Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Politics

The First Crack Just Opened in the Climate Left

The Earth will have one less friend in Congress.

•
Jamaal Bowman.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

There will be many chances this week to dissect why two-term New York Congressman Jamaal Bowman lost his primary to Westchester County Executive George Latimer, which The Associated Press called less than an hour after the polls closed on Tuesday. Post mortems will focus on the financial angle (the 16th District primary was the most expensive in House history) and, of course, the Israel-Palestine angle (nearly $15 million alone came from an American Israel Public Affairs Committee-affiliated super PAC that aggressively portrayed Bowman as antisemitic). Others will say it had been a forgone conclusion and point to the disturbing way Latimer co-opted Republican racial dog-whistles in his attacks, or claim Bowman sabotaged his own chances by shifting too far to the left.

It’s probably still a stretch to say that Bowman’s resounding loss was a referendum on progressive climate movements like Sunrise, which attached itself both to Bowman and to the Green New Deal. But look at it the other way around: In the context of Governor Kathy Hochul’s reneging on congestion pricing and the state legislature’s failure to pass the NY HEAT Act, one of the staunchest allies of progressive climate policy losing his election represents another blow to New York’s image as a national leader on the issue — and its ability to remain one.

The Sunrise Movement played a pivotal role in Bowman’s 2020 win against 30-year incumbent Eliot Engel — who was, himself, an original co-sponsor of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal bill. But Bowman, then 44, represented a fresh face for environmentally minded progressives in a district that once voted more overwhelmingly for Barack Obama than any other locality in the county. When Bowman ultimately defeated the then-73-year-old establishment figure, he also became the first Black representative of the majority minority district that covers the southern half of Westchester County and the northern lip of the Bronx.

In Congress, Bowman’s senior policy advisor reportedly helped spur Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer into action on the Inflation Reduction Act during the summer of 2022. Somewhat less gloriously, Bowman became only the 27th member of Congress to be censured after he pulled a fire alarm in the Capitol during spending bill negotiations. (He claimed he thought it opened a door.) But his legacy also includes the pursuit of progressive climate policies, such as the Sunrise-backed Green New Deal for Public Schools Act, which he’s introduced in each of the past two congressional sessions and, if passed, would invest $1.6 trillion to reduce emissions and lower environmental justice-related barriers at public schools. Still, that sort of aggressive public spending hasn’t always sat right with the powers that be in the Democratic Party; tellingly, Hillary Clinton endorsed Bowman’s challenger, Latimer, even as pro-Trumpers poured money into his campaign.

Fast-forward to 2024, and the Sunrise Movement is going through a reckoning of its own over whether President Biden’s climate record outweighs his handling of the crisis in Gaza. (Ironically, Bowman “probably had the worst politics on the issue of any Squad member early on in his tenure,” the progressive Discourse Blog has argued.)

That’s not to say that the climate is “losing” to Middle East policy in Americans’ hearts and minds, exactly; on the contrary, climate is a proven election winner, albeit not always in those words. “The NY16 race is a setback for the climate movement, but it also shows the popularity of our ideas,” Saul Levin, the campaigns and political director of the Green New Deal Network, wrote me. “It took the most money in primary history and GOP donors to buy Green New Deal champion Jamaal Bowman’s seat.”

But elections are about, and influenced by, many things, and whatever the combination of reasons may be, the truth stands that with Bowman’s defeat, Congress is now down one more progressive climate ally than it otherwise would have been. (Latimer has called climate change an “existential threat” but has not foregrounded it as a primary concern.)

Bowman’s loss might not sound like much in the bigger picture of the many climate elections happening this year — including, of course, the Big One. But if former President Donald Trump manages to take back the White House this November, every House and Senate seat sympathetic to the urgent realities of climate change will matter critically. That’s not to say, necessarily, that Latimer won’t fight for such causes, but it seems unlikely he’ll be a leader the way Bowman and other Squad members have been, at times pushing more centrist Democrats further to the left and to action.

So yes, you can draw many conclusions from the 16th District primary — that it represents the collapse of the progressive influence of groups like Sunrise; or that, with Bowman being the first Squad member to lose reelection, it reveals a growing impatience with absolutist politics; or that big-money interests have finally figured out a winning strategy in outspending scrappy underdogs; or how all these things in combination might spell trouble for Biden in a few months. But a loss is a loss, and it’s the nature of post mortems to leave out the most important question: What happens next?

Blue
🔒

You’ve reached your free article limit

Subscribe to Heatmap News for unlimited access to daily energy and climate coverage.
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
Spotlight

A Giant Data Center Offers a Permitting Reform Test Case

What would happen to Project Jupiter if the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act is passed?

Project Jupiter.
Heatmap Illustration/Project Jupiter, Library of Congress

One of the nation’s largest data centers is struggling under permitting woes. So let’s play a game: would the bipartisan permitting bill in Congress make the path easier, or might the federal legislation be irrelevant to large hyperscalers under development today?

Meet Project Jupiter, a mega project in southern New Mexico in Dona Ana County under development by Oracle and OpenAI, with financial backing from SoftBank and political support from the Trump administration for being a part of Stargate, a major Trump administration public-private initiative boosting AI development. Project Jupiter would be one of the largest data centers in the country if completed and currently is expected to run on a microgrid powered by fuel cells converting gas to electricity, which the developers claim will burn much cleaner than a typical off-grid gas turbine power plant.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

The Trump Administration Is Still Messing with Offshore Wind Farms

And more of the week’s top news around project fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. New England (and Maryland) – The Trump administration is still messing with offshore wind farms, even while trying to pass a permitting reform deal. Examining the court filings reveals why they may feel empowered to do it — and I’m not sure how this ends.

  • Last Friday, in a legal case brought by anti-wind activists, the Justice Department submitted a motion in federal court to send the construction and operations plan for Orsted’s Revolution Wind project in New England back to the Interior Department for more analysis. On Wednesday, the DOJ entered a similar motion in another case challenging the construction and operations plan for U.S. Wind’s MarWin project off the coast of Maryland in a lawsuit brought by the state’s coastal community of Ocean City.
  • Trump’s actions led some to question whether the president was sabotaging the deal, and others to claim the media coverage itself was an attempt to kill it. Going further, supporters of the bipartisan bill claimed the DOJ's motions were precisely why the bill should become law, implying it would guard offshore wind farms against this sort of maneuver.
  • However, for the bill’s backers, it’s worth considering why the Trump administration believes it has the legal authority to do this. It’s also time to ask whether the bill would actually protect these wind farms against this tactic.
  • To answer those questions, you have to rewind. On May 1, 2025, the Interior Department withdrew a Biden solicitor’s opinion instructing the agency to “strike a rational balance” between wind power and fishing interests. This revocation document is technically not in effect at the moment; one year later, a federal court ruled the opinion was potentially illegal as a part of a preliminary injunction on five anti-renewables actions requested by solar and wind trade groups. The Trump administration is contesting that ruling, and the administration has filed a notice of appeal.
  • In August, despite that opinion being in doubt, a federal judge granted Trump permission under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to remand the construction and operations plan for the now-defunct Atlantic Shores offshore wind farm in the waters of New Jersey. U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb specifically wrote that Atlantic Shores failed to demonstrate the federal government had limitations under OSCLA on revisiting these plans and that the injunction from the litigation on appeal “did not prohibit all reevaluation of agency action.”
  • In the recent Revolution and MarWin filings, Trump’s Justice Department argues the construction and operations plans should be remanded under OSCLA without being vacated. The DOJ motions include claims that previous decision documents did not adequately explain impacts to commercial fishing and other industries that use OSCLA waters. It’s not clear if the administration will win these motions.
  • The bipartisan permitting bill would bar the Interior Department and other federal agencies from taking “any new action that would revoke, rescind, withdraw, terminate, suspend, amend, or alter a federal authorization or permit in effect on or after September 16, 2026,” or “any other action to interfere with or prevent the construction or operation at full capacity of a project that has secured all necessary federal authorizations and permits.” The restriction exempts cases where “the agency is required to take such action by order of a court.” As I wrote in our lengthy piece explaining the bill, this provision has a damages component that allows companies impacted by violations to pursue financial compensation.
  • Here’s the billion-dollar question I expect we won’t have answered unless the bill language is enacted and then litigated: Would the court order exception apply to rulings that grant these motions? Or would the developers be able to sue for damages?

2. Columbia County, N.Y. – New York’s renewable energy permitting office has rejected an upstate solar farm on farmland as a House Democrat representing the area joined hands with the Trump administration in publicly railing against the project.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Politics

Climate Races to Watch This November

These seven elections could change state energy policy.

Watching voting.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

No matter how well Democrats do in the House and Senate in November, it’s unlikely to mean anything new on climate policy in Washington, D.C., for as long as Donald Trump remains in the White House.

That is not true when it comes to the other elections this year.

Several states are on the verge of a possible Democratic trifecta, meaning unified control of both chambers of the state legislature and the governor’s mansion. It’s a position that could enable such states to either top off existing climate and energy policies passed in the last decade or to make the first real run at climate legislation in recent history.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue