MASSACHUSETTS COULD RENDER its 2030 climate commitments null and void under new sweeping legislation being fast-tracked by the House, according to a copy of the bill viewed by CommonWealth Beacon.  

The measure, led by Rep. Mark Cusack, co-chair of the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy, would grant Massachusetts “immunity” should the state miss its target if the top environmental official in Massachusetts attributes that outcome to “the actions or inactions of the federal government.” 

In such an instance, the state’s goal to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared to 1990 levels would become “advisory in nature and unenforceable.” 

These changes to the state’s bedrock climate law, along with other major shifts in state climate policy like offshore wind procurements and energy efficiency funding, are currently under consideration by lawmakers on the House panel and could be quickly advanced.

Cusack is aiming to move the legislation out of the House with a floor vote before lawmakers break for the year on November 19 after a poll of committee members closes on Wednesday. He says he has House Speaker Ron Mariano’s support for the bill, though a spokesperson for the speaker said he hasn’t yet taken an official position. 

The bill leaves in place the state’s long-term goal of cutting emissions by 85 percent by 2050. 

“The number one goal is to save money and adjust to the reality with clean energy,” Cusack said in an interview. “This is a bill that saves significant money, real hard dollars, that people will see the impact of, while also dealing with the assault we’ve gone through,” he said, referring to moves by the Trump administration to roll back climate initiatives. Meanwhile, Cusack said, it allows “planning for the future by not touching any mandates farther out. We want to get there, but if we’re going to miss our mandates, and it’s not the fault of ours, it’s incumbent on us not to get sued and not have the ratepayers be on the hook.” 

The plan reverberating around Beacon Hill, as first reported by CommonWealth Beacon last week, is sure to put lawmakers in a politically difficult position and test their willingness to defend the climate commitments enacted just four years ago. And it forces them to confront the drastic changes President Trump has made to Massachusetts’s efforts to transition to a clean energy economy, including stalled offshore wind permitting and revoked funding for solar energy and electric vehicles, as the onset of winter stokes residents’ anxiety over energy costs. 

Cusack’s measure would cap the budget for the state’s energy efficiency program, Mass Save, at $4 billion, marking a $500 million cut from its current budget as approved by the Department of Public Utilities.  

The bill would even reduce the already-approved Mass Save budget by more than $300 million over the course of three years until 2027, with a focus on trimming the money that Mass Save spends on marketing and advertising. The program upgrades homes with heat pump installations and weatherization through a collaboration among the state’s utility companies, but it has become a contentious point in the state’s affordability debates because it is funded by ratepayers and appears as a line item on electric bills.  

The legislation would similarly render Mass Save’s emissions reduction goals through 2030 — which are currently 1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide under the program’s current three-year budget — as “advisory, non-binding, and non-enforceable.” Since buildings are the second-most polluting sector in Massachusetts, the Mass Save goals are a key part of the state’s strategy to meet the overall 2030 targets. 

Mass Save delivered $2.8 billion in total benefits last year and has reduced annual electricity consumption dramatically, according to program data. 

The bill would also push back the state’s statutory deadline to contract for 5,600 megawatts of offshore wind by two years, from 2027 to 2029, in order to respond to “uncertainty surrounding federal permitting” and “changing market conditions,” according to a bill summary. Gov. Maura Healey proposed the same offshore wind procurement delay in her supplemental budget filed earlier this year.

The legislation represents Cusack’s overhaul of Healey’s energy affordability package filed earlier this year, which didn’t contain the reforms and rollbacks of the climate commitments and Mass Save that are now on the table. Cusack’s bill is moving as an entirely new measure outside of regular procedure, meaning he can move on his own track through the House without consent from his counterpart on the joint committee, Sen. Michael Barrett.  

In order to become law, however, it would still need Senate approval – likely a long shot.  

“People always criticize the process when they can’t criticize the substance of the bill,” Cusack said when asked if the measure is more for messaging or negotiation than something that can become law. “We took the perspective of, what’s a bill that saves the ratepayer money, makes our commitment to clean energy, and our competitiveness economically? That was the focus. It wasn’t a focus of, can I get 21 votes in the Senate? I don’t serve in the Senate. Not my monkey, not my circus.” 

Still, the fact that such a measure appears to be advancing in the House is a sign of just how far the pendulum has swung on climate policy and a renewed sensitivity to the costs of clean power in spite of the volatilities tied to fossil fuels.  

Healey didn’t directly address the House plan when asked at a press conference on Monday as her legislation devolves into a broader fight over climate goals. 

“I haven’t seen the outlines of any specific plan on that,” she said, adding that she’s going to continue to work with the Legislature on her energy affordability bill. “There are other things in that legislation that will, right now, help us reduce energy costs. That’s what we’ve got to focus on.”  

The new measure from Cusack is bound to further upset climate advocates and progressives in Massachusetts, some of whom are already urging action in response.  

Sierra Club Massachusetts, Mass Power Forward, and Progressive Mass have all mobilized their networks to contact state lawmakers just since Friday to express their opposition to the House bill.  

The measure would also make reforms to various agencies and the utilities, including a proposal similar to Healey’s to expand the state’s ability to procure clean energy. That provision would set the Department of Energy Resources on a path to procure 10,000 megawatts of solar and 10,000 megawatts of offshore wind by 2040.  

DPU would also no longer be required to calculate the social value of greenhouse gas emissions when evaluating cost-effectiveness of the Mass Save program and other efforts to reduce energy demand.  

And the legislation cuts the amount of clean energy that utilities must purchase in Massachusetts each year from a 3 percent annual increase to 1 percent until 2033.  

On solar power, Cusack is also aiming to reduce net-metering compensation rates and raise a limit on municipal solar generation from 10 megawatts to 20 megawatts, a cap that has been cause for concern for cities and towns around the state.  

“These are hard savings coming back to the ratepayers here, and that’s what drove this bill,” Cusack said. “That was the number one goal from the onset and from my appointment [to this committee] and my charge from the Speaker and the rest of the House: How do we save people money? How do we lower our energy costs? How do we make sure that our energy costs aren’t a major hindrance to affordability of living, to doing business? And what does that mean long term for our economy, where we still want to be a hub of clean tech and clean energy and move away from fossil fuels?”