|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Trump blocks Bernie Sanders’ pet taxpayer-funded ‘climate initiative’
by Ted Cohen
The Trump administration has canceled $8 billion in funding for climate-related projects in primarily Democratic-controlled states – Vermont among them.
The end of the “Green New Deal” – which Republicans call the “Green New Scam” – comes as a blow to the Green Mountain State’s socialist senior senator.
Bernie Sanders has been trying to get funding for a bill he envisioned as curbing “climate change.”
“Nearly $8 billion in Green New Scam funding to fuel the Left’s climate agenda is being cancelled,” OMB Director Russell Vought wrote in a post on the social media site X, on the same day the federal government shut down after Congress did not pass a stopgap funding bill.
Vought said the projects affected by the decision are in Vermont, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Washington state.
In the 2024 election, President Trump lost those states to then-Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee whom he defeated in the Electoral College.
The cuts are likely to affect battery plants, hydrogen technology projects, upgrades to the electric grid and carbon-capture efforts, among many others, according to the environmental nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council.
The Energy Department said that 223 projects were terminated after a review determined they did not adequately advance the nation’s energy needs or were not economically viable.
Sanders recently reintroduced the “Green New Deal,” a comprehensive bill that took aim at the alleged “housing crisis” and so-called “climate change.”
The bill would have invested almost $250 billion over 10 years to make the public housing stock in the U.S. more energy-efficient.
Sanders claimed it would also have created up to 280,000 union jobs a year and reduce carbon. That would be equivalent to taking more than 1.25 million cars off the road, he asserted.
“We need to mobilize millions of people to ensure every American has decent and affordable housing, and at the same time we address the existential crisis of climate change and that is what the legislation does,” Sanders said earlier this year.
Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a co-sponsor, were joined by 55 House members and seven senators, including Vermont’s Democrat Sen. Peter Welch, in supporting the ill-fated bill.
“We want community, and we know in order to get that, we need public policy that is going to address climate, that is going to address housing, that is going to build in a way that is sustainable and efficient. This is in our power to do,” Welch said as he tried to revive the bill last spring.
Sponsors of the legislation has argued that improving the energy efficiency of the country’s public housing stock would improve the quality of life for low-income residents, who they claimed are often forced to choose between paying for utilities or food.
The author is a Burlington resident and career journalist.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary
I can’t express the elated joy I feel as I watch these dirtbags squirm when their corrupt lifeline is swept away. One day all.is going to be revealed, the amount of hands in the lobby pot would be astounding. Bernie has always been for Bernie, whoops I mean the farmer. I just hope people wake up to the understanding, our leadership in this state is not appointed for us. They were voted in with lies to direct this state into the toilet. Thanks you 3 fools, Balint, Bernie, and Welch.
Yeah! Bernie was totally on board with giving Argentina $20 billion dollars. And he was also a huge fan of tariffs against china so that china would not purchase soybeans from american farmers. It’s all because of bernie that midwest farmers can’t sell their crops.
Re: “…giving Argintina $20 Billion.” If this was only about tariffs and U.S. Soy Bean exports, the complaint might be valid. But, as usual, it’s not.
The U.S. stands to gain several strategic, economic, and financial benefits from the $20 billion support package to Argentina, announced on September 27, 2025, by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. While the deal has faced domestic pushback (e.g., from U.S. agricultural lobbies concerned about Argentine soybean competition), here’s a breakdown of the key upsides, based on official statements and analyses from the Treasury, White House, and economic observers:
1. Financial Returns and Risk Mitigation
Currency Swap Line ($10 billion): This isn’t a grant—it’s a reversible exchange of U.S. dollars for Argentine pesos at market rates. The U.S. receives interest on the dollars lent (typically LIBOR + a spread) and can unwind the swap anytime, reclaiming full principal. It helps the U.S. Treasury’s Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF) by earning low-risk returns while stabilizing global currency markets.
Bond Purchases ($5–10 billion): The U.S. could buy Argentine dollar-denominated sovereign bonds, which offer yields (around 8–10% as of late September 2025) higher than U.S. Treasuries. This provides portfolio income and hedges against inflation.
Standby Credit Line ($2–5 billion): From the ESF, this acts as insurance against Argentine default, protecting U.S. exposure via the IMF (where the U.S. holds a 17% voting share and has committed $117 billion in quotas).
Overall, the package is structured to minimize losses—Argentina must repay in full, with safeguards like collateral requirements—while generating modest returns estimated at $500–800 million annually if fully drawn.
2. Geopolitical and Regional Stability Gains
Argentina under President Javier Milei is a key U.S. ally in South America, pursuing pro-market reforms that counter Chinese and Russian influence (e.g., Argentina’s recent lithium deals with Beijing). The aid bolsters Milei’s government ahead of October 26 midterms, reducing risks of populist backsliding or economic collapse that could destabilize the region.
It aligns with U.S. goals under the “Americas Partnership” initiative, enhancing trade ties (U.S.-Argentina bilateral trade hit $13 billion in 2024) and securing access to critical minerals like lithium for U.S. EV supply chains.
3. Broader Economic Spillovers
Preventing an Argentine crisis avoids contagion to emerging markets, protecting U.S. banks and investors with $20+ billion in exposure to Argentine assets.
It signals U.S. commitment to allies, potentially encouraging similar reforms elsewhere (e.g., in Brazil or Mexico), which could open new markets for U.S. exports.
Final analysis: Being of libertarian sensibilities doesn’t mean one must live in a cave without interpersonal relationships. And same goes for sovereign countries. Making deals comes with the territory. If Bernie Sanders is the financial guru of choice, then elect him. But be sure to get Bernie to expound the risk-reward ratios of his specific financial strategies, at least to a greater degree than over-simplifying the issue by describing the deal as a mere unilateral gift.. when it clearly isn’t.
Well said Jay, digging deeper than the headlines, which some just seem to regurgitate
As usual Jay unwinds things with precision but doesn’t mention that this is a massive win for argentina, and pennies on the dollar for the US. The farmer’s in the midwest who are directly impacted by soybean sales to the tune of billions of dollars are not so nuanced about this deal with argentina. Check your Grok research for some opinions on the matter from the mouths of the US soybean farmers themselves. Maybe, jay, you should tell the farmer’s that their suffering is for the good of the nation. And they do not need a bailout because republicans believe in a free market… uh… well… they used to. Perhaps Trump should just use the US government to purchase the farms. Then, the US government can make money from farming just like they make money from owning Intel.
Yes, President Trump is actively planning to help U.S. soybean farmers through a significant aid package, primarily funded by tariff revenues, amid ongoing trade tensions with China. This comes as soybean exports to China—historically accounting for over 50% of U.S. soybean sales—have halted entirely in 2025 due to retaliatory tariffs, leaving silos full and prices below break-even levels (around $9.84 per bushel for the November harvest, down from $11.20 in 2024). The aid is positioned as short-term relief while Trump pursues a trade deal with China.
Key Details on the Aid Package: Scale and Timeline: The package is estimated at $10 billion or more, with the first tranche of bailout payments rolling out in the coming weeks using USDA funds. A broader announcement could come as early as next Tuesday (October 14, 2025). Some estimates suggest total aid could reach $35–50 billion if trade issues persist.
Funding Source: Trump has emphasized using a “small portion” of the $364.6 billion in tariff revenues collected in the first half of 2025 to support farmers. He stated on Truth Social: “We’ve made so much money on Tariffs, that we are going to take a small portion of that money, and help our Farmers.”
Additional Support: The administration is coordinating with the Farm Credit Bureau to ensure farmers have resources for the next planting season. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent highlighted this as part of broader agricultural priorities, including national security concerns over food self-sufficiency.
Trade Deal Push: Trump plans to make soybeans a “major topic” in his upcoming meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping at the APEC summit in South Korea at the end of October. Officials are also reaching out to other global buyers to diversify markets.
Context and Challenges: Soybeans are America’s largest agricultural export (valued at $30+ billion in FY 2024), with major producers like Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, and Minnesota hit hardest. The current crisis echoes Trump’s first term, when similar tariffs led to a 75% drop in China exports and $19 billion in prior bailouts. This year, farm production costs are up 3% to $467.4 billion, bankruptcies are at a four-year high, and China has shifted to cheaper suppliers like Brazil and Argentina—whose economy the U.S. is separately bailing out with up to $20 billion in aid.
Farmers, like Ryan Mackenthun (Minnesota), and organizations such as the North Dakota Soybean Growers Association are grateful for the relief but stress the need for restored markets over handouts. Critics, including some on X, argue this is self-inflicted damage from tariffs, with one farmer noting: “We’re in this to produce a product that’s needed… not for government payments.”
While the aid provides immediate breathing room, long-term recovery hinges on the U.S.-China talks. If no deal materializes by November, southern hemisphere harvests (e.g., Brazil) could further erode U.S. leverage.
Postscript: Argentina benefits from the deal, and so does the U.S.. Afterall, if Rosato read any of the analysis provided, he would have seen the caveat – “Overall, the package is structured to minimize losses—Argentina must repay in full, with safeguards like collateral requirements—while generating modest returns estimated at $500–800 million annually if fully drawn.”
As per Milton Friedman’s sage observations… unless of course one chooses to not observe anything:
“The key insight of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations is misleadingly simple: if an exchange between two parties is voluntary, it will not take place unless both believe they will benefit from it. Most economic fallacies derive from the neglect of this simple insight, from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the expense of another.”
Jay, all that is to say Trump screwed over the farmers and now trying to remedy the situation is a sloppy mess. You quote milton fridman, as if he would be a proponent of tariffs. Both sides do not benefit from trump unilaterally imposing tariffs. China is better off buying from south america now. And the US loses.
And I love how you write the argentina package is setup to minimize losses, rather than maximize gains. Rosato knows that throwing billions of dollars into duct tape to patch a sinking ship leaves the cargo at the bottom of the ocean. But perhaps a few wooden boards float to shore… minimizing losses.
Ah… the continuing false premise – duct tape on a sinking ship.
Tariffs on Chinese imports under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, were initiated primarily in response to an investigation by the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) that identified unfair trade practices by China. They were seen as harming U.S. intellectual property, innovation, and economic interests. The tariffs began in 2018, targeting hundreds of billions of dollars in Chinese goods, and escalated over time.
The key Chinese trade infractions cited include:
Forced technology transfers: China uses joint venture requirements, foreign investment restrictions, and administrative licensing processes to pressure or require U.S. companies to transfer technology to Chinese partners.
Discriminatory licensing terms: China deprives U.S. companies of the ability to negotiate market-based terms in technology licensing and related agreements, often favoring Chinese firms.
Systematic acquisition of U.S. assets for technology gain: China directs and facilitates investments in and acquisitions of U.S. companies and assets to enable large-scale technology transfers.
Cyber intrusions and theft: China conducts and supports cyber-attacks on U.S. commercial networks to steal valuable business information and intellectual property.
Broader concerns, such as China’s state subsidies to industries creating overcapacity and dumping, as well as the persistent U.S. trade deficit with China (which exceeded $300 billion annually), also lead to the tariffs… not to mention widespread, severe labor abuses against its own citizens, including forced labor, internment camps, child labor and trafficking, and exploitative working conditions. Even the UN urges global companies to conduct due diligence to avoid complicity with Chinese indiscretions.
And then there’s Chinese compliance with its membership in the World Trade Organization.
Based on the USTR report and recent WTO disputes, China’s violations cluster around several core WTO agreements, including the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM), the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), and accession-specific commitments.
And speaking of duct tape on a sinking ship, don’t forget that China facilitates money laundering to drug cartels and the flow of fentanyl into the United States, primarily by serving as the dominant global source of precursor chemicals—raw materials used to manufacture the drug—that are shipped to Mexican cartels for synthesis and subsequent smuggling across the U.S. border.
So, who’s sloppy mess is it, again, screwing who over?
Jay, in the mighty words of Queens of the Stone Age, “If Only.” If trump had asked for congressional approval for tariffs we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Nor if he outlined what you just outlined, but he didn’t. The ongoing tariff war with the world is trumps fault. Full stop. And the farmers are taking the heat while orange man fills the white house with gold and builds a ballroom.
Re: “If only….”
Nothing stated in my missive is untrue.
he beat her in the popular vote too, not just the electoral college … don’t try to re-shape what happened …
Interesting how Dems push saving ‘Democracy’, majority of popular vote, but vilify candidates that win the popular vote that aren’t their choices! Very apparent Dems only want their own candidates to win for absolute control.
Consider after erecting giant wind turbines and plastering solar panels all over the place, with NO long-term environmental impact studies, utility rates are way up; water, fuel, and power – costs of living for basic needs is out of control. Yet, Vermont’s banditos legislated billions of declining federal debt notes that somehow float in considerable deposits to their own bank accounts. No wonder they can afford to turn those federal debt notes into tangible assets like real estate for children, in-laws, and related outlaws. There is no honor among thieves.
Melissa, Solar Farms and Huge Windmills don’t run on wind or the sun, they are powered by Tax Money, without which they can’t produce; once tax money dries up so do the sites
Good!
I recently read that politicians and diapers should be changed, usually for the same reason.
Someone once told me not to burn green firewood in my stove, because my house could go up in smoke. Many green things can be bad.
Nick, how did we get to this point? Is it your TDS? We were talking about Bernie, Balint, and Welch upset their handouts for their buddies at the solar companies dried up. Maybe Trump taking from our 1 percent and showing them how we live day to day is a good thing. Your comments are getting redundant and old my friend.