fundamentalists, Fascists, and Flock-Fleecing Frauds by John FugelsangStories:May 22, 2025 - DC Jewish museum shooting, two Israeli embassy staffers killed, Elias Rodriguez is suspect | CNNRepublicans pass Trump bill while trying to hide Medicaid, SNAP cuts | MSNBCExclusive: Musk's SpaceX is frontrunner to build Trump's Golden Dome missile shield | ReutersStaffers quit over Kristi Noem's 4-hour 'fishing expedition' polygraphs: report | Raw StoryWhite House purges transcripts of Trump's remarks from its website | NBC NewsTrump Administration Says It Is Halting Harvard's Ability to Enroll International Students | The New York TimesFederal judge blocks immigration authorities from revoking international students' legal status | Los Angeles TimesJudge blocks Trump bid to dismantle Department of Education | POLITICOGreenland gives Danish-French group permit to mine rock with green potential, in wake of Trump interest | ReutersGood Trouble: Use the five calls app or just pick up the phone and call your senator. Remind them that Trump doesn't have to get re-elected, but they do. They need to keep their hands off our medicare, medicaid, and food assistance because we are NOT OK with them taking OUR money to give themselves tax breaks. Call them every day. Pick a time and take a minute to keep reminding them who they work for. Remind them that WE are the government, NOT them, and that they can be replaced if they abandon us.5calls.org Contacting U.S. SenatorsFind Upcoming Demonstrations And Actions:50501 MovementJune 14th Nationwide Demonstrations - NoKings.orgIndivisible.orgShare your Good News or Good Trouble:dailybeanspod.com/goodFrom The Good NewsCooperative Innovative High Schools | NC DPIStudents with Disabilities Under the IDEA, Section 504, and the ADA | Congress.govBookshareNew Jersey Legislative Roster of Members | NJ Legislaturegcpetpals.orgMountain Pet RescueSoul Dog RescueNYC SaltReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Mega Happy Hour Zoom Call - you can interact with not just me and Harry Dunn, Andy McCabe, and Dana Goldberg. They'll all be there this Friday 5/23/2025 at 7 PM ET 4 PM PT. Plus, you'll get these episodes ad free and early, and get pre-sale tickets and VIP access to our live events. You can join at patreon.com/muellershewrote for as little as $3 a month. Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good Trouble:https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/ Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewrote , Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote,Dana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts
Donald Trump achieved a major political and policy victory on Thursday when the U.S. House of Representatives passed what he calls his “Big Beautiful Bill.” The less-creative name is the budget reconciliation bill, which presidents for years have used to implement large parts of their agenda. (That's how we got “Obamacare.”)The bill includes many of Trump's economic policy promises, such as tax cuts, but also rolls back much of the “green” energy and climate policies the Biden administration imposed via the Inflation Reduction Act.Join Heartland's Anthony Watts, Linnea Lueken, H. Sterling Burnett, Jim Lakely, and special guest Steve Milloy LIVE at 1 p.m. ET for Episode #58 of The Climate Realism Show. We'll break down the good, the bad, and the disappointing in the Big Beautiful Bill. We'll also cover the Crazy Climate News of the Week and answer your questions in the chat. In The Tank broadcasts LIVE every Thursday at 12pm CT on on The Heartland Institute YouTube channel. Tune in to have your comments addressed live by the In The Tank Crew. Be sure to subscribe and never miss an episode. See you there!Climate Change Roundtable is LIVE every Friday at 12pm CT on The Heartland Institute YouTube channel. Have a topic you want addressed? Join the live show and leave a comment for our panelists and we'll cover it during the live show!
House Republicans passed their megabill Thursday, taking a sledgehammer approach to the clean energy portions in Democrats' Inflation Reduction Act, going further than expected in the final text. POLITICO's James Bikales and Kelsey Tamborrino break down the energy details of the bill, the reaction on and around the Hill, and what's next in the reconciliation process. Plus, the Senate voted Thursday to nix California's phase-out of gasoline-fueled cars and trucks, handing a major victory to President Donald Trump. Kelsey Tamborrino is a reporter covering clean energy for POLITICO. James Bikales is a reporter for POLITICO. Nirmal Mulaikal is the co-host and producer of POLITICO Energy. Alex Keeney is a senior audio producer at POLITICO. Gloria Gonzalez is the deputy energy editor for POLITICO. Matt Daily is the energy editor for POLITICO. For more news on energy and the environment, subscribe to Power Switch, our free evening newsletter: https://www.politico.com/power-switch And for even deeper coverage and analysis, read our Morning Energy newsletter by subscribing to POLITICO Pro: https://subscriber.politicopro.com/newsletter-archive/morning-energy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Donald Trump achieved a major political and policy victory on Thursday when the U.S. House of Representatives passed what he calls his “Big Beautiful Bill.” The less-creative name is the budget reconciliation bill, which presidents for years have used to implement large parts of their agenda. (That's how we got “Obamacare.”)The bill includes many of Trump's economic policy promises, such as tax cuts, but also rolls back much of the “green” energy and climate policies the Biden administration imposed via the Inflation Reduction Act.Join Heartland's Anthony Watts, Linnea Lueken, H. Sterling Burnett, Jim Lakely, and special guest Steve Milloy LIVE at 1 p.m. ET for Episode #58 of The Climate Realism Show. We'll break down the good, the bad, and the disappointing in the Big Beautiful Bill. We'll also cover the Crazy Climate News of the Week and answer your questions in the chat. In The Tank broadcasts LIVE every Thursday at 12pm CT on on The Heartland Institute YouTube channel. Tune in to have your comments addressed live by the In The Tank Crew. Be sure to subscribe and never miss an episode. See you there!Climate Change Roundtable is LIVE every Friday at 12pm CT on The Heartland Institute YouTube channel. Have a topic you want addressed? Join the live show and leave a comment for our panelists and we'll cover it during the live show!
It's Thursday, May 22nd, A.D. 2025. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 125 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com. I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Jonathan Clark Pakistani Muslim man abducted, forcibly converted, and “married” Christian teen A Christian 15-year-old girl in Pakistan reunited with her parents yesterday after being abducted five months ago. A 29-year-old Muslim man, Muhammad Anees, kidnapped her with four other men from her aunt's home, forcibly converted her to Islam, and married her. The girl suffered abuse for months and is now pregnant. Attorney Hanif Hameed told Morning Star News, “This is a clear case of false conversion and fake marriage to cover the crime of abduction and rape.” Sadly, such cases are increasing in the South Asian country. Pakistan is ranked eighth on the Open Doors' World Watch List of nations where it is most difficult to be a Christian. Billy Graham Association to host evangelism meeting in Germany The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association is hosting the largest meeting on evangelism in 25 years in Berlin, Germany later this month. It's the same location that Rev. Billy Graham held the first World Congress on Evangelism in 1966. Evangelist Franklin Graham is focusing the upcoming event on the church in Europe. Listen to his comments to CBN News. GRAHAM: “We want to ignite a fire in Europe to where there's an excitement for evangelism and the churches are willing to be bold and not ashamed of the Gospel. “We've got Ukrainian churches coming. We have churches coming from Russia. You know, some say, ‘These countries are at war.' Yes, they are, but the Gospel is more powerful than any of that stuff.” In Romans 1:16, the Apostle Paul wrote, “I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes.” Trump announces “Golden Dome” missile defense system U.S. President Donald Trump announced plans for a $175 billion missile defense system on Tuesday. U.S. Space Force General Michael Guetlein is leading the project, known as the “Golden Dome.” Trump said the system should be completed in about three years. Defunding Planned Parenthood remains in Trump's budget bill A handful of conservative Republicans, who hesitated to support Trump's “big, beautiful bill,” appear ready to support the massive package after a furious pressure campaign from President Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson, reports The Hill. After meeting with Trump at the White House on Wednesday afternoon, and then huddling together afterward on Capitol Hill, the members of the conservative Freedom Caucus emerged to say they're on the cusp of supporting the package — if a laundry list of changes promised by the White House is reflected in the final proposal. Their newfound enthusiasm appears to stem from assurances Trump and Johnson made during the White House meeting, including a promise from the president to issue more executive orders addressing some of the spending concerns the conservatives couldn't secure in the legislation, and expanding the rollback of green energy tax credits enacted in the Democrats' 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. The bill seeks to deliver on Trump's key campaign promises, including making permanent Trump's 2017 tax cuts and eliminating taxes on tips. And, thanks in part to the calls of Worldview listeners, the defunding of Planned Parenthood remains in the bill. Court: Florida should require parental consent for a minor's abortion Last Friday, a federal appeals court ruled against a Florida law that allows minors to get abortions without parental consent. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Fifth District Court of Appeals ruled that the law was unconstitutional and violated parental rights. The decision stated, “Whatever asserted constitutional abortion rights may have justified Florida's [law] in the past unequivocally have been repudiated by both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Florida Supreme Court.” Married, employed, church-attending people happier Harvard University recently published their Global Flourishing Study which surveyed 200,000 people across 22 countries over the past five years. The study found people experienced higher levels of wellbeing when married, employed, and attending religious services. Professor Tyler VanderWeele led the research. He noted, “Religious service attendance was one of the factors most consistently associated with present or subsequent wellbeing, across countries and across outcomes.” Anniversary of First Council of Nicaea And finally, this month marks the anniversary of the First Council of Nicaea, 1,700 years ago. In May A.D. 325, about 300 Christian leaders convened in the city of Nicaea, located in modern-day Turkey. The council dealt with the doctrine of the Trinity. In particular, the church at the time had to refute the heresy of Arianism, which denied that Jesus is fully and eternally divine. The council went on to affirm the Trinity and Christ as fully God in the Nicene Creed. It is recited by churches worldwide to this day. The creed affirms there is “one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by Whom all things were made.” John 1:1 and 4 says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ... In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.” Close And that's The Worldview on this Thursday, May 22nd, in the year of our Lord 2025. Subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.
Republicans are divided over how to confront China's clean energy dominance in President Donald Trump's “big, beautiful” megabill, complicating negotiations and causing an intra-party rift. POLITICO's Zack Colman breaks down the Republican clean-energy feud and how it's shaping their reconciliation package. Plus, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin said more than $3 billion in funding for Biden EPA climate grants has flowed to nonprofits despite his agency's attempt to recoup $20 billion from a program funded by the Inflation Reduction Act. Zack Colman covers climate change for POLITICO. Nirmal Mulaikal is the co-host and producer of POLITICO Energy. Alex Keeney is a senior audio producer at POLITICO. Gloria Gonzalez is the deputy energy editor for POLITICO. Matt Daily is the energy editor for POLITICO. For more news on energy and the environment, subscribe to Power Switch, our free evening newsletter: https://www.politico.com/power-switch And for even deeper coverage and analysis, read our Morning Energy newsletter by subscribing to POLITICO Pro: https://subscriber.politicopro.com/newsletter-archive/morning-energy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Sponsored by KPMGNegotiations currently taking place on Capitol Hill stand to have a dramatic impact on tax incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act that have powered tremendous growth in clean energy and domestic manufacturing. With so much chatter coming out of Congress, Alfred Johnson, the co-founder and CEO of Crux, and Lauren Collins, a partner at Vinson and Elkins LLP, return to the show to help separate the signal from the noise -- or in this case, decipher the difference between a scalpel and a sledgehammer. Insights from Crux (updated May 22, 2025)Insights from Vinson & Elkins LLP (updated May 22, 2025)More resources from KPMGTransferable Tax CreditsTrade and Tarfiff InsightsShaping the Future of Renewable and Emerging EnergiesSign up for the Renewable Energy SmartBrief
Legislation with massive implications for clean energy in the US has been making progress in Congress. The Republican party's “big beautiful bill”, introducing sweeping changes to taxes and government spending, would phase out most of the tax credits for low-carbon energy that were created, expanded or extended in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022.To unpack the proposals and examine what they might mean for the US and the world, host Ed Crooks is joined by some of the Energy Gang's top policy wonks:Amy Myers-Jaffe, Director of NYU's Energy, Climate Justice, and Sustainability LabRobbie Orvis, Senior Director for Modelling and Analysis at the thinktank Energy InnovationRay Long, President and Chief Executive of the American Council on Renewable Energy They discuss whether the phaseout of tax credits for wind, solar and storage will deter the development of renewable energy. The credits have created a whole industry to support investment in new renewables projects. What happens if those credits go away?The group also dig into the crucial details of the proposals, including changes to the transferability of tax credits, and more stringent provisions on “foreign entities of concern” or FEOCs. Those rules could affect the majority of clean energy projects in the US. As of Tuesday 20th May, the game is not over. Some Republicans in the House and the Senate senators think the proposals don't fit with the administration's bigger goals, and have been fighting to save at least some of the credits.The gang set out the various options for how the negotiations over the bill could play out, and assess the potential damage.And they ask the question: could clean energy in the US actually be better off without support from tax credits?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Punchbowl News Congressional Reporter Max Cohen joins Anna Palmer to discuss how Congressional Republicans are working to roll back some Inflation Reduction Act provisions and undo some regulations that critics say will stifle new medical innovations. Want more in-depth daily coverage from Congress? Subscribe to our free Punchbowl News AM newsletter at punchbowl.news. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
“While the word ‘climate' may be politically charged for some, the need for affordable, reliable, and secure energy is something we can all agree on. Americans are calling for action, and as Members of Congress it's our responsibility to deliver. If we want long-term solutions that address both our constituents' concerns and growing climate risks, we must work together to strengthen our energy and climate security with urgency.” Congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan to Electric Ladies Podcast This week, Congress is set to debate legislation that could reshape the United States' energy landscape. At stake is more than $700 million in climate action and clean energy investments from the Inflation Reduction Act that was intended to benefit the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. What will the impact be if that funding is withdrawn. Listen to Congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania and co-chair of the Bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus, a rare example of cooperation on Capitol Hill. She's also co-chair of the Women in STEM Caucus, which is also bipartisan. She shares insights into how to build bipartisanship, address the climate crisis and energy needs – as well as the threat that political polarization poses to keeping communities and critical infrastructure safe from extreme weather events. You'll hear about: How Pennsylvania's political landscape shapes the path of climate legislation What the Bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus is doing to advance the clean energy transition How extreme weather events can open the door to bipartisan climate action Why Congresswoman Houlahan's leadership with the Women in STEM Caucus matters Plus, insightful career advice “Recognize that whatever you choose to do right now is not the end decision for the rest of your life. When you look backwards it's going to make sense, but when you look forward, it's going to be a crooked line. It's not going to be a straight line to somewhere, so do not to be too hard on yourself, do not try to seek perfection.” Chrissy Houlahan on Electric Ladies Podcast You'll also like: Most Americans Want Climate Action, Study Says. How To Bridge The Political Divide, ELP Host Joan Michelson's article that includes Congresswoman Houlahan. Women Rewriting The Climate Conversation, a panel from The Earth Day Women's Summit moderated by Joan Michelson Hilary Doe, Michigan's Chief Growth Office on how the state is turning IRA Credits into Growth Doreen Harris, President and CEO of NYSERDA, on how New York is leading the way to the clean energy future. Sherri Goodman, former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, on why climate change is an issue of national security. Joan Michelson's Forbes article on Fossil Fuels, War And Climate: Women On The Frontlines Call For A New Security Mindset Read more of Joan's Forbes articles here. More from Electric Ladies Podcast! JUST LAUNCHED: Join our global community at electric-ladies.mykajabi.com! For a limited time, be a member of the Electric Ladies Founders' Circle at an exclusive special rate. Elevate your career with expert coaching and ESG advisory with Electric Ladies Podcast. Unlock new opportunities, gain confidence, and achieve your career goals with the right guidance. Subscribe to our newsletter to receive our podcasts, articles, events and career advice – and special coaching offers. Thanks for subscribing on Apple Podcasts, iHeart Radio and Spotify and leaving us a review! Don't forget to follow us on our socials Twitter: @joanmichelson LinkedIn: Electric Ladies Podcast with Joan Michelson Twitter: @joanmichelson Facebook: Green Connections Radio
Dozens of rank-and-file Republicans like Arizona Representative Juan Ciscomani are facing a difficult decision: resist the party's efforts to gut the Inflation Reduction Act as part of their reconciliation package or incur the wrath of their constituents who are economically benefiting from the law. POLITICO's James Bikales breaks down how Ciscomani, a rising star in the GOP who holds one of the most competitive House seats in the nation, is wrestling with this dilemma. Plus on Monday, a panel of appellate judges appeared skeptical of EPA's reasons for terminating $20 billion in Biden-era climate grants, and the Energy Department said it will now start issuing final orders for pending applications to export natural gas. Josh Siegel is an energy reporter for POLITICO and the host of POLITICO Energy. James Bikales is a reporter for POLITICO. Nirmal Mulaikal is the co-host and producer of POLITICO Energy. Alex Keeney is a senior audio producer at POLITICO. Gloria Gonzalez is the deputy energy editor for POLITICO. Matt Daily is the energy editor for POLITICO. For more news on energy and the environment, subscribe to Power Switch, our free evening newsletter: https://www.politico.com/power-switch And for even deeper coverage and analysis, read our Morning Energy newsletter by subscribing to POLITICO Pro: https://subscriber.politicopro.com/newsletter-archive/morning-energy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
On the latest Clean Power Live, Tim Montague and John Weaver dive into the cutting-edge developments from InterSolar Europe 2025 and discuss critical US clean energy policy challenges. John shares his first-hand experiences from the conference, highlighting how the battery revolution is transforming the renewable energy landscape, with batteries now taking up more exhibition space than traditional solar technology…HighlightsBattery Revolution Takes Center Stage: At InterSolar Europe 2025, batteries and battery-adjacent technologies now occupy more exhibition space than traditional solar equipment, signaling a major industry shift (PV Magazine).Next-Generation Battery Technology: CATL showcased an ultra-dense 9MWh battery container, while sodium batteries emerge as a potential lithium alternative despite current cost and lifespan limitations (ESS News).Solar & Tech Innovation Continues: New developments include flexible colored solar panels exceeding 20% efficiency, laser wind measurement systems providing 5-10 minute warning of damaging winds, and automated cleaning robots for arid region installations.Hotel Solar Carport Project: Weaver's 690 kW commercial project is progressing toward Q3 2025 completion despite excavation challenges (LinkedIn).IRA Under Threat: Proposed legislation could undermine the Inflation Reduction Act, which has spurred $321 billion in domestic clean energy investments, by imposing unworkable supply chain verification requirements (Canary Media).Battery Tariff Developments: Tariffs on Chinese battery imports have been reduced from 145% to 60%, though industry experts estimate effective tariffs remain at 40-65% when all categories are considered (Energy Storage News). Support the showConnect with Tim Clean Power Hour Clean Power Hour on YouTubeTim on TwitterTim on LinkedIn Email tim@cleanpowerhour.com Review Clean Power Hour on Apple PodcastsThe Clean Power Hour is produced by the Clean Power Consulting Group and created by Tim Montague. Contact us by email: CleanPowerHour@gmail.com Corporate sponsors who share our mission to speed the energy transition are invited to check out https://www.cleanpowerhour.com/support/The Clean Power Hour is brought to you by CPS America, maker of North America's number one 3-phase string inverter, with over 6GW shipped in the US. With a focus on commercial and utility-scale solar and energy storage, the company partners with customers to provide unparalleled performance and service. The CPS America product lineup includes 3-phase string inverters from 25kW to 275kW, exceptional data communication and controls, and energy storage solutions designed for seamless integration with CPS America systems. Learn more at www.chintpowersystems.com
This Day in Legal History: Blue Jeans PatentedOn May 20, 1873, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office granted Patent No. 139,121 to Jacob Davis and Levi Strauss for an innovation that would revolutionize American workwear and fashion: the use of copper rivets to reinforce the stress points on men's work pants. Davis, a tailor from Reno, Nevada, originally developed the concept after customers complained about the durability of their trousers. He lacked the funds to file for a patent on his own, so he partnered with Strauss, a San Francisco dry goods merchant who had been supplying him with fabric. The riveted pants were constructed from denim—a sturdy cotton twill that Strauss already sold—which was tough enough for laborers, miners, and cowboys during the American Westward Expansion.The legal protection granted by the patent secured exclusive rights for Strauss and Davis to produce the reinforced trousers, giving them a significant advantage in the market. This protection enabled Levi Strauss & Co. to expand rapidly and establish itself as a dominant force in durable clothing for manual laborers. The patent also illustrates how intellectual property law can incentivize practical innovation by providing a framework for commercial exclusivity.While the original patent expired in 1890, the riveted jean had by then become an entrenched part of American identity. The evolution of the product—from utilitarian workwear to a global fashion staple—highlights how a simple legal instrument can underpin lasting commercial success. The legal recognition of their invention helped formalize what would become a uniquely American contribution to the world's wardrobe. Strauss and Davis's patent remains one of the most iconic examples of how intellectual property law intersects with design, utility, and culture.As federal AI regulation lags, state attorneys general (AGs) are stepping into the void by using existing laws—such as consumer protection, privacy, and anti-discrimination statutes—to govern the use of generative AI technologies. Although only California, Colorado, and Utah have passed AI-specific legislation, AGs across other states are issuing formal guidance and taking enforcement actions to address AI misuse. Key concerns include the use of personal data, deepfakes, fraudulent representations, and algorithmic bias in sectors like hiring, healthcare, and lending.California AG Rob Bonta has warned that AI tools causing misleading or discriminatory outcomes may violate state law, especially in sensitive fields like health and employment. Massachusetts AG Joy Campbell cautioned that misrepresenting AI capabilities or using AI-generated content to deceive consumers could breach the state's Consumer Protection Act. Oregon's guidance focuses on transparency, privacy, and anti-discrimination concerns, requiring consent for data use and allowing opt-outs from significant AI-based decisions. New Jersey's AG launched a Civil Rights and Technology Initiative targeting algorithmic bias, noting that even third-party tools can trigger liability under anti-discrimination laws. Texas AG Ken Paxton reached a settlement with an AI health tech firm over potentially misleading marketing, marking the first known AG enforcement action under consumer protection law involving generative AI.A Reuters column by Ashley Taylor of Clayton Friedman and Gene Fishel of Troutman Pepper Locke LLP emphasizes that companies cannot assume regulatory immunity simply because AI tools are new or complex. Liability can arise from disparate impacts alone, even absent intent to discriminate. Firms must carefully audit their AI systems, clarify marketing claims, and ensure fair and secure implementation across jurisdictions. Given the fragmented legal landscape, businesses should involve legal and technical leadership early in AI deployment to reduce risk exposure.State AGs fill the regulatory voidThe long-running feud between Donald Trump and New York Attorney General Letitia James has escalated sharply with a federal investigation now targeting James herself. Trump, having returned to the White House, now has the Justice Department behind him, while James continues to lead Democratic opposition through lawsuits challenging his policies. Both known for their combative styles, the two have clashed over ideology, politics, and Trump's business practices.The new front in their battle involves allegations that James committed mortgage fraud, based on documents where she allegedly misrepresented her primary residence and misstated details about her Brooklyn property. The Justice Department, acting on a referral from a federal housing agency, is investigating the claims through its offices in Virginia and New York. James's lawyer denies wrongdoing, saying the filings were accurate in context and reflect long-standing property use.James has framed the investigation as retaliation for her successful legal actions against Trump, including a high-profile civil fraud suit that resulted in a $450 million judgment against him for inflating asset values. Trump and his allies have attempted to link James's alleged conduct to the very behavior she prosecuted, suggesting hypocrisy.Despite the legal risks, the public feud may benefit both figures politically. James faces re-election in 2026, and her confrontation with Trump plays well with Democratic voters. For Trump, casting James as a corrupt adversary energizes his base. Their mutual antagonism has become a defining feature of New York's political and legal landscape.Donald Trump and Letitia James Raise Stakes in Bitter Feud - WSJThis week in my column for Bloomberg, I argue that House Republicans' push to repeal major clean energy tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act is a short-sighted move that prioritizes fiscal optics over long-term national interest. While they claim to be reducing the deficit, the repeal would do little to constrain the $3.7 trillion cost of extending Trump-era tax cuts that largely benefit the wealthy. The energy credits being cut were not handouts but performance-based incentives—rewards for building, hiring, and deploying clean tech—that sparked a manufacturing and jobs boom, particularly in red states like Georgia and Tennessee.Eliminating these credits would introduce severe policy instability, undermining both current and planned investments. Companies made long-term siting and hiring decisions based on stable tax incentives; reversing them now would not only threaten those investments but signal to global capital markets that the U.S. is an unreliable industrial partner. I emphasize that the structure of the law—tying incentives to emissions reductions—was one of its best features, offering predictability that's now at risk.This volatility would be a gift to America's competitors. The EU and China are doubling down on green industrial policy, while the U.S. risks stalling momentum just as it began catching up. Trust in federal policy durability isn't easily regained once lost. The repeal wouldn't just cost jobs or projects—it would damage the credibility of American industrial policy in a global race where we're already behind. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
Maheep Mandoli discusses the solar space, which he believes is due for a rebound as two major overhangs - the Inflation Reduction Act and tariffs - are addressed. Mandoli expects investors to return to solar stocks, which have been trading at low valuations since before the 2024 election. He also shares his top pick, First Solar (FSLR) which he thinks can benefit from nearshoring and has a competitive pricing advantage.======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day. Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/ About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about
Congressman Eric Burlison from Missouri discusses the current state of Congress amidst looming deadlines and unfulfilled promises. Burlison shares his insights on the ongoing budget negotiations, the implications of the Inflation Reduction Act, and the pressing military procurement crisis in America. Additional interviews with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Brent Sadler from the Heritage Foundation.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
In this episode of The Lobby Shop, Liam Donovan provides an update on the budget reconciliation process in Congress, and the team dives into the proposed House cuts to energy programs funded by the Inflation Reduction Act, proposed Medicaid reductions, and the ongoing debate over SALT deductions—along with the challenges the legislation faces in the Senate and a tight legislative timeline. Josh and Paul also examine the current state of the Trump Administration's tariffs, including the temporary easing of the U.S.–China trade war, multiple Section 232 investigations, and the complex policy landscape companies must navigate amid evolving tariff rules.
with Brad Friedman & Desi Doyen
House Republicans aim to repeal and phase out major energy portions of the Inflation Reduction Act, the Democrats' climate law, as part of President Donald Trump's megabill. POLITICO's Josh Siegel and James Bikales break down what House Republicans are proposing, the potential impacts, reaction from the Senate and green groups, and the timeline for this legislation. Plus, the Trump administration said it intends to roll back first-ever limits set by the Biden administration on four toxic “forever chemicals” contaminating water supplies across the country. James Bikales is a reporter for POLITICO. Josh Siegel is the host of POLITICO Energy and a congressional energy reporter for POLITICO. Nirmal Mulaikal is the co-host and producer of POLITICO Energy. Alex Keeney is a senior audio producer at POLITICO. Gloria Gonzalez is the deputy energy editor for POLITICO. Matt Daily is the energy editor for POLITICO. For more news on energy and the environment, subscribe to Power Switch, our free evening newsletter: https://www.politico.com/power-switch And for even deeper coverage and analysis, read our Morning Energy newsletter by subscribing to POLITICO Pro: https://subscriber.politicopro.com/newsletter-archive/morning-energy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Our strategists Michael Zezas and Ariana Salvatore provide context around U.S. House Republicans' proposed tax bill and how investors should view its potential market impact.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Michael Zezas: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Michael Zezas, Global Head of Fixed Income Research and Public Policy Strategy.Ariana Salvatore: And I'm Ariana Salvatore, Public Policy Strategist.Michael Zezas: Today, we'll dig into Congress's deliberations on taxes and fiscal spending.It's Wednesday, May 14th at 10am in New York.Michael Zezas: So, Ariana, there's been a lot of news around the tax and spending plans that Congress is pursuing; this fiscal package – and clients are really, really focused on it. You're having a lot of those conversations right now. Why are clients so focused on all of this?Ariana Salvatore: So, clients have reasons to focus on this tax policy bill across equities, fixed income, and for macroeconomic impacts.Starting with equities, there's a lot of the 2017 tax cut bill that's coming up for expiration towards the end of this year. So, this bill is Congress's chance to extend the expiring TCJA. And add on some incremental tax cuts that President Trump floated on the campaign trail. So, there's some really important sector impacts on the specific legislation side. And then as far as the deficit goes, that matters a lot for the economic ramifications next year and for bond yields.But Mike, to pivot this back to you, where do you think investor expectations are for the outcome of this package?Michael Zezas: So there's a lot of moving pieces in this fiscal policy package, and I think what's happening here is that investors can project a lot onto this. They can project a lot of positivity and constructive outcomes for markets; and a lot of negativity and negative outcomes for markets.So, for example, if you are really focused on the deficit impact of cutting taxes and whether or not there's enough spending cuts to offset those tax extensions, then you could look at the array of possible outcomes here and expect a major deficit expansion. And that might make you less constructive on bonds because you would expect yields to go higher as there was greater supply of Treasuries needed to borrow that much to finance the tax cuts. Again, not necessarily fully offset by spending cuts.So, you could look at this and say, well, this will ultimately be something where economic growth helps tax revenues. And you might be looking at the benefits for companies and the feed through to the equity markets and think really positively about it.And we think the truth is probably somewhere in between. You're not going to get policy that really justifies either your highest hopes or your greatest fears here.Ariana Salvatore: So, it's really like a Rorschach test for investors. When we think about our base case, how do you think that's going to materialize? What on the policy front are we watching for?Michael Zezas: Yeah, so we have to consider the starting point here, which is Congress is trying to address a series of tax cuts that are set to expire at the end of the year. And if they extend all of those tax cuts, then on a year-over-year basis, you didn't really change any policy. So that just on its own might not mean a meaningful deficit increase.Now, if Congress is able to extend greater tax cuts on top of that; but it's going to offset those greater tax cuts with spending cuts in revenue raises elsewhere, then again you might end up with a net effect close to zero on a deficit basis.And the way our economists look at this mix is that you might end up with an effect from a stimulus perspective on the economy that's something close to neutral as well. So, there's a lot of policy changes happening beneath the surface. But in the aggregate, it might not mean a heck of a lot for the economic outlook for next year.Now, that doesn't mean that there would be zero deficit increase in the aggregate next year because this is just one policy that is part of a larger set of government policies that make up the total spending posture of the government. There's already something in the range of $200-250 billion of deficit increase that was already going to happen next year. Because of weaker revenue growth on slower economic growth this year, and some spending that would automatically have happened because of inflation cost adjustments and higher interest on the debt. So, long story short, the policy that's happening right now that we think is going to be the endpoint for congressional deliberations isn't something our economists see as meaningfully uplifting growth for next year, and it probably increases the deficit – at least somewhat next year.Now we're thinking very short term here about what happens in 2026. But I think investors need to think around that timeline because if you're thinking about what this means for getting deficits smaller, multiple years ahead, or creating the type of tax environment that might induce greater corporate investment and greater economic growth years ahead – all those things are possible. But they're very hypothetical and they're subject to policy changes that could happen after the next Congress comes in or the next president comes in.So, Ariana, that's the overall look at our base case. But I think it's important to understand here that there are multiple different paths this legislation could follow. Can you explain what are some of the sticking points? And, depending on how they're resolved, how that might change the trajectory of what's ultimately passed here?Ariana Salvatore: There are a number of disagreements that need to be resolved. In particular, one of the biggest that we're focused on is on the SALT cap; so that's the cap on State And Local Tax deductions that individuals can take. That raised about a trillion dollars of revenue in the first iteration of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017.Republicans generally are okay with making a modification to that cap, maybe taking it a bit higher, or imposing some income thresholds. But the SALT caucus, this small group of Republicans in Congress, they're pushing for a full repeal or something bigger than just a small dollar amount increase.There's also a group of moderate Republicans pushing against any sort of spending cuts to programs like Medicaid and SNAP; that's the food stamps program. And then there's another cohort of House Republicans that are seeking to preserve the Inflation Reduction Act. Ultimately, these are all going to be continuous tension points. They're going to have to settle on some pay fors, some savings, and we think where that lands is effectively at a $90 billion or so deficit increase from just the tax policy changes next year.Now with tariff revenue excluded, that's probably closer to [$]130 billion. But Mike, to your point, there are these scheduled increases in outlays that also are going to have to be considered for next year's deficit. So, you're looking at an overall increase of about $310 billion.Michael Zezas: Yeah, I think that's right and the different ways those different dynamics could play out, I think puts us in a range of a $200 billion expansion maybe on the low end, and a $400 billion expansion on the high end. And these are meaningful numbers. But I think important context for investors is that these numbers might seem a lot smaller than some of what's been reported in the press, and that's because the press reports on the congressional budget office scoring, and these are typically 10-year numbers.So, you would multiply that one-year number by 10 at least conceptually. And these are numbers relative to a reality in which the tax cuts were allowed to expire. So, it's basically counting up revenue that is being missed by not allowing the tax cuts to expire. So, the context matters a lot here. And so we have been encouraging investors to really kind of look through the headlines, really kind of break down the context and really kind of focus on the short term impacts because those are the most reliable impacts and the ones to really anchor to; because policy uncertainty beyond a year is substantially higher than even the very high policy uncertainty we're experiencing right now.So, sticking with the theme of uncertainty, let's talk timing here. Like we came into the year thinking this tax bill would be resolved late in the year. Is that still the case or are you thinking it might be a bit sooner?Ariana Salvatore: I think that timing still holds up. Right now, the reconciliation bill is supposed to address the expiring debt ceiling. So, the real deadline for getting the bill done is the X date or the date by which the extraordinary measures are projected to be exhausted. That's the date that we would potentially hit an actual default.Of course, that date is somewhat of a moving target. It's highly dependent on tax receipts from Treasury. But our estimate is that it's somewhere around August or September. In the meantime, there's a number of key catalysts that we're watching; namely, I would say, other projections of the X date coming from Treasury, as well as some of these markups when we start to get more bill text and hear about how some of the disputes are being resolved.As I mentioned, we had text earlier this week, but there's still no quote fix for the SALT cap, and the house is still tentatively pushing for its Memorial Day deadline. That's just six legislative days away.Michael Zezas: Got it. So, I think then that means that we're starting to learn a lot more about how this bill comes together. We will be learning even a lot more over the next few months and while we set out our expectations that you're going to have some fiscal policy expansion. But largely a broadly unchanged posture for U.S. fiscal policy. We're going to have to keep checking those regularly as we get new bits of information coming out of Congress on probably a daily basis at this point.Ariana Salvatore: That's right.Michael Zezas: Great. Well, Ariana, thanks for taking the time to talk.Ariana Salvatore: Great speaking with you, Michael.Michael Zezas: Thank you for your time. If you find Thoughts on the Market and the topics we cover of interest, leave us a review wherever you listen. And if you like what you hear, tell a friend or colleague about us today.
“How do we get people in the tent to even hear the story? With ‘Living with Ed' and other projects, we were a family they could identify with. We were yelling, laughing, loving each other while talking about real issues. I represented the average person's perspective on issues like taking the subway. There's the funny, and there's the conflict. If it's not entertaining, it's not going to connect.” Rachelle Begley on Electric Ladies Podcast Culture wars around climate change do more harm than good. As climate-driven extreme weather events become more frequent, proposed cuts to climate-related programs at the federal, state, or corporate level, pose a growing threat to public safety. The climate crisis is a safety issue – this isn't political. Fresh from The Earth Day Women's Summit at Earthx2025, listen to a live recording of a panel moderated by Joan Michelson about how we can find common ground in a climate crisis. Hear from women who have successfully bridged culture, politics and platforms to reframe conversations around the climate crisis. You'll hear from Inna Modja, Goodwill Ambassador of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, on humanizing climate migration. Rachelle Carson Begley, Actor and Environmentalist, on engaging through entertainment. Hayden Begley, Content Creator, on using social media to engage diverse audiences. Chelsea Henderson, Director of Editorial Content at RepublicEn, on bridging the political divide, and who also shares insightful career advice, and… Joan Michelson, host of Electric Ladies Podcast “Playing into your interests and strengths is important. It's become a bit of a cliché to say, ‘Do what you love, and everything will fall into place,' because it's not that easy. I try not to say no to opportunities. Instead, I try to say yes more and engage with other women, because women are incredible at supporting one another. Leaning into that support system – hearing about the pitfalls, the challenges, what was hard, what was easy – is invaluable.” Chelsea Henderson on Electric Ladies Podcast You'll also like: Hilary Doe, Chief Growth Officer of Michigan, on how the state leverages the Inflation Reduction Act to increase climate resilience and drive growth. Chelsea Henderson, Director of Editorial Content at RepublicEn, on bridging the partisan divide on climate. Daniella Ortega, Director of “Carbon: An Unauthorized Biography”, on communicating non-preachy climate messages Courtney Bickert, social innovator and comedienne, on how comedy could help us solve today's biggest problems. Joan Michelson's Forbes article on Communicating Creatively On Climate To Save Lives Read more of Joan's Forbes articles here. More from Electric Ladies Podcast! JUST LAUNCHED: Join our global community at electric-ladies.mykajabi.com! For a limited time, be a member of the Electric Ladies Founders' Circle at an exclusive special rate. Elevate your career with expert coaching and ESG advisory with Electric Ladies Podcast. Unlock new opportunities, gain confidence, and achieve your career goals with the right guidance. Subscribe to our newsletter to receive our podcasts, articles, events and career advice – and special coaching offers. Thanks for subscribing on Apple Podcasts, iHeart Radio and Spotify and leaving us a review! Don't forget to follow us on our socials Twitter: @joanmichelson LinkedIn: Electric Ladies Podcast with Joan Michelson Twitter: @joanmichelson Facebook: Green Connections Radio
Thursday, May 8th, 2025Today, Republican Jefferson Griffin has conceded the North Carolina Supreme Court race to Democratic incumbent Allison Riggs; a second US Navy jet has been lost at sea under the watchful eye of Pete Kegstand; the Trump administration has ordered the intelligence community to amp up spying on Greenland; Salt Lake City and Boise have adopted official pride flags in response to state laws banning them; a US appeals court allows Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk to be transferred to Vermont to challenge her immigration detention; lawyers have asked for a restraining order to stop the removal of migrants to Libya; the Abrego Garcia case is delayed again - this time because Trump is invoking privilege over discovery; a woman says a rent a cop at a hotel in Boston confronted her in the bathroom and demanded she prove her gender; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You, IQBARText DAILYBEANS to 64000 to get 20% off all IQBAR products, plus FREE shipping. Message and data rates may apply.MSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueGuest: Rep. Mile Levin (CA 49th)Mike Levin - House.govRep. Mike Levin (@levin.house.gov) - BlueskyMike Levin (@repmikelevin) - InstagramRep. Mike Levin (@RepMikeLevin) - twitterStories:Second US Navy jet is lost at sea from Truman aircraft carrier | CNN PoliticsWoman says security guard at Liberty Hotel in Boston confronted her in bathroom, asked to prove gender | CBS News BostonExclusive | U.S. Orders Intelligence Agencies to Step Up Spying on Greenland | WSJJudge Orders Elections Board to Certify Democrat's Victory in Contested N.C. Race | The New York TimesDetained Tufts student must be transferred to Vermont, appeals court rules | The Washington PostSalt Lake City and Boise Adopt Official Pride Flags in Response to State Laws | The New York Times Good Trouble:Protests are being planned to counter US President Donald Trump's military parade on June 14. The 'No Kings' group is organizing nationwide demonstrations against Trump's policies. These events coincide with the US Army's 250th-anniversary parade. Over 100 'No Kings' events are registered across the US. The group aims to reject authoritarianism. No Kings.orgIndivisible And Partners Announce ‘NO KINGS' Nationwide Day of Defiance on Flag Day, During Trump's Birthday Parade'We Don't Do Kings': Mass Protests Planned to Counter Trump's Birthday Military Parade | Common DreamsFind Upcoming Actions - 50501 MovementFrom The Good NewsAbortion Every Day by Jessica Valenti | SubstackNovaCareStrong Paws RescueReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good Trouble:https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/ Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewrote , Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote,Dana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
