Why Republicans voted for the megabill despite threats to local green jobs

The GOP megabill’s recission of green energy tax credits is expected to kill renewable energy projects and jobs — including in the districts and states of lawmakers who voted for it.

Many lawmakers from these areas raised objections to the bill, but ultimately voted for it as other issues take center stage and the potential for a Trump-backed primary challenger looms large. 

“We're still dealing with a tax bill, and that is hardwired in Republican DNA,” said Republican strategist Doug Heye. “If six Republicans vote no and that bill goes down, those six are responsible for raising taxes. Good luck.”

As it became increasingly clear that Republicans were slashing the tax credits, companies began to cancel some previously announced projects. 

E2, a group that supports and tracks low-carbon energy jobs, found that through the end of May, some $15.5 billion in investments in climate friendly projects had already been canceled, amounting to 12,000 jobs lost. 

The vast majority of these losses — $9 billion in investment and 10,000 jobs — were in Republican districts.

While the E2’s data is from before the bill passed, the group said that the market uncertainty surrounding the green energy subsidies was a major reason for the cancellations — and that even more job losses could follow. 

“Everybody that voted for this bill is betraying their constituencies,” said Bob Keefe, E2’s executive director. “If they, in fact, care about jobs, if they care about investments coming into their communities, if they care about bringing new opportunities to areas of the country that, in many cases, have been bypassed by previous economic transitions.”

A group called the Bluegreen Alliance, which advocates for environment and labor issues, has also found that the legislation would put massive numbers of jobs at risk, noting that the economic stimulus provided by the green jobs could also impact other sectors. 

“We're talking about jobs for electricians, laborers, machinists, carpenters, the folks who were going to build and operate these new…facilities, those are the kinds of jobs that are going to be lost,” said Jason Walsh, the Bluegreen Alliance’s executive director.

“The question is whether the members of Congress … are going to be held accountable for a vote that is contrary to the interests of their districts and their constituents,” Walsh added.

But Trump put intense pressure on GOP holdouts as he pushed to get the megabill through Congress by a self-imposed July 4 deadline, stressing that votes against the package could mean tax hikes and “a failed economy.” 

“What are the Republicans waiting for??? What are you trying to prove???” Trump wrote on Truth Social in the hours before the bill passed. “MAGA IS NOT HAPPY, AND IT’S COSTING YOU VOTES!!!”

“What Trump is saying is: whatever unhappiness you will have in your district, you are going to recoup it by the midterms through this bill because of the combination of what it's doing with the tax code and with energy in particular,” Republican strategist Ford O’Connell said of the megabill. 

After Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) came out against the bill, citing concerns about Medicaid funding, Trump threatened to look for a primary challenger. A day later, Tillis announced he wouldn’t seek reelection. 

“Given the makeup of most congressional districts, the threat of a primary is much more significant than losing in a general election,” Heye said. Even in swing districts, he said, “you still have to get through the primary to get to the general.”

“There hasn't been a double-digit Senate margin in North Carolina since 1974, so Thom Tillis was going to have a tough race anyways, but what was hanging over his head, not just during this vote, but the [Defense Secretary] Pete Hegseth vote, was: Is he going to be primaried or not? And can he win it?” he added. 

As the bill was making its way through Congress, a coalition of moderate Republicans asked leadership for a “targeted and pragmatic” approach to dealing with the credits rather than a rapid and all-out repeal.

While they were able to stave off some of the most hardline policies, the legislation passed by Republicans is still expected to dramatically scale back wind and solar energy incentives, along with investment.

Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.), whose district is near major offshore wind projects, said in a statement that the bill is “far from perfect,” but cited “relief it gives working families, the investments it makes in our national defense, and the long-overdue resources it provides to secure our border” in voting for it.

Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.), meanwhile, cited the compromises that were made in the bill, saying: “While some wanted a full repeal of key clean energy provisions, we fought back and secured language that will help preserve jobs.”

For some lawmakers, there is a limit. When Republicans tried to insert a new excise tax on future solar and wind at the last minute, Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) pushed for its removal.

“The taxes, the thing that Grassley and Ernst were able to get out of the bill, would have been a real threat to existing jobs. The credits were more about future jobs,” said Dave Peterson, a political science professor at Iowa State University.

Voters may not immediately grasp the job impacts in their area. While some of the projects tracked by E2 are closures of existing plants and layoffs — others represent construction or operations jobs for facilities that don’t yet exist — like solar or wind farms that have yet to be built.

“It's the jobs that could have been that you will lose,” said John Helveston, an associate professor of engineering management and systems engineering at George Washington University. 

“You may not feel it at home if your town had a battery facility that was going to be built, and now it's not going to be built. It's not like you've lost a current job, it’s that you've lost a future job. And economic growth that could have been a huge revival of a lot of especially rural America in manufacturing is not going to happen now.” 

For investors and employees impacted in red states, “there was probably an unrealistic expectation” that they “would be somewhat insulated” from the megabill’s impacts in this sector, said Tim Baye, a professor of business development and a state energy and energy finance specialist with the Wisconsin Energy Institute.

“I think that those who felt that way, one: didn't learn the lesson from the first Trump administration. Two: underestimated the strength of the message of rolling back incentives for those who are natural advocates, liberals, renewable energy advocates, etc.” 

There was “a lot of political gain” for Republicans to lean into demonizing energy projects and incentives, Baye said. But as the impacts of the megabill reverberate in the energy sector, lawmakers may well be compelled to take another look, both for their local communities and for their electoral success.

“The pendulum swings back and forth here. I think reestablishing the incentives, as perversely as this may sound, may end up getting votes, just like getting rid of them got more votes,” Baye said.