# Why Biden-era clean energy investment policies had limited political returns

## TL;DR

Biden's clean energy investments increased public visibility but failed to generate political credit for the administration, as governors and companies claimed more recognition.

## Contribution

Shows how credit attribution in complex policy environments limits the political effectiveness of green investments.

## Key findings

- Proximity to green projects increases visibility but not credit for the Biden Administration.
- Governors are seen as more responsible for green investments than the White House.
- Private firms and fragmented messaging reduce the political impact of green spending.

## Abstract

The Biden Administration enacted over $198 billion in clean energy and manufacturing incentives, with the expectation that delivering material economic benefits could yield political dividends. This nationwide study examines whether these investments affect public opinion. Although proximity to green projects makes them more visible to the public, it does not bestow credit on the Biden Administration which pushed for them. The most substantial political beneficiaries are governors, who more actively claim credit than the White House. For policies to affect politics, voters need to be able to trace them back to the responsible political actors, which is challenging in a complex information environment. Green spending channeled through private firms alone is unlikely to build ground-up coalitions for climate policy.

The Biden Administration enacted the largest federal policy framework to incentivize clean energy and decarbonization in U.S. history. We examine whether Biden-era green investments produced political returns by affecting public opinion. Using geolocated survey data linked to investment records and a database of company and politician statements, we assess project visibility and credit attribution. People closer to new renewable energy and green manufacturing facilities are more likely to notice these investments but are not more likely to credit the Biden Administration. Instead, the public sees governors as most responsible. This credit allocation pattern aligns with the political message environment: Governors more frequently claim credit than the White House and companies spread recognition broadly across political actors. This fragmented information environment illustrates the limits of using less traceable forms of green spending to generate electoral gains and public support for climate policy.