The Biden administration’s “Build Back Better” (BBB) bill, if not dead, certainly seems to be on legislative life support. Biden’s environmental agenda currently stands beset by a series of adverse court decisions, and the Supreme Court could soon make things worse when it renders a decision in a case regarding EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.
The President’s polling numbers continue to fade, weighted down in part by rising gasoline prices at the pump and a rising level of general inflation across all consumer goods, a problem he has few choices to try to address. Appearing on CNN Newsroom Tuesday, White House Council of Economic Advisors member Jared Bernstein could only suggest doubling down on measures that have already failed to control rising oil prices that lead to higher gas and diesel costs.
Bernstein tossed out the idea of Biden ordering more drawdowns of crude oil from the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), claiming without evidence that the President’s November order to sell 50 million barrels from it resulted in “the price of gasoline actually fell by ten cents a gallon.” In reality, crude prices rose on November 23, the day Biden announced his order. They only started falling on November 25, when news of the Omicron COVID variant hit the global media, stoking market fears of falling oil demand.
Bernstein next suggested the President was again resorting to trying to arm-twist OPEC and other oil-producing nations to produce more oil, saying “In terms of oil-producing countries, we want them to live up to their supply commitments, and we’re engaged in diplomatic measures to make that happen.” This is a tactic the administration has repeatedly tried since last summer, one that has repeatedly failed to produce any results. Bernstein and others in the administration refuse to recognize the reality that many of these countries lack the ability to meet their OPEC+ quotas by increasing production. They are simply short of capacity after 7 years of massive under-investment in new oil reserves demanded by ESG investors and the global climate change community.
Bernstein next noted that “oil-consuming countries also have their own strategic reserves,” a nod to the fact that India released a small volume from its reserve late last year, and that China had promised in mid-January to release volumes from its reserve as well. But China’s release has not been forthcoming despite the fact that the Xi government stated it would begin with the advent of the Lunar New Year on February 1. Biden’s economic advisor then suggested that the President could order another release from the U.S. SPR, a doubling down on November’s failed tactic.
As for the domestic oil and gas industry, Bernstein remained consistent with past anti-industry rhetoric from the President and Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm. He made no mention of any administration efforts to incentivize America’s oil and gas producers to raise America’s own production here at home. Instead, he reverted to tired talking points about efforts by regulators to protect consumers from undue price increases by Big Oil.
Thus, at the end of the interview, Bernstein leaves us with a clear picture of a struggling President and advisors who plan to double down on the failures they’ve already produced. With his desired $555 billion in new and expanded subsidies for wind, solar and electric vehicles stalled along with the Build Back Better bill, Biden’s environmental legislative agenda has hit a wall as well. The approaching mid-term elections render any further major legislative efforts increasingly unlikely as Democrats in competitive states and house districts struggle to secure re-election.
Biden’s efforts to attain much of his environmental agenda via new regulatory actions could stall as well, depending on how the Supreme Court rules in the West Virginia v. EPA case currently under consideration. The case is scheduled for oral arguments on Feb. 28, just three days before Biden delivers his state of the union address to congress. With the Court now sporting a nominal 6-3 conservative majority, climate change activists fear a decision that could dramatically rein in EPA’s ability to regulate carbon dioxide as a “pollutant” under the language of the Clean Air Act.
“How much of the Clean Air Act they decide to gut, or if they decide to do it, is really an open question,” Jamal Raad, the co-founder and executive director of Evergreen Action, told Axios.
For Biden, congressional Democrats and their “Green New Deal” agenda, a failure to pass major subsidy legislation before the mid-terms, combined with an adverse decision in this key case, could spell doom for their climate-related goals for years to come. The Biden energy and environment game plan needs a new vision fast, because continuing to double-down on failure is no real plan at all.