By Kate O'Brien
In the past few months, headlines have stormed with debates over Senator Joe Manchin’s side deal, also commonly referred to as his “Dirty Deal.” But what is this deal actually about? In short, in an agreement with Senator Chuck Schumer, Manchin would sign the Inflation Reduction Act so that his “Permitting Reform” bill would get accepted.
So what does this mean for us? For starters, the Mountain Valley Pipeline would be pushed forward, producing 90 million metric tons of GHG per year. Such emissions have obvious negative effects on human health, most notably causing respiratory issues. This proposal would prioritize the political and economic agendas of politicians and CEOs over the health and safety of local communities. The deal would also combat the progress made in renewable energy sources by continuing and accelerating the use of fossil fuels. And with recent climate-induced events like Hurricane Ian and the summer-long drought experienced here in Massachusetts, it is more important than ever to lower atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Therefore, the nation’s focus should be on working towards lowered carbon emissions, not Manchin’s backwards coal and oil dependency.
Furthermore, the deal would have vast political consequences. It would go against the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that protects citizens from harmful federal projects. The proposal planned to cut judicial review to only 150 days and cap the period for public input at 30 days. If these were to both occur, the deal would take away citizens’ ability to make comments over environmental projects. Marginalized communities directly experiencing the effects of these projects are able to enact change by voicing their concerns, protecting both themselves and the environment from these political agendas. Thus, not following NEPA would have alarming consequences on the environment by taking away its allies’ voices.
Luckily, climate activists did not give Manchin an easy time in passing this law. In fact, here at the Sierra Club, there was an overwhelming amount of support for legislators who supported the Merkley letter, such as Senator Elizabeth Warren. This letter was intended to separate the vote on the Inflation Reduction Act and the stop-gap spending bill. It was crucial getting senators who spoke out against the proposal, like Ed Markey, to actually sign the letter. There was also a similar letter in the House with the signatures of 80 representatives.
And so, with the support, media attention, and persistent action from climate activists, the Senate was able to remove the proposal. This means that the Mountain Valley Pipeline will not go forward, preventing harm to local communities and increased fossil fuels emissions in the US. This is a victory we environmentalists should be proud of. However, it is important to take away from this side deal the importance of our climate goals. There will be obstacles along the way, like senators who push dirty deals for political gain, yet we must remain committed to protecting both our local communities and the environment.