OPINION:
This permitting legislation story just keeps getting better and better.
President Trump gave the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act his support on Sunday, calling it a “BIG WIN for U.S. ENERGY INDEPENDENCE and DOMINANCE” in a social media post. It is probably not either of those things, but que sera, sera, especially in matters related to the president.
On Monday, however, in response to a question from Scott Waldman at Politico, the president described wind turbines as “a major loser” and said he would not approve any more wind projects. At that point, Mr. Waldman explained — correctly — that BAAJA authorizes the federal government to more or less mandate the building of transmission lines designed specifically to carry electrons from wind turbines to population centers.
People were interested in these podcasts
If you doubt that, take the testimony of Ben King, a director in Rhodium Group’s Energy and Climate practice, a think tank on the left, who said a few weeks ago that, “If your goal is to do climate policy in the future, this [legislation] is an important down payment to making progress there.”
The bill gives the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission the authority to decide who will pay how much to enjoy the privilege of getting electricity from wind turbines.
Mr. Trump not only seemed aware of the problem but also noted, without breaking stride, that the bill would require further negotiation.
Keep that in mind when we get to the part of the story about Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.
Right around the same time Mr. Trump was speaking on Monday afternoon, the administration issued a statement of administration policy regarding the permitting legislation. That statement — which is usually a bland recitation of the facts that lead the administration to endorse, reject or propose amendments to legislation — wholeheartedly and rather fangirlishly endorsed BAAJA.
That probably bears repeating. On Monday afternoon, the Executive Office of the President issued a statement supporting the permitting legislation as is — even as the president himself, at essentially the same time, said the bill needed further work.
There is no telling how or when the system broke down.
It may be worth noting that Monday was the new chief of staff’s first day on the job. Perhaps some current or former White House staff wanted to get the statement out the door before the new leadership team had its sea legs. Perhaps it was just one of those things that happens in large organizations.
Unfortunately, whatever remaining confidence there was that everyone in the administration was fully aligned with Mr. Trump on this issue was probably eroded Tuesday, when Politico published a surprisingly illuminating story.
In it, Politico reported that by Monday evening, in the wake of the president alerting everyone to his preference that the legislation needed further negotiating, “officials from [the National Energy Dominance Council] and others in the administration” were trying to keep the coalition for the transmission legislation together.
Some administration staff — described in the story only as “the White House” by Sen. Martin Heinrich, New Mexico Democrat — reportedly apologized for the president’s remarks, with Mr. Heinrich recalling, “The White House was like, you know, ‘Sorry — he just says stuff.’”
One possible interpretation of that story is that the reporters meant that unidentified White House staff were working against the president and his expressed preferences regarding the transmission legislation. Let us hope that is not the case.
Yet it does bring us back to Mr. Burgum. On Tuesday, he said that “in some ways, negotiations are over. The bill is the bill.” That does not sound like the secretary is completely on board with Mr. Trump’s position on this issue.
• Michael McKenna is a contributing editor at The Washington Times.
Follow the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.