The Morning After
Given Trump’s victory, what can be done to save the planet?
We are about to have in the White House a man who thinks solar panels kill bunnies, and windmills cause cancer – a man who rolled back over a hundred environmental regulations in his first term of office. This a dreadful setback that could not have come at a worse time. The climate and biodiversity crises are becoming more urgent by the day. But we’ve been here before, and we know what needs to be done.
Twice before in this century, enemies of environmental protection have taken the helm. After taking office, Bush embraced fossil fuels, opposed climate action, and weakened environmental regulations. Trump’s first term made Bush seem like a tree hugger, and his second term may be even worse.
The strategies we’ve used in the past are still applicable, though circumstances have changed. Not all the changes are bad. Some changes will make it harder to push back against Trump, while others have made it easier.
The courts
The courts can be important checks on anti-environmental actions. The Trump Administration had a terrible litigation record last time. There’s been some speculation that they’ve learned to avoid stupid mistakes. It seems likely that in this term, even more than the last one, Trump will value fealty over competence. If so, the new appointees may fare no better in court.
The judiciary is more conservative today and more skeptical of environmental regulation, which could make litigation more difficult. But other changes have made it easier in some ways to challenge agency actions, with the overruling of Chevron and the rise of the major question doctrine. So, despite the more conservative slant of the courts, they still could serve as a check on Trump’s most destructive impulses.
The states
Second, we’ve learned in this century that states can play a much bigger role in environmental policy than they did in the last one. Bush’s inaction helped launch major climate change programs in California and on the East Coast. In Trump’s first term, those initial state efforts became much more aggressive, and many additional states acted. We need to redouble those efforts. The first Trump Administration made some efforts to attack state regulation in court. But this may turn out to be difficult, because anti-regulatory judges are often also believers in state’s rights.
State-level actions will be able to take advantage of some major economic trends, especially the plunging cost of renewable energy and battery storage. These incentives are amplified by the financial incentives of the Inflation Reduction Act. As I’ve written before, the IRA will be hard to repeal because it has sparked so much investment in Republican congressional districts. The changed economics of renewables also open another front: pushing for renewables on economic grounds in conservative states.
The bureaucracy
Under both Bush and Trump 1.0, we learned that government experts and civil service have some leverage even under the most ideological leaders. The Trump people are aware of this: thus, their talk about destroying the “deep state.” Despite talk of firing tens of thousands of public servants, doing so could be illegal, would be very difficult and time-consuming, and would leave the administration unable to craft actions that can stand up in court.
There is no doubt that public servants will be under tremendous pressure from the Trump Administration. Protecting them from political pressure should be a major priority of environmental advocates and pro-democracy groups.
Politics
The opposition party always has the advantage in off-year elections, giving Democrats an edge in regaining control of Congress. Trump will certainly be a powerful presence in the Republican party, but he will also be a lame duck and an aging one at that. Moreover, as we have seen in the House over the past four years, the Republican Party is badly divided internally and has found it hard to organize to do business. Trump may be able to impose more order, but the fact remains that there are deep divisions within the party. It may not be easy for him to push through Congress the measures he has promised the country – which could be good news for the environment.
Trump will no doubt live up to his past records as the most anti-environmental president in U.S. history. There’s no gainsaying it: his victory is an environmental disaster.
For that very reason, the effort to defend public health, the environment, and future generations is now more important than ever. We’ve suffered a terrible loss but we still have the tools to fight back. But we can’t allow shock and despair to get in the way of immediate preparation for the environmental battle of our lifetimes.
Thanks for this clear-eyed assessment, Dan. A little ray of hope at a very difficult moment.
Trump won because the American public is sick and tired of being ripped-off by endless climate scams and very expensive fake mitigation. No more lies about an imaginary crisis. Thank you President Trump
perhaps now we will have a more reasonable approach to addressing climate change and not ruin the economy trying to meet false deadlines created by scientists who have the hubris to think they understand the earth’s complex atmosphere.
The Environmental Law course will look much different than originally planned for next semester.
Protecting the investments from the IRA seems like the top priority. The Methane Rule, the Power Plant Rule, NEPA consideration of climate change and EJ … all on the chopping block. Hopefully, he hasn’t figured out legally undo rules under the APA over the past five years.
The results will certainly embolden the climate change deniers.
This may be a good time for the environmental community to finally embrace nuclear energy. The environmental community is myopically focused on the environmental impacts of energy production, that we seem to have forgotten 1) what energy is used for – to power our civilization; and 2) the global implications for our safety and security regarding where we get that power. In other words, buying 400 BILLION dollars worth of oil from Iran allowed them to finance the Houthis, Hamas & Hezbollah and fund their collective dream to “destroy America” and the rest of the world in the process. Climate change has been called an “existential threat.” An immediate threat is 6+ Islamic fundamentalist regimes in the ME and North Africa that want to destroy life as we know it, and they are being funded by oil men
Hi Susan. I’m wondering what you make of Trump’s recent expressions of skepticism about nuclear. https://www.aei.org/economics/trump-and-nuclear-energy-there-are-questions/ Seems like a shift from the traditional Republican stance.
Dan, most tragically, our best educators keep proving that the gravest threat to the future for our newest generations is that you refuse to inform, educate and motivate the public to demand immediate actions by our politicians to implement solutions in time to protect the future of the human race.
You keep proving the fact of life that you were warned about by former Berkeley faculty member Will Durant in his book “The Lessons of History” that civilizations decline because of failures by political or intellectual leaders to meet the challenges of change, such as out of control climate change disasters today.
With Trump now in control of the Presidency, Senate, House and SCOTUS, and our intellectuals refusing to communicate with what they refer to as the “Impure” public to inform, educate and motivate us to demand that our politicians implement immediate solutions to the out of control climate change disasters today then it is now impossible to protect quality of life on earth.
Today, at COP29:
UN Secretary General António Guterres has warned world leaders that time is running out in the fight against climate change.
“We are in the final countdown to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius,” Guterres told the UN’s Climate Change Conference (COP29) in Baku. “And time is not on our side.”
Thank you for providing some hope and direction during these trying environmental times.