House liberals insist they have the numbers to at least force a negotiation on a Manchin side deal they see as too fossil fuel-friendly.
Susan Walsh/AP Photo

The West Virginia centrist said he understands if House Democrats are still steaming over the downsizing he exacted upon their original party-line domestic agenda. Yet liberals across the Capitol vow their opposition to his plan is not retribution for two years of Manchin-induced headaches — from his reshaping of the $1 trillion-plus Build Back Better bill into the smaller Inflation Reduction Act, to the House’s forced swallowing of last year’s bipartisan infrastructure bill, derided by some on the left as basically a Republican effort.

Instead, House Democrats say it’s all about what they see as an environmentally hazardous permitting deal that undercuts some of the climate provisions they won in this summer’s new law.

Still, a few Democrats admit they’re relishing their chance to hold some leverage over the West Virginian.

“It’s about time,” quipped retiring Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.), who joined about 70 Democrats in urging party leadership to keep Manchin’s bill separate from government funding.

“It’s a pretty important vote and we shouldn’t play games with it to make it impossible to defeat,” Yarmuth said, adding that he and other House Democrats never signed off. “That’s totally Schumer’s deal. I’m not bound by Schumer’s agreement.”

There’s another big incentive to limit the blast radius of the permitting fight. Democrats are entering the pre-midterms stretch with a singular focus on avoiding self-inflicted political wounds, including the potential for a shutdown. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said he needs to see the permitting text before he can say whether he’ll support it, but urged his party to be strategic about picking fights that could endanger a government funding patch.

“It could be that people are looking for leverage,” Murphy said of Democrats’ positioning. “Or it could be that House members are still cross at Joe Manchin.”

If the permitting push does hitch a ride on the Senate’s funding bill this month, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) hinted at the steep climb — and possible education campaign — that skeptical Democrats in his chamber might need to sign on.

“There’s no doubt it’s controversial,” Hoyer told Bloomberg TV of Manchin’s permitting plan on Monday. “And we’ll have to convince our members that the language that is brought over does not undermine our environment.”

Manchin said Schumer and Pelosi are standing firm in their commitments to him: “I believe exactly what they’ve told me … they see exactly what this country needs and why we need to make sure that we have to be the superpower of the world.” He said he was buoyed by the Monday release of a competing permitting reform bill by dozens of Senate Republicans as a show of bipartisan support for his ideas.

The road to an eventual permitting law is still looking bumpy, with some of the nation’s most vocal environmental groups galvanized into their own missives opposing what they called a “fossil fuel wish list” that would perpetrate “environmental racism,” among other effects. Some climate activist groups have already staged protests.

In a recent interview, Grijalva wouldn’t say whether he and other progressives were “willing to take the whole ship down” and trigger a standoff over government funding. But he said that any Manchin-led permitting bill would face “a great deal of resistance” without significant changes.

And while Democrats cheered their summer’s huge climate gains in the Manchin-crafted party-line bill, plenty of progressives feel they owe him nothing on the separate issue of energy permits. Huffman said that while some of the bill could end up being “good policy,” he stressed that it needed to be considered “in the light of the day — not in some back room with Joe Manchin.”

Beyond Sanders, progressives on the Senate side are staying out of the fray for now and calling for a pragmatic approach. Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), who’s already backed the permitting deal, said that disagreements within the Democratic coalition are natural, but “like it or not, in order to build the kind of clean energy we want, we are going to have to change some federal laws.”

Josh Siegel contributed to this report.