By Annelise Fisher
As the slew of Trump administration rollbacks build, it is clear that the federal government is intent on unraveling years of climate progress. These environmental policy setbacks not only pose threats to New York’s climate agenda, but also to climate efforts across the globe. The Senate Republicans’ sweeping reconciliation bill prominently illustrates this threat by aiming to derail foundational clean energy incentives, threaten over one million jobs, and significantly increase energy costs for Americans.
The Senate Republicans’ “Big Ugly Bill”
The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025,” A.K.A. the “Big Ugly Bill,” is one of the most sweeping legislative packages in recent history. This bill covers a wide range of issues with the overarching goal of lowering Americans’ tax rates. However, it poses particularly harmful objectives with regard to environmental impact. The bill proposes substantial rollbacks to the clean energy policies established under Biden’s administration. Among these objectives is phasing out key clean energy tax credits established under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), including the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) and Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind and solar projects. These tax incentives have served an instrumental role in spurring the renewable energy boom in the U.S. by making clean energy options and projects much more economically viable. Now, these credits are set to be reduced by 40% for projects commencing construction in 2026 and will be phased out entirely by 2028.
The bill also aims to phase out the Advanced Manufacturing Production Tax Credit (45X) by 2028, a credit that supports the domestic manufacturing of clean energy parts. This portion of the bill would undermine the ability of the U.S. to build its own competitive and independent manufacturing industry for clean energy, while also threatening hundreds of thousands of green jobs. Stripping electric vehicle funding is additionally proposed, further impeding U.S. emission reduction goals. Even more alarmingly, the bill includes provisions that allow public lands to be auctioned off to fossil fuel companies and private developers, stripping away their protection against exploitation and environmental harm.
With more than 93% of new energy in 2024 coming from solar, wind, and battery storage, the clean energy transition has clearly gained powerful and critical momentum in recent years. New York, for instance, has experienced incredible growth in offshore wind (OSW) development.
[A new NYLCV interactive OSW supply chain map illustrates the current OSW leaders driving growth in the industry and the extensive job opportunities that have emerged from it. Check out the OSW map here!]
This progress, however, faces direct threats from this reconciliation bill.
Evidently, the implications of the “Big Ugly Bill” are enormous, environmentally, economically, and beyond. Economically, this bill is expected to sideline over $500 billion in private investments, increase household energy costs by as much as $400 per year and raise wholesale power prices by up to 50% through hindering clean energy development and investment in energy efficiency programs. Of course, this will also disproportionately impact lower-income households spending a larger portion of their income on energy bills. In contrast, the clean energy credits disappearing with this bill were projected to save families thousands of dollars while also supporting job creation, and faster, cheaper energy access.
Currently, the reconciliation bill is moving through the Senate with a goal of reaching agreement and moving forward with final passage by July 4th, in alignment with Trump’s insistence to sign that day. The bill has faced increasing opposition from lawmakers concerned about its economic consequences, household impacts, and clean energy implications. Notably, New York’s Republican Representatives Andrew Garbarino, Mike Lawler, and Nick LaLota have been advocating for preserving the clean energy tax credits and recently signed letters to urge their colleagues to maintain these incentives. Potential changes could be made such as adjusting the timeline for phasing out certain credits and reconsidering the treatment of ongoing clean energy projects. Even so, the bill’s fundamental threats to clean energy would remain largely intact.
As the bill moves closer to a vote, it is important to track last-minute shifts that could salvage or undermine clean energy efforts further. This week will likely mark a pivotal moment for this controversial piece of legislation and in history.
EPA Attempted Rollback of Power Plant Emissions Rules
In addition to the “Big Ugly Bill,” the Trump Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently announced a proposal aimed at revoking limits on emissions from power plants. Specifically, they propose a repeal of the 2024 Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) to limit toxic pollutants, and of the Section 111 Power Plant rule, limiting greenhouse gas pollution from coal- and gas-fired power plants. In May 2024, former President Joe Biden’s EPA finalized a suite of Standards and Guidelines for Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants aimed at strictly limiting the emissions generated from coal- and natural gas-fired plants. Despite some state-by-state pushback prompted by these rules, they marked an important push towards tackling the biggest contributors of greenhouse gases and most effectively approaching U.S. climate targets.
Trump and the EPA’s proposed reversal of these rules demonstrates a disturbing disregard for long-term environmental and health impacts and indicates alignment with fossil fuels interests. Today, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin argues that the power sector does not, in fact, contribute enough to global climate pollution to necessitate regulatory action. Yet, this claim directly contradicts recent study findings revealing that the U.S. power sector’s carbon emissions rank amongst the top six countries globally. Additionally, power plants are the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S., accounting for more than 25% of national emissions. This federal move to undermine power plant regulations not only places future generations at risk, but also jeopardizes necessary progress toward building a clean energy future.
The EPA has initiated a 45-day public comment period which began on June 17th and is set to conclude on August 7th. A virtual public hearing has also been set for July 8th. After this comment period comes to an end, the EPA plans to review the feedback and may decide to proceed to finalize their repeal by the end of the year. However, growing public scrutiny can be expected as the comment period progresses, as well as potential future judicial review by the courts.
Ultimately, as the federal government works to unravel environmental progress, it is crucial to continue pushing forward with bold climate efforts on a state and local level to combat these setbacks.
Cancellation of Environmental Justice Grants Deemed Unlawful
Just as troubling, Trump’s EPA recently cancelled $600 million in critical environmental justice grants aimed at addressing the increased toll of pollution on communities of color, low-income communities, and rural areas. These grants—issued by the Biden Administration—fall under the Thriving Communities Grantmaking Program, a federal initiative providing greater funding access for community-based organizations’ environmental justice projects. This initiative distributes funding to regional and national grantmakers and, in turn, these grantmakers elect eligible community groups and award them with subgrants to support their efforts within marginalized communities.
In a recent legal development, federal Judge Adam Abelson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland has ruled that the EPA’s termination of the $600 million in grants was unlawful. The basis of this ruling was determined by the EPA’s grant termination violating the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and Clean Air Act, as they defied Congress’ explicit directives to use the appropriated funds for environmental justice programs. The EPA is currently reviewing the “unlawful” ruling decision.
Among the 11 approved grantmakers tied up in this cancellation was Fordham University, which had been allocated a $60 million grant under the Thriving Communities program. Fordham was tasked with organizing this funding into subgrants for community groups in New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and multiple Indian nations. New York, among these other regions, now remains at a standstill with the grants needed for their community projects as the EPA reviews the decision and potential reallocation of funding.
Environmental justice grants have been threatened further with Trump’s termination of the EPA Environmental and Climate Justice Grant programs, but environmental justice organizations, tribes, and local governments have filed a lawsuit against the administration in protest. These cases depict the importance of challenging the onslaught of federal environmental policy rollbacks and serve as a reminder to pursue bold advocacy and legal action in the face of federal misconduct. While many environmental rollback efforts have proceeded, Judge Abelson’s unlawful ruling shows the power of community advocacy and the judicial system to hold the federal government accountable for its actions.
The coming weeks will be pivotal as efforts to curb or facilitate these rollbacks ramp up. With the Trump administration’s continuous dismantling of environmental policies, community and judicial pushback will remain essential to protecting our climate efforts.
Annelise Fisher, an undergraduate summer intern at the New York League of Conservation Voters, is a rising senior at Harvard University pursuing a bachelor’s degree in psychology and environmental science & public policy.