Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Politics

Even Democrats Don’t Talk About ‘Climate Change’ Anymore

A new set of policy proposals from House illustrates a marked change in rhetoric since 2020.

•
Infrasturcture Investment and Jobs Act text and dollars
Illustration by Justin Renteria/Getty Images

Nine House Democrats from the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition published a sweeping federal policy blueprint on Tuesday called the Thriving Economy Project. While it is explicitly not a policy platform, it is the first window we’ve gotten into how lawmakers are thinking about their next set of climate moves in the post-One Big Beautiful Bill Act era.

The last time House Democrats published a major energy and environment policy document was in 2020, when the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis released the aptly titled report “Solving the Climate Crisis.” The Thriving Economy Project covers many of the same themes as that 2020 platform — energy, agriculture, disaster recovery, innovation. It even contains some of the same policy proposals. But as the contrast in titles suggests, the approach is markedly different.

The 2026 version doesn’t call itself climate policy at all. Though it contains plenty of proposals to support cleaner energy and reduced emissions, it frames them in terms of affordability, economic opportunity, resilience, and competitiveness, rather than as a means to stop planetary warming. The words “climate change” aren’t entirely absent, but they appear primarily as the context for proposals to improve disaster preparedness, response, and recovery, or to adapt infrastructure to higher seas and hotter days.

This isn’t a huge shock. We’ve written quite a bit at Heatmap about how climate change advocacy is shifting away from talking about the crisis directly to messaging about the benefits of actions that just so happen to cut carbon or shore up communities against disasters. When I compared the number of times certain words and phrases appeared in the 2020 package versus this new one, the evidence of that rhetorical shift was decisive.

Mentions of “climate change” dropped from more than 500 to 22. Whereas the 2020 package cited the “climate crisis” more than 150 times, the new report casually references it in just four places. In 2020, Democrats framed their entire platform around hitting “net-zero” by 2050, citing the goal 139 times. Net-zero appears just once in the new package in a chapter about investing in innovation. According to the International Energy Agency’s “Net Zero Roadmap,” it says, about a third of the emissions reductions required to get there “will come from technologies still under development.”

While lawmakers took a stand six years ago to fight for “environmental justice,” that term is wholly absent from the new report. Instead of pushing for policies that improve outcomes for “communities of color,” a phrase which appears just five times in the Thriving Economy Project, it focuses on building “thriving communities” and improving outcomes for “low income” and “underserved” populations.

It’s easy to be cynical about the political calculation these rhetorical shifts reflect, but the two policy platforms were also written for different audiences. Florida Representative Kathy Castor, a Democrat who led the creation of both versions, told me that the goal of the Thriving Economy Project was to come up with policies that could be adopted in the next two years. “This effort is driven by solving problems ASAP where we think there can be bipartisan support,” she said. The 2020 document, by contrast, was a wishlist for a future Democrat-led Congress and administration. Much of what was in it later became part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the IRA, but has since been dismantled under Trump.

The increased frequency of certain other terms — such as “energy security,” “cybersecurity,” and “geopolitical” — is also a reminder that between the war over Ukraine, the war in Iran, and the AI race, a lot really has changed since 2020.

Just because the report is not explicitly about climate change doesn’t mean it’s not a climate policy document, however. When I asked Sean Casten, a Democratic representative from Illinois who also worked on the project, whether he considered the policies to be about addressing climate change, he responded that there was no way to talk about energy or home insurance and not talk about climate. “You also don’t necessarily have to use the word climate to talk about all of those things, right?” he added.

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe to access Heatmap's exclusive climate and energy polling, award-winning journalism, and subscriber-only events. Save $57 on an annual subscription, just $156 $99/year.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Ideas

Electricity Isn’t the Only Thing Getting More Expensive Because of AI

We need a ratepayer protection pledge for natural gas, too, argue two energy systems experts.

A pickpocketing power plant.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Everyone is talking about high energy prices, which were a major factor in the midterm elections. And it’s not just electricity: Families are paying 16% more for natural gas now than they were just two years ago. Within a few more years, the boom in electricity demand from data centers could add enough natural gas power plants to expand America’s gas power generation capacity by a third. Some back of the envelope math shows that the additional costs to regular customers from this expansion could total more than $23 billion across all retail gas and electricity prices by 2030.

Large users choosing gas will raise costs for the more than 70 million households in America paying a gas bill every month. It’s simple supply and demand. Some data center developers are working with utilities to connect to the grid, but many others are building their own off-grid power plants that would burn natural gas to power their operations. That would require a massive gas infrastructure build-out on top of the supply pressure, raising costs still further.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
X-Energy in Singapore.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

For years now, the United States has watched anxiously as its nuclear industry stagnated while those of its biggest geopolitical adversaries boomed. Russia, America’s top 20th century rival, dominated exports, securing deals to build virtually every nuclear newcomer nation’s first reactors. China, meanwhile, took the lead in domestic construction, with three dozen large-scale reactors under construction right now; Beijing even dabbled briefly in exporting its technology with a deal to build half a dozen reactors in Pakistan. It’s already made an offer to build Serbia’s first nuclear plant, and it’s expected to bid on more deals soon.

Now, for the first time, an American company is going head to head with a Chinese state-owned champion for one of Asia’s most sought-after nuclear deals.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
AM Briefing

Carbon Complaint

On Guterres naming a villain, how Masayoshi Son ‘overdid it,’ and Vance’s Venezuela trader

An Exxon sign.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: A major Atlantic storm called Storm Charles is bearing down on Portugal, which closed schools, canceled all non-essential services, and called off the second day of the WebSummit in Lisbon • A potential nor’easter is threatening New York City with heavy rain and flooding • Jackson, Mississippi — where Democrat Scott Colom declared victory last night to become the state’s first Black senator in nearly 150 years — is set to reach a warm, sunny, 71 degrees Fahrenheit today before dropping off by nearly 20 degrees overnight.


THE TOP FIVE

1. UN chief’s closing climate message: Fossil fuels are ‘killing our planet’

When the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its landmark report on the closing window to keep global warming within the range set by the Paris Agreement in 2018, António Guterres was just a year into the job as the United Nations’ secretary-general. The left-wing former Portuguese prime minister quickly developed a knack for delivering speeches that contained exactly the kind of rousing soundbites that blared in headlines across the world. That year, he proclaimed climate change “the defining issue of our time – and we are at a defining moment.” As emissions continued to grow, he ratcheted up his language. In 2022, he warned of a world in “great peril.” In 2023, he lamented that “humanity has opened the gates of Hell.” In his likely final speech before the annual global climate summit as the UN chief, Guterres raged against a world still on “the path to mutually assured destruction.”As “heat records keep shattering,” he said, “fossil fuel interests keep making a killing — while killing our planet.”

Keep reading...Show less
Blue