A New Tax Provision Supposedly Targeting Junk Lawsuits Actually Imperils Conservatives
Trial lawyers and the left deserve a good thrashing (policy-wise), but that isn’t what these bills do.Trial lawyers and the left deserve a good thrashing (policy-wise), but that isn’t what these bills do.The parliamentarian isn’t more powerful than the people
First we were told that unelected federal judges could dictate all policy, law, and appropriations. Now the excuse for inaction is the Senate parliamentarian.
Left-wing protesters chant “no kings,” but nearly every major Trump-era domestic policy was blocked by a court. Nearly 200 actions on immigration, personnel, spending, and transgender issues were halted or overturned by the judiciary. Today, the good provisions in an otherwise lackluster reconciliation bill are being gutted — not by Congress, not by voters, but by a Senate staffer.
Republicans now hide behind the parliamentarian to justify a bill that hikes the deficit, preserves green energy handouts, and leaves the welfare state untouched.
If Republicans refuse to overrule the courts, the parliamentarian, or anyone else standing in the way, what’s the plan? What’s the point of winning elections if Democrats, judges, and bureaucrats still call the shots? Do they really expect to get 60 Senate votes?
Over the past week, Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled that a long list of provisions violate the Byrd Rule and can’t be included in the reconciliation bill. Among them:
Financial Cuts:
- Require states with high food stamp overpayments to share in the cost (reduced from $128 billion to just $41 billion).
- Cut $6.4 billion from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
- Cut $1.4 billion in Federal Reserve staff wages.
- Cut $293 million from the Office of Financial Research.
- Eliminate the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board ($771 million).
- Cut Pentagon funding if the department misses spending deadlines.
- Ban food stamps for illegal aliens.
Policy Measures:
- Repeal green energy subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act.
- Overturn EPA tailpipe emission rules.
- Vacate certain court injunctions when plaintiffs don’t post bond.
- Bar funding for sanctuary cities.
- Allow states to arrest illegal aliens.
- Require congressional approval of major federal regulations (modified REINS Act).
Republicans now hide behind MacDonough to justify a bill that hikes the deficit, preserves green energy handouts, and leaves the welfare state untouched.
The Byrd Rule has become an excuse to flush the conservative priorities and pass a mess. And let’s not kid ourselves — the parliamentarian had no objection to provisions that punish states for regulating AI. Under the Senate version of the bill, states can still regulate AI and data centers, but if they do, they lose access to BEAD broadband funding.
The good stuff in this bill may have been bait — added just to lure conservatives into voting yes, knowing full well the parliamentarian would knock it out. That’s why conservatives must pressure President Trump to do what Senate Republicans won’t: overrule MacDonough.
RELATED: Split the Big Beautiful Bill Act, seal the border … and give Trump a real win
Let’s get something straight: The Senate parliamentarian does not make the rules. The presiding officer does — and the majority party controls the chair. The office of parliamentarian didn’t even exist until 1935. The parliamentarian sits below the presiding officer on the rostrum, not above him. Her advice is just that — advice.
The Congressional Research Service puts it plainly: "As a staff official, neither parliamentarian is empowered to make decisions that are binding on the House or Senate. The parliamentarians and their deputies/assistants only offer advice that the presiding Representative or Senator may accept or reject."
JD Vance, as president of the Senate, can overrule MacDonough at any time. Here’s how: When Democrats raise a point of order against a GOP-backed provision, MacDonough may say it violates the Byrd Rule and must be stripped. But the presiding officer — Vance or his designee — can simply say no. That provision stays in the bill. The Senate then proceeds under the reconciliation process and passes the whole thing with a simple majority.
Trump can make this happen. He can threaten to send Vance to the chair if Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) refuses to play ball. Thune can demand MacDonough’s firing — just as Trent Lott did in 2001 when the parliamentarian ruled against Republican priorities.
Trump is right to be frustrated. On Tuesday, he demanded that Congress cancel the July 4 recess and finish the job. But he also needs to make it clear that he won’t accept a watered-down deal. He must draw red lines around immigration and the Green New Deal. The American people didn’t elect Elizabeth MacDonough. They elected Trump.
And no unelected staffer has the right to overturn the will of 77 million voters.
Split the Big Beautiful Bill Act, seal the border … and give Trump a real win
The GOP doesn’t resemble a big tent any more — it looks more like a boundless landfill. No shared vision or coherent guiding principles bind the party’s disparate factions beyond not having a “D” next to their names. That’s why it’s impossible to pass a reasonable budget bill that cuts spending without including massive subsidies for high-tax blue states.
The rift between the Freedom Caucus, the K Street crowd, RINOs, and the Trump White House remains unbridgeable. So what’s the realistic path forward on budget reconciliation?
With real leadership, Trump could sign the most consequential part of his 2024 mandate into law — before the smoke clears in LA.
Focus on the one issue that unites the base: immigration enforcement.
Riots in Los Angeles this week have made the case for an immigration-only reconciliation bill even stronger. The public sees the connection. The urgency is obvious. And President Trump, understandably frustrated by the calendar — it’s June and he hasn’t signed a single major legislative win — wants action now.
But cramming unrelated tax and health care provisions into one big, bloated bill guarantees disaster. Good members will face a bad vote. So why not act decisively?
Split the immigration provisions from the rest. Make them tougher. Pass the bill right away, while the chaos in L.A. is still at the front of everyone’s mind. Save the fiscal brawls for later.
The math of an immigration-focused bill
The current draft of H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill, includes about $185 billion in new funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection, and new and improved border infrastructure. It also tacks on another $150 billion in defense spending — a top White House priority.
Even strong provisions need offsets. But in a party this fractured, cutting spending isn’t just difficult — it’s practically taboo.
Still, by limiting the bill to the Department of Homeland Security and Pentagon spending and scrapping the tax components, Republicans would only need to offset $335 billion over 10 years.
RELATED: How much Green New Scam spending will survive the One Big Beautiful Bill?
That’s well within the realm of possibility. They could hit that number using the consensus cuts and immigration reforms already in the bill. No gimmicks. No sleight of hand. Just political will and a sense of timing.
The current bill would generate about $77 billion in new revenue from immigration-related fees and taxes on remittances. It saves hundreds of billions more over the next decade by cutting off illegal aliens from Medicaid, Obamacare, and food stamps.
Republicans should go farther and ban illegal aliens from claiming the child tax credit — a move that could save another $50 billion.
Instead of loading the first reconciliation bill with a jumble of unrelated and divisive provisions, Republicans should focus on consensus items: national security, enforcement of sovereignty, and policies that put Americans first.
If the Republicans were more ambitious, they would use this bill to repeal the Green New Deal. Funding illegal immigration and the Green New Deal were the Biden administration’s two most transformative and unpopular policies. Target both. Pass the bill right away. Deliver a win that matches the mandate voters gave Trump — and give the president a badly needed legislative victory.
Enforcement money isn’t enough
Throwing $180 billion more at enforcement won’t solve the immigration crisis. Spend a trillion on deportations, and it still won’t matter if courts continue to block action.
Even in Trump’s rare Supreme Court wins on immigration, the justices insisted every illegal alien must receive due process — despite deportation being a civil process, not a punishment.
No president can litigate his way out of an invasion. Even with favorable rulings, Trump won’t deport enough illegal immigrants before the next Democrat takes office. That’s the hard truth.
Now is the moment to fix it.
Americans are watching a violent, coordinated invasion unfold in real time. The bill should formally declare an invasion — and include an amendment by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) to strip judicial review from deportation cases involving noncitizens and, ideally, legal permanent residents.
Under that reform, the administration’s removal decisions would stand. No federal judge could second-guess them. No more delays, appeals, or lawfare.
Roy’s amendment would transform the first reconciliation bill into a singular focus on Trump’s most unifying, necessary, and popular campaign promise. It would hand him a quick, clean victory while the nation remains fixated on the border invasion.
RELATED: Americans didn’t elect Trump to bust SALT caps or overhaul Medicaid
So why not just split the agenda into two bills and get on with it?
Here come the usual GOP excuses. Let’s knock them down one by one.
Excuse 1: “We only get one bite at the apple.”
White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller claims Republicans must use reconciliation just once to avoid the Senate filibuster.
But Democrats already broke that precedent in 2021, pushing through two separate reconciliation bills with a green light from the Senate parliamentarian, who noted that reconciliation should be reserved for “extraordinary circumstances.”
But ultimately, this isn’t the parliamentarian’s call. The decision rests with President Trump and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.). If Biden’s team could do it, so can we.
Excuse 2: “Without this bill, Americans face massive tax hikes.”
This line is pure fearmongering. The 2024 election wasn’t about taxes. MAGA never revolved around tax cuts for their own sake — that was the old GOP. Yet somehow, this bill morphed into another tax-centered mess.
The truth? Most tax provisions in the current draft — from an expanded child tax credit and higher standard deduction to new breaks for seniors, overtime, and tips — enjoy broad bipartisan support.
No Democrat wants to get blamed for letting these expire. Even in a lame-duck session, they wouldn’t allow a public tax hike. The only serious dispute involves the top marginal rate. Trump has already signaled he’s open to a modest increase if it means getting the rest of the agenda passed.
And let’s be honest: The current bill isn’t exactly Reaganesque. It’s loaded with progressive goodies, including an obscene expansion of the SALT deduction.
Even the pro-tax-cut Tax Foundation calls the bill’s economic impact weak and overly complicated. This isn’t a bold, pro-growth package — it’s a muddled compromise.
The irony is that ending taxes on tips — perhaps Trump’s most prized tax provision — already passed the Senate 100-0. Why not pass that and similar provisions in the House and place it on Trump’s desk without wasting budget reconciliation?
Excuse 3: “We can’t include policy provisions in a budget bill.”
Critics claim the Byrd Rule blocks the inclusion of policy reforms — like immigration or judicial changes — in a reconciliation bill. That excuse doesn’t hold up.
The original House-passed bill included a provision that barred states from regulating artificial intelligence. That isn’t budget-related. That is pure policy.
By comparison, a provision removing judicial review from deportation cases would directly cut costs by eliminating thousands of court hearings. That’s a legitimate budgetary angle — and far more defensible than regulating AI through backdoor channels.
The Byrd Rule exists, yes. But the party in power determines what gets through. The president and Senate leadership can overrule the parliamentarian. Democrats did it. So can we.
Fast-forward to this week: The streets of Los Angeles are on fire again. And instead of seizing the moment to deliver on the most urgent national priority, Miller is using anti-ICE violence to ram through a bloated mega-bill — all because it includes ICE funding.
But if solving immigration were the real goal, Republicans would just split the bill already. They’d put the judicial reform language in the first package. And they’d pass it immediately.
With real leadership, Trump could sign the most consequential part of his 2024 mandate into law — before the smoke clears in L.A.
How much Green New Scam spending will survive the One Big Beautiful Bill?
Germany’s first chancellor Otto von Bismarck famously said, “Laws are like sausages. It is best not to see them being made.” That description fits President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act — with one major exception.
Unlike most legislation, the OBBB deserves a close look. But the media would rather focus on headline fodder like the SALT deduction fight and proposed Medicaid work requirements. What the media has mostly ignored is far more significant: the dismantling of the so-called Inflation Reduction Act’s climate spending, or what Trump rightly calls the “Green New Scam.”
The OBBB isn’t perfect — but it’s the best shot conservatives have to kill the Green New Scam, lock in Trump’s tax cuts, and put America’s fiscal house on firmer ground.
Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) recently claimed in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that the OBBB rolls back “the most reckless parts of the engorged climate spending,” reclaiming $6.5 billion in unspent funds. But that figure barely scratches the surface.
Goldman Sachs estimated the total value of the Inflation Reduction Act’s climate spending at a whopping $1.2 trillion. According to Grok, X’s artificial intelligence tool, the initial OBBB version would have left most of it intact.
Roughly $140 billion of that $1.2 trillion had already been spent in 2024 — much of it used to grease the palms of red-state politicians, as I’ve discussed elsewhere. Another $140 billion has been committed but not yet disbursed. The Trump administration is currently fighting in court to block that money from being spent.
But here’s the kicker: Grok’s analysis projected that between $700 billion and $900 billion of the Green New Scam funds would remain untouched under the original OBBB draft. That’s not a rounding error. That’s two orders of magnitude away from Guthrie’s $6.5 billion figure.
Fortunately, the House Freedom Caucus didn’t back down.
Led by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), the caucus demanded a bill that honored Trump’s campaign pledge to kill the Green New Scam. Roy wrote on X, “Rather than just subsidizing $350B for states with high taxes — we should pass a OBBB that FULLY terminates the Green New Scam and FULLY ends the Medicaid money laundering scam abused to hurt the vulnerable.”
He followed with this: “Writing a deficit-backed blank check (SALT) is easier than cutting spending (DOGE, Green New Scam, Post-COVID spending). Congress/swamp will always choose the easy route, but we can’t afford it.”
Roy was right. And though not completely successful, the Freedom Caucus scored a major win.
The House passed the OBBB on May 22 by a single vote, 215-214. Thanks to the Freedom Caucus, the bill cuts about $500 billion in wasteful Green New Scam spending. Half of the unspent funds have now been stripped out. The bill is now with the Senate, where its fate remains unclear.
RELATED: The Senate’s Romney-Ryan tax ideas collide with a Trump-Vance world
One strategic advantage of the OBBB lies in how it’s being passed. Like the Inflation Reduction Act before it, the OBBB uses budget reconciliation — a tool that bypasses the filibuster and requires only a simple majority. In this case, what was once a Democrat-only spending spree may now be repealed with a Republican-only rollback.
Call it poetic justice. Call it the only viable option. Either way, reconciliation makes this repeal possible — despite the fondness many subsidy-happy Republicans still have for the Green New Scam.
But the most important part of the OBBB isn’t about repealing waste. It’s about preserving growth.
The bill makes Trump’s 2017 tax cuts permanent. That alone carries a projected value of $4 trillion over the next decade and prevents a $1,700 annual tax hike on the average American family.
Republicans who block the OBBB over narrow interests risk handing Democrats a tax increase — and possibly their own walking papers in the 2026 midterms. That includes swing-district moderates who demand Green New Scam subsidies and fiscal hawks who balk at anything short of a full repeal.
The key difference? The pro-subsidy Republicans didn’t vote for those climate programs in the first place. Yet, now they’re willing to tank the whole bill to preserve them.
One Freedom Caucus member told me he remains hopeful the Senate can claw back more of the Green New Scam funds. Maybe so. But I wouldn’t bet on it.
Which brings us back to Bismarck. Lawmaking may resemble sausage-making, but at least sausages leave a good taste behind. When done right, so can legislation.
The OBBB isn’t perfect — but it’s the best shot conservatives have to kill the Green New Scam, lock in Trump’s tax cuts, and put America’s fiscal house on firmer ground.
One big, beautiful bill — one big, back-loaded disaster
Republicans have a bad habit of passing major legislation without thinking through the consequences. The “one big, beautiful bill” suffers from one big, ugly dose of shortsightedness. It’s an ambitious package loaded with short-term tax cuts and spending increases, followed by a cliff’s-edge drop into fiscal and political chaos just three years down the road.
That’s right. The expiration dates baked into the bill all but guarantee a showdown with Democrats during the 2028 election season, with Trump still in the White House, handing them enormous leverage and setting up Republicans for another round of fiscal self-sabotage.
Another fiscal cliff in the making
To keep the bill’s official price tag under control, drafters built in a series of sunset provisions. The goal: Limit the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate to just three years of deficits, even though they fully intend to extend those policies later. That gimmick allows Republicans to pretend the bill adds “only” $3 trillion to the national debt.
Republicans just built a bomb — and they are poised to hand over the detonator to their political enemies at the worst possible time.
But the policies don’t just disappear in 2028. If history is any guide — see the Bush and Trump tax cuts — most of the expiring provisions will be renewed. And when that time comes, Republicans will argue that these are now “current law” and therefore don’t count as new spending. It’s baseline budgeting sleight of hand, and everyone in Washington knows it.
Let’s look at what’s on the chopping block at the end of 2028:
- $320 billion in extra defense and immigration spending
- A larger standard deduction for all taxpayers
- A $500-per-child bonus tax credit
- A deduction for auto loan interest
- $1,000 “Trump accounts” for newborns
- A higher standard deduction for seniors
- Exemptions from tax on overtime and tips
- Immediate expensing for business structures
On top of that, several key business tax provisions — 100% bonus depreciation, enhanced interest deductions, and the R&D credit — will expire in 2029. That timing coincides with the possibility of a Democrat retaking the presidency, leaving Republicans with even less control over what happens next.
According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, extending the 2028-2029 provisions would add another $2 trillion to the national debt. That would push total costs above the original Trump tax cuts. And it would come just as the U.S. confronts mounting interest payments and an economy likely in no condition to absorb more debt.
A perfect storm in ’28
The timing couldn’t be worse. Democrats are already poised to take back the House in 2027. The GOP’s majority is razor-thin, and Democrats sit just a few seats away from regaining control. If recent special elections offer any clues, the midterms won’t be kind to Republicans.
That means Trump will likely face a Democrat-controlled House in 2028, as his administration scrambles to extend the bill’s most popular provisions: child tax credits, overtime and tip exemptions, baby accounts, business deductions, and elevated defense and homeland security spending — all of it set to disappear just as voters head to the polls.
Trump won’t want to campaign on tax hikes or cuts to defense and border security. He’ll push to renew the provisions — and Democrats will know it. They may agree with many of these policies, but they’ll still demand concessions, knowing Trump has no choice but to deal.
RELATED: I was against Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ — Stephen Miller changed my mind
Expect ransom demands. Democrats could insist on undoing the repeal of Green New Deal policies. They might push to roll back modest Medicaid reforms included in the bill. They could demand changes to immigration enforcement or extract new spending commitments, especially if the economy continues to falter. Nothing would be off the table.
In short, Republicans have given Democrats the upper hand in a high-stakes negotiation just as Trump is trying to shape his legacy and tee up a successor. They didn’t just walk into the trap — they built it.
Lessons not learned
Republicans keep making the same mistake. Rather than structurally reforming the federal government, they pass short-term tax cuts and temporary spending increases while pretending deficits don’t matter.
This bill could have tackled the cost of health care, the explosion of federal spending, or the burden of inflation. It could have included structural reforms to entitlements, energy, or higher education. Instead, the GOP opted to pass a tax cut bill that tries to game the budget window.
If they believe growth will eventually offset the deficit — fine. But in that case, why not go all in? Make the cuts permanent. Expand them. Flatten the code and eliminate more deductions. Build a case for supply-side reform rather than hiding behind fiscal gimmicks.
Instead, they did the opposite. They chose a politically popular mix of spending and tax breaks and timed it to explode during an election that will determine Trump’s legacy, hoping no one would notice.
The bottom line
The one big, beautiful bill doesn’t reduce spending. It doesn’t rein in the bureaucracy. It doesn’t fix the structural problems crushing the middle class. It temporarily cuts taxes while baking in a debt explosion and surrendering future negotiating power to Democrats.
If Republicans think deficits don’t matter, they should at least have the courage to admit it. If they think Trump’s policies will spark enough growth to pay for themselves, then make those policies permanent. But don’t pretend to care about fiscal restraint while quietly handing the next Congress a multitrillion-dollar mess.
Republicans just built a bomb — and they are poised to hand over the detonator to their political enemies at the worst possible time.
DOGE subcommittee reveals how Biden autopen may have funneled money to leftist NGOs
The House Department of Government Efficiency subcommittee unveiled how nongovernmental organizations apparently utilize taxpayer dollars to covertly advance their own left-wing agendas.
Democrats scoffed as Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, who also chairs the subcommittee, detailed how these nonprofits funnel grants and contracts toward ideological causes. These grants, many of which were issued during former President Joe Biden's administration, reveal the seemingly corrupt relationship between governments and NGOs that often carry innocuous titles.
"Today we are going to draw back the curtain," Greene said during the hearing Wednesday.
'It is fair to question the process and demand transparency.'
One particularly egregious example brought up during the hearing included a group known as Power Forward Communities, which is dedicated to "decarbonizing" homes in America. The organization received $2 billion from the government through the National Clean Investment Fund despite the organization being just a few months old and with just $100 in the bank. Notably, failed Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams is affiliated with the organization.
"Yes, it is legal to create a nonprofit, get IRS accreditation, and apply for and receive government grants," Daniel Turner, founder of Power the Future, said during the hearing. "But it is fair to question the process and demand transparency."
"There is no private entity that would give an organization 20 million times revenue after a few months of creation," Turner said. "Only government is stupid enough to do that."
"The American people definitely support nonprofits, but what they don't support is corruption, waste, fraud, and abuse," Greene added.
RELATED: Who ran the White House? Ask Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson under oath
Energy-related executive actions taken by Biden, many of which were apparently greenlit using the autopen, also made up a significant number of grants and contracts dealt to NGOs.
"This is impersonation of the president," Turner said. "Staffers, of course, have a lot of leniency in what they do working on behalf of the president, but these executive orders that we've identified, there's no evidence of Joe Biden in first person, in his voice as president, talking about them."
"Whether it's exploiting taxpayers to push illegal immigration or fake environmental justice, the left's NGO scheme seeks to destroy our country and, fundamentally, alter the American way of life," Greene said. "This ongoing waste and abuse of taxpayer resources must end."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
GOP’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill Act’ lets Big Tech and Big Pharma run wild
The Republicans’ bizarrely named “Big Beautiful Bill Act” includes two egregious provisions that would strip states of their power to regulate key agenda items pushed by globalist elites.
Anyone who still understands what the word “conservative” means can see the truth: The Republican budget bill is a mixed bag of deficit bloat, missed opportunities, and the odd policy win. Whether the House bill was worth passing as a “take it or leave it” deal depends on one’s political calculus. But the result is underwhelming and fails to rise to the moment.
Stripping states of authority and subsidizing green fantasies are the exact opposite of the anti-globalist message that won Trump the White House.
Supporters of the bill — particularly President Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) — argue that it’s the best possible outcome given a razor-thin House majority packed with RINOs from purple districts in blue states. Set aside that debate. If it’s true, then conservatives should focus their energies in deep-red states where Republicans hold supermajorities. That’s where we can — and must — do the work Congress won’t.
Instead, Republican leaders included two provisions in the bill that actively prevent red states from pushing back against green energy mandates, land-grabs, surveillance schemes, and a growing transhumanist agenda.
Green New Deal jam-down
Thanks to Republican Freedom Caucus stalwarts, including Reps. Andy Harris of Maryland and Chip Roy of Texas, much of the Green New Deal faces rollback — assuming, of course, the Senate doesn’t block the repeal. But one key subsidy survives: federal incentives for carbon capture pipelines. Worse still, the bill strengthens protections for these projects by stripping states of regulatory power.
Section 41006 spells it out: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law,” once the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission grants a pipeline license under an newly amended section of the Natural Gas Act, state and local governments can no longer block or delay the project using zoning, permitting, or land-use laws.
In plain English: carbon dioxide pipelines, backed by federal subsidies, get the same privileges as oil and gas pipelines. That includes eminent domain powers and “certificate of public convenience and necessity” status — bureaucratic code for “we’ll take your land whether you like it or not.”
But carbon pipelines aren’t oil and gas. Oil fuels the economy and delivers a clear public good. Carbon capture, by contrast, sucks up CO2 and buries it to appease climate hysterics. It serves no market need and survives only through government handouts. It exists to sanctify the fiction that carbon dioxide is a pollutant.
This isn’t an oversight. It’s a direct response to South Dakota ranchers, who successfully fought to ban eminent domain for carbon capture projects. Lawmakers in Iowa and North Dakota have followed suit, targeting Summit Carbon Solutions’ proposed pipeline, which would have plowed through private ranchland to serve a project with no public value.
The rebellion in South Dakota ranks among the most important conservative grassroots victories in recent history. Yet this bill spits in the face of those landowners. It overrides red-state laws and rural rights on behalf of globalist, green-energy profiteers.
A 10-year pause on state bans
Funny how Republicans said budget reconciliation couldn’t include policy changes. That was the excuse for not pursuing immigration reform or judicial restructuring. And yet when it suits the priorities of Big Tech and globalist interests, lawmakers found a way to insert sweeping federal mandates into the bill.
Out of nowhere, either the White House or GOP lawmakers added a provision banning states from regulating artificial intelligence or data center systems. Section 43201 of the bill states: “No State or political subdivision thereof may enforce any law or regulation regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems during the 10-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.”
That’s not compromise. That’s total pre-emption — no exceptions.
Florida and other red states have already passed laws prohibiting the use of AI in enforcing gun control or violating medical privacy. More states are following suit. Legislatures across the country are debating how to safeguard civil liberties and property rights from tech overreach. But this bill would kneecap every one of those efforts.
Then come the AI data centers — massive, power-hungry, water-consuming facilities that are cropping up in rural areas and harming communities in their wake. Bipartisan state efforts aim to regulate them through zoning and environmental protections. Yet under this bill, Congress could override even the most basic local safeguards. If a township tries to limit where these centers operate or how they’re built, that could be viewed as “regulating AI systems” and thus outlawed for a decade.
Why does this matter? Because tech moguls aren’t hiding their intentions.
RELATED: The Republicans who could derail reconciliation
At Trump’s January 22 launch event for Oracle’s Stargate platform, CEO Larry Ellison gushed about mRNA vaccines. “One of the most exciting things we’re working on ... is our cancer vaccine,” he said. “Using AI, we can detect cancers through blood tests and produce an mRNA vaccine robotically in about 48 hours.” That’s the model. AI plus big data plus biotech equals unregulated medical experimentation — powered by infrastructure no local government can block.
Red states have started pushing back, attempting to pass 10-year moratoriums on mRNA technology. But the federal budget bill would do the opposite: It could impose a 10-year federal moratorium on state bans.
So here’s the question: Do we really want Arab-funded special interests building AI spying centers in our heartland with no recourse for state and local governments to regulate, restrict, or place common-sense privacy guardrails on these new Towers of Babel?
That question raises another: Should localities be forced to accept carbon pipelines by federal decree, with no power to defend their land or water?
These policies — stripping states of authority, empowering transnational corporations, subsidizing green and biotech fantasies — are the exact opposite of the anti-globalist, America First message that won Trump the White House and won Republicans the House.
We deserve answers. Who inserted these provisions? And more urgently, who will take them out?
Spain and Portugal went dark for 12 hours — America could easily be next
When I visited in Europe earlier this month, a massive blackout had just struck Spain and Portugal — the largest in either country’s history. Sixty million people across the Iberian Peninsula and parts of southern France lost power and communication for 12 hours. It was a total system collapse. And if America doesn’t wake up, we’re heading for the same fate.
This wasn’t just some fluke or freak weather event. It was a disaster years in the making, baked into the very structure of Spain and Portugal’s energy policies — policies championed by radical environmentalists and now echoed by the Democratic Party here at home.
Over-reliance on wind and solar leads to blackouts and economic chaos and puts us at the mercy of our adversaries.
Spain and Portugal are the poster children of Europe’s so-called green energy revolution. Just before the blackout, Spain’s energy infrastructure was a mixture of up to 78% solar and wind, with only 11% nuclear and 3% natural gas. Spain gutted its base-load energy sources — nuclear, hydro, and gas — in favor of wind turbines and solar panels. The result was an electrical grid as flimsy as a house of cards.
Predictably, the U.S. media ran interference. Reuters insisted that the blackout wasn’t the fault of renewable energy but instead blamed the “management of renewables.” That’s like saying a building collapse isn’t the fault of bad materials, just bad architecture. Either way, it still falls down.
Set up to fail
“Renewable” power sources are unreliable by nature. Solar doesn’t work when the sun doesn’t shine. Wind turbines don’t spin when the air is still. And when these systems fail — and they inevitably do — you need consistent, dispatchable backup. Spain doesn’t have that. In the name of “saving the planet,” the Spanish government heavily taxed nuclear plants until they became unprofitable, then shut them down altogether.
As Spanish economist Daniel Lacalle put it: “The blackout in Spain was not caused by a cyberattack but by the worst possible attack — that of politicians against their citizens.”
And yet, not far away, parts of southern France that were affected by the same blackout recovered quickly. Why? Because France has wisely kept its nuclear power intact. In fact, nuclear power provides 70% of France’s electricity. Say what you want about the French, but they got that part right.
What happened in Spain and Portugal is not a European problem — it’s a cautionary tale. It's a flashing red warning light for the United States. The Democrats' Green New Deal playbook reads exactly like Europe’s: Phase out fossil fuels, demonize nuclear power, and vastly expand wind and solar — all while pretending this won’t destabilize our grid.
Look at California. In 2022, the state experienced rolling blackouts during a heat wave after years of shutting down nuclear and natural gas plants. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) had to scramble to bring those “dirty” plants back just to keep the lights on.
Even back in 2017, the U.S. Department of Energy warned that over-reliance on renewables threatens grid stability. But the Biden administration ignored it and dove headlong into the disastrous waters of green energy.
AI’s imminent energy demand
Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt recently told Congress that artificial intelligence is expected to consume up to 99% of our total electricity generation in the near future. Think about that — 99%. Add to that the left’s obsession with mandating electric vehicles, and the demand on our already fragile grid becomes unsustainable.
Try running all of that — AI data centers, EV charging stations, and the basic needs of 330 million people — on wind and sunshine. It’s impossible. Until someone invents a clean, infinite power source that works 24/7, we need nuclear, natural gas, and yes, maybe even coal.
This isn’t the first time a green energy fantasy has ended in blackouts. In 2016, 1.7 million Australians lost power due to wind farm fluctuations. In 2017, Germany’s trillion-dollar experiment with renewables nearly collapsed its grid. In 2019, more than a million Brits lost power after a lightning strike overwhelmed their renewables-heavy system.
These aren’t isolated events. This is a pattern. When energy policy is driven by ideology instead of engineering, people suffer.
Here’s a dirty little secret the climate cult doesn’t want you to know: Renewables lack something critical called inertia. Traditional base-load sources like nuclear and gas provide the physical inertia needed to keep a grid stable. Without it, a minor disruption — like a cloudy day or a sudden drop in wind — can trigger a cascading blackout.
Worse, restarting a power grid after a blackout — what’s called a “black start” — is significantly more challenging with renewables. Nuclear and natural gas plants can do it. Wind and solar can’t.
While it doesn’t appear that this was a cyberattack, it easily could have been. Renewable-heavy grids rely on inverters to convert DC to AC — and those inverters are vulnerable. Major flaws have already been discovered that could allow hackers to remotely sabotage the voltage and crash the grid. The more we rely on renewables, the more we invite foreign actors like China and Russia to exploit those vulnerabilities.
Save the grid!
So what’s the takeaway from the Spain-Portugal blackout?
First, we need to stop demonizing nuclear energy. Spain still plans to shut down all of its nuclear plants by 2035 — even after this catastrophe. That’s insane. Nuclear is safe, is clean, and provides the base-load power and inertia a modern grid needs.
Second, we must preserve and expand our natural gas infrastructure. When renewables fail — and they will — gas is the only backup that can be scaled quickly and affordably.
Third, we need to fortify our power grid against cyber threats. If our electricity goes down, everything else follows — banking, transportation, communication, water. We’re talking about national survival.
Green energy has a role in the future. But it’s not the savior the left wants it to be. Over-reliance on wind and solar leads to blackouts and economic chaos and puts us at the mercy of our adversaries.
The blackout in Spain and Portugal should be a wake-up call. If Democrats turn our grid into their ideological jungle gym, the lights will go out — literally. We can’t afford to play roulette with our power supply.
America’s energy strategy must be based on reliability, security, and reality — not political fantasy. If we fail to recognize that, we’ll soon be the ones stuck in elevators, stranded on trains, and left in the dark.
Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.
Tennessee Valley Authority gets a Trump-style reckoning
President Donald Trump has made the Tennessee Valley Authority a key front in his America First energy agenda. With the authority to appoint and remove TVA directors, Trump hasn’t hesitated to fire those who promote globalist “green” schemes that ignore the needs of the region’s residents.
This month, Trump ousted two Biden-appointed directors, including the board’s chairman. Their offense: trying to turn the TVA into a vehicle for the radical left’s anti-carbon agenda.
The future of reliable energy across the Tennessee Valley — and much of the South — still hangs in the balance.
Trump took similar action during his first term, firing several directors, including a previous chairman, after they approved outsourcing 146 American tech jobs to foreign workers on H-1B visas.
These firings are critical to ensuring that the Tennessee Valley Authority continues to produce abundant and reliable energy for the seven states it serves.
A call for reform
Last month, Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) published a joint letter voicing their concerns about the agency’s distracted leadership. They stressed the need for the energy provider to expand nuclear projects, especially small modular reactors, which utilize existing fission technology on a smaller, more deployable scale than the massive projects of decades past.
As to the incapable leadership of the existing Tennessee Valley Authority board, the senators wrote:
As it stands now, TVA and its leadership can’t carry the weight of this moment. The presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed TVA Board of Directors lacks the talent, experience, and gravitas to meet a challenge that clearly requires visionary industrial leaders. The group looks more like a collection of political operatives than visionary industrial leaders. The current TVA board focused on the diversity of its executives ahead of job creation for hungry workers in the region it is supposed to serve.
Shortly thereafter, Trump fired two of the agency’s six current directors.
A critical purge
Trump fired Michelle Moore on March 27, followed by TVA board Chairman Joe Ritch on April 1. Both were Biden-appointed green energy enthusiasts bent on turning the Tennessee Valley Authority into a utopian solar-and-battery experiment.
Had they succeeded, the consequences for the region’s energy reliability would have been disastrous.
Moore founded and runs Groundswell, a “sustainable energy” company whose mission statement boasts a “people-centric approach to developing community solar projects.” I’m not sure what that means — but I know I’d rather depend on coal, natural gas, or nuclear power than on some feel-good solar scheme when temperatures plunge below freezing.
Ritch, originally appointed to the TVA board by President Obama, returned under Biden’s nomination to serve as chairman. In his Senate confirmation statement, Ritch promoted transitioning the agency away from its current mix of coal, nuclear, hydro, and gas toward unreliable green alternatives — convinced, somehow, that it would help the environment and boost the economy.
A historic blunder
This utopian obsession with “sustainable energy” isn’t just naïve — it’s deadly. In December 2023, a hard freeze struck the Tennessee Valley Authority’s service area. The cold snap wasn’t historically extreme, but the consequences were.
For the first time in TVA history, the agency failed to produce enough electricity to meet demand. Rolling blackouts swept the region. Why? Because the TVA lacked enough baseline reliable energy. On those near-zero nights, solar energy produced exactly zero kilowatts.
That’s the future TVA customers would face under the fantasy energy plans pushed by climate zealots like Michelle Moore and Joe Ritch: blackouts in the dead of winter and no backup.
TVA leadership has failed in other ways too — most notably by outsourcing American jobs. In 2020, CEO Jeff Lyash tried to replace over 100 U.S. tech workers with foreign nationals on H-1B visas. While gutting working-class jobs, Lyash collected nearly $8 million a year, making him the highest-paid federal employee. One longtime worker said employees were expected to train their foreign replacements before being shown the door.
Trump responded immediately. While he couldn’t fire Lyash, he could — and did — remove board members who refused to act. When the board wouldn’t fire Lyash or cut his pay, Trump fired them instead.
Soon after, Lyash ended the outsourcing plan. Following Trump’s 2024 election win, Lyash saw the writing on the wall and resigned.
Protections are still needed
The Tennessee Valley Authority remains vital to the economic strength of the upper South. Trump’s removal of Obama-Biden-era appointees has played a key role in preserving the agency’s reliability and focus. But the threat isn’t gone.
The TVA’s service states — especially Tennessee — face a serious vulnerability: Any future Democrat president could again install green energy ideologues, fire current directors, and impose Green New Deal policies. The result? An energy-starved Tennessee Valley plagued by blackouts and foolish political experiments.
Trump’s stand against the radicalization of TVA energy policy deserves recognition. His pushback has protected millions of residents from rolling blackouts and economic self-sabotage. But the fight isn’t finished.
The future of reliable energy across the Tennessee Valley — and much of the South — still hangs in the balance. The region cannot afford to treat Trump’s changes as a lasting victory.
Today's top stories
thefederalist.com
www.theblaze.com