America moves back in climate policy – here is how Democrats can correct the ship
Every week it brings a new address on the Trump administration and Republican in Congress to cancel climate protection. The last shocking suggestion to cancel the prominent scientific discovery that carbon dioxide emissions are at risk, which supports most of the American climate organization.
No other democracy in the world faces such an attack on the science and climate policy. The huge costs of weather disasters in the destroyed and increasingly expensive United States, such as this summer Texas flood, have killed more than 100 American citizens.
At some point, we must ask ourselves: How did our policy become so distorted that a number of Americans voted in favor of a president and a Republican party that has continuously canceled dozens of climate protection?
The sincere answer is that all elements of American policy – right, position and left – are involved in some blame. Fortunately for Democrats, there is a new recognition in the wake of the 2024 elections towards strengthening the “economy of abundance”, including building new clean energy projects by allowing reform in Congress.
There is no doubt that the Republican Party Control Tactics is the primary engine of climate policy. Unfortunately, they have become a major part of the political strategy of the cultural war that divides the country and prevents the desired climate work. From President Trump, the Republicans routinely presented completely false assurances regarding climate and science policy, and even they intentionally undermined the ability of America to protect its citizens from harsh weather disasters.
At the same time, large numbers of voters have been persuaded to support Republican politicians because many Americans are also stopped through the radicalism of the remote left-wing environmental movement-in particular, the incorrect assumption that fossil fuels should be banned immediately, with its formation of undermining the middle capacity of citizens to enjoy the age of the middle class.
These tactics have fought tens of millions of Americans in the wrong opinion that Democrats are trying to ban fossil fuels. However, the Democrats themselves did not extinguish themselves adequately from fossil fuel, or have placed clear lines on major issues.
For example, progress over the past fifteen years has increased significantly from US natural gas production, which has reduced energy prices while directly allowing a huge reduction in emissions of coal. But Democrats often appear defensive from the issue and often give up the Leadership of the Left Climate Groups, which take unreasonable positions such as the ban on gas, a position that most Americans oppose. In fact, approximately 70 percent of Americans, including the vast majority of Democrats, support natural gas production, as well as expanding renewable energy.
As former President Obama indicated in 2014, America produces “more natural gas than anyone – and the power bill for everyone is almost less because of it. As well as carbon emissions that cause climate change.”
However, the use of natural gas does not require the United States to make deeper discounts in the fleeing emissions of methane, most of which are in support of the gas industry. The discounts in methane can limit 0.3 ° C of the temperature by 2050, which prevents three times the warming by the middle of the century from carbon dioxide pieces alone. Unfortunately, the Trump administration has just announced this month that it will delay the implementation of methane regulations. Avoiding the explicit cancellation of methane should be a major goal.
For larger popular support necessary to prevent climate disasters, Democrats need new curricula without mercy based on limiting high temperatures in the near-term-not ideological pregnancy tests. Promise Democrats, including those running for the presidency in 2028, should attack the Tram’s climate and economically harmful declines of clean energy incentives that hand over hundreds of thousands of jobs and trillions in China.
But this is not enough. To restore the White House and Congress, Democrats must present new ways to discuss the climate that shows that they appreciate the economic benefits of traditional energy, as Obama did, even because they support the production of new clean energy that is the future. Democratic candidates should have the courage to challenge unreasonable interests groups in all aspects, including the left wing of the climate hall that played a major role in delaying reasonable climate progress by taking extremist positions. Democrats must be more striking in China, whose emissions are still greater than those in the United States
In Congress, the immediate opportunity is to fix federal allowance. Supporting some natural gas pipelines in exchange for more approvals on the clean project and additional clean energy transmission lines between the United States is a decent deal for Democrats. Building the new electricity infrastructure is very important now, as technical data centers increase demand and raise prices. Democratic voters will blame if they are known to prevent the production of new electricity, just as they have begun to blame Republicans for reducing renewable resources that can reduce prices as well.
The time of ideology has ended on the climate. The far right or left should not specify the maximum conditions for politics and climate policy. Democrats must focus unabated on this fact that climate work revolves around protecting citizens, reducing costs and creating good jobs. If they do so, climate work will once again become a profitable issue for Democrats, which helps to protect America now and for future generations.
Paul BledSoe, a professor at the American University’s Environmental Policy Center. The White House climate change was served under President Clinton.
