Introduced January 24, 2025 by Brad Schneider · Last progress January 24, 2025
The bill would reduce emissions to protect public health, create clean‑energy jobs, and avoid large climate costs over time, but it imposes near‑term energy, compliance, and financing burdens on households, businesses, and taxpayers and carries diplomatic risks if the U.S. retreats from international commitments.
Households, state governments, and businesses would face lower long‑term economic losses because reducing emissions lowers the frequency and severity of extreme weather and disaster costs (current average ~ $150 billion/year).
Residents — especially low‑income, rural, and otherwise vulnerable communities — would have lower health risks from extreme heat, wildfires, and air pollution as U.S. climate action reduces emissions.
American workers and businesses could gain substantial job growth and private investment from expanded clean energy and manufacturing (cited figures: ~406,000 jobs; $422B private investment).
Middle‑class households and some businesses could face higher near‑term energy prices and transition costs as the grid is modernized and cleaner technologies are deployed.
Certain industries, small businesses, and taxpayers could face compliance costs or higher taxes/fees to finance investments and incentives needed for emissions reductions.
If the U.S. withdraws from international commitments like the Paris Agreement, Americans could suffer diplomatic and economic consequences (weaker cooperation, reduced export competitiveness, and diminished influence).
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Affirms a set of findings that support U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement by summarizing recent climate science, economic impacts, national security concerns, and benefits from U.S. clean-energy investments since rejoining. The text is a nonbinding statement of policy and does not create new legal requirements, appropriations, or program authorizations.