It has been one year since the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act became law, and Pennsylvania is seeing and using some of the funding.

The groundbreaking law directs $370 billion to clean-energy efforts through tax incentives, grants and loan guarantees. The Keystone State has set a goal of using 100% clean energy by 2050, and the law is helping to make it a reality.

Annie Regan, campaign director for the environmental watchdog group PennFuture, said together, the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law have brought more than $300 million to Pennsylvania.

She pointed out a variety of projects are already benefiting from the funding.

"We also know the Inflation Reduction Act is lowering energy costs for families in Pennsylvania, with estimates ranging from $300 to $1,800 in annual savings," Regan observed. "Folks will notice -- within this year, in the next couple of years, especially -- that their energy bills will become lower and more affordable."

Regan added the funding has already added 64 electric school buses in seven school districts in the state, with more than $19 million in rebates. Republican opponents of the Inflation Reduction Act have cited concerns about the U.S. budget deficit and the effect on jobs in the oil and gas sector.

Regan explained funding from the law puts the Keystone State on the cusp of a Green Revolution, which promises not only cleaner skies, but economic growth and opportunities.

"It's going to bring an estimated $270 million of investment in large-scale, clean power generation and storage to Pennsylvania by 2030," Regan outlined. "It's going to provide $30 billion in tax credits to accelerate domestic production of solar panels, wind turbines, batteries and critical minerals processing."

Regan added her group, along with ReImagine Appalachia, are working to make sure the states in their region are all taking advantage of the federal funding for renewable energy opportunities, affecting communities in need.

"We want to create good-paying, family-sustaining union jobs with these federal climate investments," Regan emphasized. "I think that's where we've seen a pivot in the environmental movement, of not just employing clean energy, but making sure it's done right, using union labor."

The massive law also includes money to update the nation's power transmission systems, and tax credits for projects using American-made steel and iron, which should result in more jobs in those fields.

Professors on college campuses across the country are unionizing at increasingly higher rates and a bill in the Maryland General Assembly may help the efforts at state universities.

The legislation would give faculty at Morgan State University, St. Mary's College of Maryland, and faculty in the University of Maryland system the right to form a union. Another bill would also offer collective bargaining rights to graduate assistants at Maryland universities.

Del. Linda Foley, D-Montgomery, said the legislation would give teachers at each university the freedom to decide.

"If they desire and they vote for a union representative to represent them, then they can bargain a contract with their employer," Foley explained.

The bill includes full-time or part-time faculty, and those who are either on tenure or non-tenure tracks. Foley added faculty at Maryland community colleges are already able to organize unions.

Since 2012, the number of unionized faculty across the country has grown more than 7%, with more than a quarter of all faculty belonging to a union. More than 80% of unionized college faculty members are nontenured. Foley, a former vice president of the Communications Workers of America, said despite perceptions, unions are not just for blue collar workers.

"Just because they're not doing manual labor or you know working in a sweatshop so to speak, doesn't mean that workers don't have rights to collective bargaining or that collective bargaining isn't meaningful," Foley emphasized. "It certainly is, because there are many, many issues that collective bargaining can address."

She added workers could benefit from negotiating with an employer about hours, wages and working conditions which would otherwise be more difficult without a union.


get more stories like this via email

Consumer advocates in Virginia and around the country are trying to chart a new path forward as a federal consumer rights watchdog is being effectively "defanged."

In February, dozens of probationary employees at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau were fired.

Between 2021 and 2025, the bureau gave $9.4 billion back to consumers but the Trump administration has pulled the agency off numerous consumer protection lawsuits, including against major bank Capital One for allegedly cheating millions of customers out of $2 billion in interest.

Jay Speer, consumer rights attorney and executive director of the Virginia Poverty Law Center, said consumers will feel the brunt of the decisions.

"People not going to get all this money back that they should be getting from these wrongdoers," Speer pointed out. "Basically, it's a message to big companies that they can do whatever they want. Nobody's going to stop them, so abuse of consumers is just going to get worse. There's no question about it."

Russell Vought, Trump's director of the Office of Management and Budget, has posted on social media the bureau is "woke" and weaponized.

Advocates are putting up a fight. Speer pointed out his organization has joined a lawsuit to stop the bureau's closure. He argued administration efforts to disband the agency break the law and cut into Congress' power to create new federal agencies.

"Congress established this," Speer stressed. "It's not up to the executive branch to just do away with it by some executive order or whatever they claim they have the authority to do it. That's not right."

Conservatives called for the bureau's closure in Project 2025, which Vought helped author.

Union workers across Montana are celebrating the death of a bill which would have given employees the right to choose whether to join a union when hired by a represented company.

Known as the "right to work" bill, some said its title is misleading. More than 200 people signed up to speak against Senate Bill 376 at a hearing last Friday, and more joined them at a rally outside the Statehouse later in the day. Only two people testified in favor.

Jim Soumas, principal officer for Teamsters union Local 190, said it is "inappropriate" to expect unions to do their work with optional dues.

"It's like asking a business to provide a free service," Soumas pointed out. "There's cost to the union to provide professional representation and negotiation skills. We provide that for our members but that comes with a cost."

After the bill failed a committee vote Saturday, its sponsor, Sen. Mark Noland, R-Bigfork, tried to force it out of committee but 14 majority Republicans joined Democrats to block the move.

Jason Hottel, a member of Ironworkers Local 732, said early in his career, he worked in Idaho, a "right to work" state. He could not live off the wages, he said, so he moved back to Montana, a state with a strong union history.

"Since then, it's been night and day with what it's done for my life," Hottel explained. "The people around me and my children and everybody else involved with my life has been the biggest impact."

Hottel added he rallied at the Capitol to be an example for younger union workers. Montana is one of 23 states to have not passed so-called "right to work" legislation.