{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://www.thune.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=2BD810E6-09B6-47CF-9686-9D96F1EEB6B3", "Thune: Democrats Prioritize Radical Climate Agenda Over Addressing Ongoing Energy Crisis", "2021-10-27", "2021", "2021-10", "Republican", "Senate", "SD", "John Thune", "T000250", "www.thune.senate.gov", "thune", "https://www.thune.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases", "scraper", "U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) today spoke about the egregious climate policies in Democrats\u2019 radical spending bill. Thune reiterated that Democrats in Washington are out-of-touch with the needs and priorities of rural states like South Dakota, and increasing taxes amid soaring prices on utilities and gas will hurt American families.\n\nOn taxing unrealized gains (excerpts):\n\n\u201cMr. President, it's another day and another really bad idea coming from the Democrats to fund their reckless tax-and-spending spree.\n\n\u201cIt seems like, that to fund this massive amount of spending, they're trying desperately to come up with new revenue sources, so much so that as of yesterday still under consideration was a tax on unrealized gains.\n\n\u201cIn other words, on income that people haven't received yet.\u201d\n\n\u2026\n\n\u201cNever before has that been attempted or tried or implemented in American history where you would actually have a tax on income before people actually ever receive the income.\u201d\n\n\u2026\n\n\u201cIt's a good example of the desperate lengths to which Democrats are trying to come up with new ways to fund this reckless taxing-and-spending spree that they seem to be insistent on trying to force through Congress with an evenly divided Senate and evenly divided House of Representatives.\n\n\u201cIt's hard to imagine that you could do something that radical, but this entire proposal is that radical, which is why they are having such a hard time getting even people in their own caucuses to agree to it.\u201d\n\nOn Democrats\u2019 radical climate agenda (as prepared for delivery):\n\n\u201cMr. President, two years ago, Democrats introduced their original Green New Deal resolution.\n\n\u201cWhile the guiding principle of the Green New Deal was climate change and energy, Democrats didn\u2019t limit themselves to these issues.\n\n\u201cThey outlined a radical, comprehensive socialist revamping of our society, with the federal government inserting itself into nearly every aspect of American life.\n\n\u201cAnd while Democrats haven\u2019t advanced one all-inclusive bill to implement their Green New Deal \u2013 probably because of the absolutely staggering price tag for a comprehensive piece of legislation \u2013 the Green New Deal\u2019s socialist vision has rapidly become an organizing principle of the Democrat Party.\n\n\u201cFor proof, look no further than the tax-and-spending spree Democrats are contemplating, with its massive expansion of government and radical climate agenda.\n\n\u201cMr. President, one major problem with Democrats is that they never seem to fully consider the cost of their legislation \u2013 whether it\u2019s the actual dollar amount or other costs their proposals might impose.\n\n\u201cAnd nowhere is that more true than with Democrats\u2019 tax-and-spending spree.\n\n\u201cMr. President, I\u2019ve spent a lot of time on the floor talking about things like the way this bill will further drive up inflation and the dangers it poses for economic growth.\n\n\u201cToday I want to address some of the costs of the bill\u2019s Green New Deal-esque energy provisions \u2013 starting with the cost to American families.\n\n\u201cMr. President, we know some energy prices are increasing due to the rising demand from the lows of the pandemic.\n\n\u201cYesterday\u2019s average price for a gallon of gas was $3.38.\n\n\u201cThat\u2019s compared to an average price of $2.16 one year earlier.\n\n\u201cMeanwhile, natural gas prices recently hit a seven-year high, and there are mounting concerns about supply.\n\n\u201cAmericans are paying a lot more to drive their cars, heat their homes, and cook their food.\n\n\u201cThe high cost of gasoline and of natural gas are two more reasons why Americans are finding that their paychecks don\u2019t stretch as far these days.\n\n\u201cMr. President, given the situation, you\u2019d think that finding ways to lower energy costs would be among Democrats\u2019 top priorities right now.\n\n\u201cWell, you\u2019d be wrong.\n\n\u201cDemocrats\u2019 tax-and-spending spree isn\u2019t going to lower energy prices \u2013 it\u2019s going to drive them even higher.\n\n\u201cThe new energy policies Democrats are considering would drive up the cost of electricity, natural gas, and gasoline and subsidize Democrats\u2019 preferred technologies with Americans\u2019 tax dollars.\n\n\u201cAnd the icing on the cake is that Americans are likely to be paying higher electric costs for possibly worse electric service.\n\n\u201cA lot of Americans are familiar with the problems with California\u2019s electric grid \u2013 namely, blackouts.\n\n\u201cWell, if Democrats have their way, Americans around the country will be able to enjoy California-style electricity \u2013 in other words, expensive and inconsistent electricity delivery \u2013 along with higher gas prices.\n\n\u201cMr. President, this is what I mean when I talk about Democrats not fully considering the costs.\n\n\u201cNobody questions that clean energy is a good thing.\n\n\u201cI\u2019ve been a strong supporter of clean energy innovation, from wind power to biofuels.\n\n\u201cIn 2020, 83 percent of the electricity generated in my state of South Dakota came from renewable sources.\n\n\u201cBut clean-energy policies need to be realistic and practical for each region.\n\n\u201cWe have to, for example, understand that we\u2019re not yet at the point innovation-wise where we can rely mostly on intermittent, renewable sources to power electric grids.\n\n\u201cWe still need reliable, baseload power from sources like clean natural gas and nuclear.\n\n\u201cAdditionally, forcing older electric plants to close before the end of their remaining useful life, especially the most modern and efficient ones, will strand those assets.\n\n\u201cOur utilities make long-term investments, and when they can\u2019t recoup those facility investments, they pass the cost on to consumers.\n\n\u201cOverreaching clean-energy policies that place heavy burdens on working families are unacceptable.\n\n\u201cWealthy Democrat politicians \u2013 and the wealthy donor class that supports them \u2013 may not have to worry much if they have to spend more on their electric bill or an extra $20 or $25 filling up their gas tank.\n\n\u201cBut that\u2019s a big deal to a family on a budget \u2013 especially when that family is also dealing with the increased price of food and other basics.\n\n\u201cThanks to inflation and other pressures on gas prices, Americans are already having to spend a lot more money to fill their gas tanks.\n\n\u201cAdd in Democrats\u2019 tax-and-spending spree, and many working families could end up unable to fill their gas tank when they need to due to a diminished oil and gas sector.\n\n\u201cMaybe that\u2019s the goal of some more extreme members of the Democrat Party.\n\n\u201cBut it\u2019s an unacceptable one.\n\n\u201cMr. President, working families are likely to have a tough time thanks to the energy provisions in Democrats\u2019 tax-and-spending spree.\n\n\u201cBut wealthy families should do a little better.\n\n\u201cNot only are they more likely to be able to afford increases in the price of electricity and gas, but they will also be able to claim a tax credit from the federal government if they want to purchase an expensive electric vehicle.\n\n\u201cDemocrats\u2019 tax-and-spending spree will offer tax credits of up to $12,500 for the purchase of an electric car or truck (with the biggest credit, naturally, going to those who purchase union-made vehicles).\n\n\u201cThat\u2019s right.\n\n\u201cOnly electric vehicles produced at facilities \u2018under a union-negotiated collective bargaining agreement\u2019 would be eligible for the $4,500 plus-up, which would take the credit up to $12,500.\n\n\u201cAnd anyone making up to $400,000 will be able to claim this credit.\n\n\u201cYes.\n\n\u201cUnder Democrats\u2019 legislation, you could be making nearly half a million dollars a year and yet still receive a substantial tax break for the purchase of an electric car.\n\n\u201cMeanwhile, more accessible and readily available clean-energy technologies \u2013 notably, biofuels \u2013 take a back seat in this bill.\n\n\u201cElectric vehicles are Democrats\u2019 chosen winner in the transportation sector \u2013 no matter how impractical they may still be for a lot of working Americans.\n\n\u201cSpeaking of impractical, if you want an electric bike to go along with your electric car, Democrats will give you a tax credit for that as well.\n\n\u201cYes, Democrats\u2019 bill contains a tax credit for electric bicycles \u2013 a credit that would go to bicycles that can cost up to $8,000.\n\n\u201cIt may just be me, but if you can afford an $8,000 electric bicycle, I\u2019m not sure you need a tax credit for it from the federal government.\n\n\u201cAlso, while electric bicycles may have their appeal in urban and maybe some suburban communities, they are a completely impractical option for most individuals in states like South Dakota.\n\n\u201cWhen you live 20 miles away from the nearest grocery store, an electric bicycle is not going to be your vehicle of choice for getting around.\n\n\u201cAnd I\u2019m pretty sure that South Dakota agriculture producers will back me up when I say that electric bicycles are not going to be much use for getting out to check the fences in the far corners of the ranch.\n\n\u201cHowever, Mr. President, I\u2019ve got to say that tax credits for electric bicycles are far from the most wasteful use of government money in the bill.\n\n\u201cThat honor might have to go to the new tax credit for higher-education institutions for teaching \u2018environmental justice\u2019 programs.\n\n\u201cYes.\n\n\u201cI\u2019m sure Americans will be relieved to know that Democrats are planning to create a new tax credit for higher-education institutions, including Ivy League schools and other well-funded universities, so that they can teach courses on \u2018environmental justice\u2019 \u2013 whatever that is.\n\n\u201cYou would think colleges that charge students tens of thousands \u2013 if not hundreds of thousands \u2013 of dollars in tuition could perhaps afford to fund their own \u201cenvironmental justice\u201d programs.\n\n\u201cBut I guess you\u2019d be wrong.\n\n\u201cThen there\u2019s the $3 billion the bill provides for tree equity.\n\n\u201cYes.\n\n\u201cTree equity.\n\n\u201cI support \u2013 and encourage \u2013 the planting of trees, and I have introduced a straightforward bill to rapidly expand tree planting across the country without any federal spending.\n\n\u201cBut I\u2019m fairly sure the federal government cannot afford to spend $3 billion on tree equity.\n\n\u201cEspecially when Democrats need to save money for their Civilian Climate Corps \u2013 a new government program to provide government jobs (and subsidized housing) to climate activists.\n\n\u201cAnd for much more.\n\n\u201cMr. President, the word is that Democrats will soon be releasing a new version of their tax-and-spending spree.\n\n\u201cI can only hope that it will be less extreme than the current version.\n\n\u201cBecause if the bill\u2019s current Green New Deal-esque energy provisions go into effect, Americans are going to be looking at a future of higher energy costs, diminished energy resources, and weakened energy independence.\n\n\u201cNot to mention a lot of wasted taxpayer dollars.", 1, "2026-03-30T01:40:41Z", "2026-04-06T20:24:51Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://www.thune.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=2BD810E6-09B6-47CF-9686-9D96F1EEB6B3"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 1.625987933948636, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}