Whatâs in here ⤾ď¸
University of Chicagoâs Institute for Politics Nov. 12 event on data centers
Democrats debate taking a page from Trumpâs economic playbook
đ¸ Sun Valley beauty
Planet-sized problems collide in permitting debate
Efforts to fight climate change, conserve nature and build clean energy have long unfolded on competing tracks. Now, theyâre colliding â and exposing tough trade-offs for environmentalists.
Why it matters: Congressâ sweeping permitting debate is forcing those competing priorities into the same conversation, with major consequences for climate action and conservation.
Driving the news: The Senate is set to hold an initial procedural vote Monday on a sprawling bipartisan bill that would make it easier to build power lines and energy projects of all kinds, including clean energy and fossil fuels.
At the heart of the debate is how much public scrutiny projects should face before theyâre approved â and how much protection those approvals should receive afterward.
Supporters say the current system takes too long, delaying clean energy and other infrastructure. Opponents warn that speeding things up could come at the expense of wildlife, public lands and tribal rights.
Between the lines: The dilemma reflects a fundamental tension within the environmental movement: Building the infrastructure needed to combat climate change can threaten nature, while protecting nature can complicate efforts to build that infrastructure.
Wind and solar farms, for example, can require large expanses of land, potentially disrupting wildlife habitats even as they help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
âThe part of my organization that cares about climate sees great opportunity and the part that cares about nature sees some dangers,â said a leader of one organization that focuses on both causes, speaking anonymously to discuss the proposal candidly.
The big picture: Both parties broadly agree Washington needs to overhaul federal permitting, a perennial goal that has eluded Congress for years. The question is what reforms can attract enough support to pass both chambers.
Democrats debate taking a page from Trumpâs economic playbook
President Trump is turning the federal government into an investor in dozens of private companies, and some Democrats are considering following his lead as their party emerges emboldened from the midterm elections.
Why it matters: Democrats are gaining new power to scrutinize Trumpâs corporate investments, even as his approach gains traction within their own party.
Theyâre looking at investments and aid for clean energy and other priorities, like support for energy infrastructure.
State of play: The Trump administrationâs investments in energy, critical minerals and other industries are already drawing calls for congressional investigations.
âThe Trump administration has widened the aperture for industrial policy,â Jennifer Granholm, who served as President Bidenâs Energy Secretary, said at a gathering of energy and climate experts Axios attended in Berkeley, Calif., last month.
âYouâre not going to have state ownership of enterprises,â Granholm told Axios in an interview afterward. âBut maybe you do take a little bit of an ownership sliceâ for national security or global competitiveness reasons, she said.
Yes, but: Some politicians and energy leaders warn that direct government ownership could open the door to political favoritism and market distortions.
âGovernment is not a venture capital fund. Itâs not a private equity fund. Itâs not well suited to pick winners and losers in the marketplace,â said Tim Pawlenty, former Republican governor of Minnesota who now leads the Solar Energy Industries Association, at a University of Chicago event.
âIf it starts to go down the slippery slope of âitâs just the flavor of the day company because we like itâ or theyâre well connected or whatever, then you got problems.â
Threat level: âBuying stakes in public companies is so, so, so dangerous,â Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) said at the same event.
âI have no idea how a future president unwinds our stake in Intel without totally tanking Intel stock,â he added, referring to the administrationâs roughly 10% stake in the semiconductor giant.
Democratsâ blue wave leaves climate behind
Democrats have made climate change a centerpiece of their campaigns for years â but this year they barely mentioned it.
Why it matters: The midterms showed just how far the topic has fallen down the political priority list, even within the party most committed to addressing it â and suggest affordability will shape how Democrats govern next year.
Driving the news: Democrats up and down the ballot campaigned overwhelmingly on affordability, including fuel prices surging amid President Trumpâs Iran war and rising electricity bills, accentuated by the AI boom.
The big picture: The relative absence of climate change is striking considering that Democrats of all political stripes won big.
