trump
Trump’s plans unsettle federal workers
Federal employees fear for their jobs as Trump’s campaign promises to fire civil servants and demolish the “deep state.”
In short:
- Federal workers worry about job security and policy reversals under a potential second Trump administration.
- Trump’s new running mate, JD Vance, supports firing mid-level bureaucrats to reshape the federal workforce.
- Democrats are divided over President Biden’s re-election campaign amid his recent COVID-19 diagnosis.
Key quote:
“I think he’s learned more about what he needs to do with his incoming administration if he were to be elected.”
— National Park Service employee
Why this matters:
Federal employees are anxious about losing their jobs and seeing their work undone if Trump wins. This instability could impact the effectiveness and morale of the civil service.
Trump blames Biden for high electricity prices to gain political edge
Former President Donald Trump criticizes President Joe Biden for rising electricity costs, leveraging it as a campaign issue.
In short:
- Trump vows to reduce energy prices and blames Democrats for the current high costs.
- Republicans criticize Biden’s climate policies, linking them to a 20% rise in electricity prices since 2020.
- Experts say short-term electricity prices are more influenced by state regulators and natural gas prices than federal policies.
Key quote:
“They could say we’re just going all in on fossil fuels and to hell with the carbon emissions. That would probably have some effect but relatively small.”
— Severin Borenstein, professor at the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley
Why this matters:
Electricity prices are becoming a significant political issue, with Republicans using them to attack Democratic climate policies. As energy costs rise, voters may become more concerned about the economic impact of these policies.
Be sure to read EHN’s piece:
GOP speakers criticize Biden's energy policies at convention
Several Republican National Convention speakers blamed President Biden's policies for rising gas and electricity prices, but experts attribute the increases to global market forces and other complex factors.
Brad Plumer and Lisa Friedman report for The New York Times.
In short:
- Republicans claimed Biden's policies increased gas and electricity prices.
- Experts say global market forces and events like Russia's invasion of Ukraine influenced these price hikes more than Biden's policies.
- Former President Trump promised more domestic drilling, but experts argue other factors affect energy prices.
Key quote:
“The bulk of electricity price spikes are the result of ‘increasing cost and volatility of fossil fuels’ and extreme weather events like wildfires.”
— Brendan Pierpont, director of electricity modeling at Energy Innovation
Why this matters:
Misleading narratives can cloud public understanding and influence policymakers. For instance, blaming renewable energy for all price increases overlooks the benefits of reducing reliance on fossil fuels and the long-term savings from sustainable energy investments. Conversely, ignoring the costs associated with maintaining and upgrading the grid to accommodate renewables can lead to unrealistic expectations and frustration.
Trump’s climate policy legacy has lasting effects at home and globally
Former President Trump’s environmental policies, including exiting the Paris Agreement and rolling back more than 100 regulations, continue to influence climate efforts both in the U.S. and internationally.
In short:
- Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and his regulatory rollbacks have had enduring impacts, inspiring similar actions by populist leaders worldwide.
- His administration appointed conservative judges, including three Supreme Court justices, who have ruled against federal environmental regulations, complicating Biden’s efforts to reverse Trump’s policies.
- Trump’s rhetoric has fueled skepticism about climate policies, influencing political movements in Europe to weaken climate commitments.
Key quote:
“The Trump administration was the most anti-environmental, anti-climate, anti-public health administration we’ve ever had, by far.”
— Tiernen Sittenfeld, senior vice president for government affairs at the League of Conservation Voters
Why this matters:
Trump’s policies have undermined global climate efforts and set a legal precedent that hampers future regulatory actions. These changes pose significant challenges to achieving long-term climate goals and protecting public health.
Relevant EHN coverage:
Trump could face fewer hurdles to overhaul the EPA in a second term
Donald Trump, if re-elected, would likely face fewer legal and bureaucratic barriers to significantly alter environmental and climate regulations, leveraging a more favorable judicial landscape and conservative support.
Brad Plumer and Lisa Friedman report for The New York Times.
In short:
- Trump's previous attempts to roll back environmental regulations were often blocked by courts and internal resistance.
- Project 2025, led by conservative allies, outlines plans to weaken the EPA's authority on climate rules and environmental protections.
- The Supreme Court's conservative majority could facilitate Trump's regulatory changes, posing a challenge to existing environmental policies.
Key quote:
"It's going to be easier. They’re going to have better people, more committed people, more experienced people."
— Myron Ebell, former EPA transition leader
Why this matters:
A weakened EPA could result in reduced efforts to combat climate change, affecting global warming mitigation. Regulatory changes may increase environmental risks and undermine public health protections.
Trump denies knowing about Project 2025 crafted by his former officials
Former Trump officials, including senior energy and environmental appointees, have created Project 2025, a policy blueprint for a potential second term, despite Trump claiming no knowledge of it.
In short:
- Project 2025 is a policy guide organized by the Heritage Foundation and co-authored by former Trump officials, aiming to reshape energy and environmental policies.
- Key contributors include Mandy Gunasekara, William Perry Pendley, and Bernard McNamee, who propose significant regulatory rollbacks and agency overhauls.
- The Biden campaign criticizes the project as extreme, linking it directly to Trump’s agenda despite his disavowal.
Key quote:
“It’s not meant to be a blueprint for Donald Trump — it’s meant to be a blueprint for a conservative president.”
— Stephen Moore, Project 2025 co-author
Why this matters:
Project 2025 could influence future conservative administrations, potentially leading to major shifts in U.S. energy and environmental policies. The debate around this blueprint highlights the political divide over environmental regulation and climate change strategies.
Tim Dunn, evangelical oil magnate, aims to boost Trump’s campaign
Billionaire Tim Dunn, a Texas oil mogul, is using his wealth to support Donald Trump's bid for the White House, reflecting his desire to influence national politics with his religious and conservative values.
In short:
- Tim Dunn, CEO of CrownRock, has contributed $5 million to Trump's campaign, making him one of Trump's top donors.
- Dunn’s efforts have reshaped Texas politics, financing primary challenges to Republicans who don’t align with his conservative values.
- He supports Project 2025, aiming to craft policies for a potential second Trump administration, and is preparing for more influence with an impending $2.2 billion from selling his company.
Key quote:
"The extremists want to deindustrialize America. They want to live in huts around a campfire.”
— Tim Dunn, CEO of CrownRock
Why this matters:
Dunn's involvement in politics emphasizes the increasing influence of wealthy individuals in shaping the country's political landscape. His contributions could amplify Trump's messaging and policy priorities, particularly those favoring the oil industry and conservative social policies. This alignment with Trump also highlights a trend among affluent conservatives who seek to steer the nation’s direction through substantial financial interventions.