Partisanship and U.S. climate policy: the potential risks of a second Trump presidency
Heat deaths in Oregon, wildfires in California and record temperatures of 49°C (120°F) in Las Vegas. Extreme weather across the United States has become common and whilst left-wing voters are increasingly calling for politicians to tackle climate change, right-wing politicians are honing in on the costs of climate change mitigation and downplaying the extent to which human activity contributes to rising temperatures.
Once seen as a wholly scientific issue, climate change has become a partisan topic and there has never been a more pressing need for U.S. politicians and voters to bridge the political divide. Through its oil and gas operations, the United States is the biggest emitter of methane and the outcome of the 2024 Presidential Election will have significant ramifications for the operation of oil and gas companies, international agreements and global communities.
Commentators have heralded Biden as a champion of climate policy and his 2022 Inflation Reduction Act has been regarded as one of the most significant pieces of climate legislation in U.S. history. With the potential to reduce fossil fuel emissions, the Act also involves investments in provisions that encourage carbon management, clean energy, electrification and the promotion of domestic supply chains and combatting concerns related to environmental justice. The Inflation Reduction Act builds upon the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law by allocating greater funding for wildfire risk reduction, climate-smart agriculture and carbon sequestration in urban forests. The Biden Administration’s efforts saw historically marginalised communities being prioritised with regard to climate and environmental justice.
Prior to Biden standing down, climate groups such as Climate Defiance advocated for his withdrawal from the race as they feared he was not in the position to challenge Trump, who would reverse his policies. Kamala Harris appears to be the frontrunner for the Democrats, something that green advocates welcome because in 2019, when she ran for the Democratic presidential primary, her climate agenda was more ambitious than Biden’s. She advocated for combating global heating through an investment of $10 trillion and a carbon tax. As Vice-President, she has been a staunch supporter of Biden’s climate bills and Biden’s former chief climate adviser, Gina McCarthy has argued that Harris’s background as a prosecutor makes her perfectly positioned to fight for justice and ensure that every American can live in a healthy environment. If elected, Kamala Harris would be the United States first female president and this would come after Mexico elected their first female President, Claudia Sheinbaum last month. As a former climate scientist, Sheinbaum’s environmental policies featured prominently in her campaign and a Harris Presidency could lead to a formidable alliance between the U.S. and Mexico in tackling climate change.
“Nonexistent” and “hoax” were Donald Trump’s widely circulated remarks when asked about climate change. His presidency saw withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement, restrictions on oil drilling and rolling back environmental regulations in an effort to support his allies in Big Oil and Gas. A second Trump presidency would see the transition to electric vehicles scaled back alongside greater investment in fossil fuels. His challenger, Nikki Haley, received 10 times less the amount of money from energy sector donors than Trump. He has long-standing ties with oil and gas companies as they previously benefited from tax cuts and there are now $110 billion in tax breaks at stake. Whilst Trump’s climate agenda starkly differs from Biden’s, it is also at odds with fellow Republicans views, signalling a deep divide within the GOP. As some MAGA Republicans call to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act, others cannot deny the impact the Act has had in creating jobs in Republican districts and boosting the economy. Republican Representative John Curtis from Utah has played a vital role in the Conservative Climate Caucus becoming the 2nd largest member organisation in the House GOP Conference.
These efforts, however, may be hampered by Project 2025, a 900-page memo formulated by members of the Trump Administration which seeks to undermine the work done by Curtis and other Republicans to make their party appear more climate friendly. Some of Project 2025’s provisions include the dismantlement of the carbon capture tax credit in addition to eliminating programs aimed at assisting cash-strapped nuclear reactors. Republicans and Democrats are already deeply divided on climate change mitigation but a second Trump presidency would exacerbate the political divide in America and have ramifications for the energy sector which is why many oil and gas companies are exercising caution in formulating future plans amidst the current uncertainty.
Partisan divides between voters on the environment still persist despite climate change featuring more prominently as a priority in elections. In 2020, 52 per-cent of Americans saw climate change mitigation as a vital issue compared to 38 per-cent in 2016. 21 per-cent of Republicans as opposed to 78 per-cent of Democrats believe that tackling climate change should be the top priority on the electoral agenda. Republican voters themselves are divided as 79 per-cent of those aged 18-29 acknowledge that human activity contributes to climate change, but this figure falls to 47 per-cent when looking at right-wing voters aged 50 and older. If these trends persist, the environment may just be the issue that wins the Democrats the election as there were remarks that it played a role in Biden’s victory in 2020.
The United States has never been more divided and communities within and beyond America cannot afford for a far-right populist to take office and undue Biden’s progress. Given the polarisation amongst Americans, what is needed is for climate change mitigation to be framed as an avenue for a more prosperous society and for Republicans to advertise the success green policies have had in their districts and to closely align themselves with the more climate-friendly members of their party. It is only then that voters can come together and discard their political biases and realise the importance of climate legislation in improving public health, minimising the risks to ecosystems and bolstering the economy.