Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Exploring the American landscape: A call for nonpartisan climate action

Exploring the American landscape: A call for nonpartisan climate action
Getty Images

Kristina Becvar is the Chief Operating Officer of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

The day after celebrating the 4th of July, I embarked on a road trip across the United States. In the past week, I've had the opportunity to travel nearly 4,000 miles across ten states, and the beauty that is the American landscape has not escaped my attention.


Starting from Chicago, I passed through Wisconsin, Minnesota, and most of South Dakota before hitting the "gateway to the west" and the transformative landscape changes that take shape around Badlands National Park. Venturing further into Wyoming and Montana, through the gem that is Yellowstone, and crossing into Idaho and Washington, the diversity of the landscape was matched only by the diversity of culture in the small towns where we stopped for food, gas, or just a break in the drive. I currently find myself in Humboldt County, Northern California, where my youngest studies forestry. As I write this from a lodge in a logging industry town adjacent to one of the most majestic of the remaining redwood forests, I am reminded of the profound impact of the work of Bridge Alliance members in fostering constructive dialogue and finding solutions for our nation's most pressing issues.

Here in Humboldt County, the delicate balance between economic prosperity and environmental conservation has long been a topic of intense debate. Sea levels are rising at an alarming rate, surpassing any other location on the West Coast. The realities of overfishing and increased wildfire risks cannot be ignored, while the livelihoods of local communities and the future of our natural heritage are at stake. However, what struck me most was the community's commitment to open, practical discussions about finding sustainable solutions. Their ability to transcend divisive politics is a blueprint for nationwide climate change action.

This week, I also had the privilege of attending a program presented by the Network for Responsible Public Policy on Climate Change Solutions, featuring esteemed guest speaker Bill McKibben. From his home in flood-ravaged Vermont, McKibben shed light on the urgency of the climate crisis and the need for transformative conversations. The recent record-breaking temperatures and extreme weather events remind us of our collective responsibility to address climate change like never before. We are witnessing a planet unlike any in human history, demanding new and unprecedented conversations.

Amidst these challenges, there is reason for hope. A recent Pew research study revealed that 74 percent of Americans now support international efforts to combat climate change. It is heartening to see strong bipartisan support for alternative fuels, such as solar and wind energy generation, as well as utilizing federal public lands for sustainable solutions. Despite our differences, Americans agree more than we disagree, allowing us to find common ground and develop solutions that meet our collective needs. However, we must navigate the complexities of corporate interests and the politicization of environmental issues, which often hinder progress.

One area where this conflict is evident is in the realm of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors in investment and business decisions. While many politicians advocate for the freedom of businesses to make decisions in their best interest, with the Supreme Court ruling last month that the First Amendment protects their right to do so, surrounded by much debate. But the same logic is not being extended to decisions that support innovation in environmental protection. Many states are passing laws restricting the use of ESG factors, despite the lack of evidence suggesting that American CEOs are seeking to harm shareholder value. Understanding the concerns of the next generation of consumers, companies are adapting their products and services towards decarbonization and natural ecosystem-friendly practices. By restricting free market investment and impeding business decisions based on company culture, politicians risk harming taxpayers and pensioners while hindering progress toward a sustainable future. The motives behind such political pushback warrant further scrutiny.

One factor contributing to this pushback is the influence of special interest groups that prioritize corporate profits over environmental health and safety. This interference impedes the necessary cultural shift toward environmental protection and leads to catastrophic incidents such as oil disasters and wildfires. While we may not always have perfect solutions or prevent individuals from prioritizing personal gain over collective health, we must hold our elected officials accountable for their appointments and ensure the highest bidder does not sway those responsible for evaluating government protections.

As Americans, we hold dear our autonomy and freedom, values that manifest in various ways. However, we must rise above our polarized culture and find common ground to address the climate crisis. The future of generations to come depends on our ability to bridge divides, collaborate, and prioritize the health and preservation of our environment.


Read More

An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed upon entering the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building on June 6, 2023 in New York City. New York City has provided sanctuary to over 46,000 asylum seekers since 2013, when the city passed a law prohibiting city agencies from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement agencies unless there is a warrant for the person's arrest.(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)
An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed.
(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

The Power of the Purse and Executive Discretion: ICE Expansion Under the Trump Administration

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Core Constitutional Debate: Expanded ICE enforcement under the Trump Administration raises a core constitutional question: Does Article II executive power override Article I’s congressional power of the purse?
  • Executive Justification: The primary constitutional justification for expanded ICE enforcement is The Unitary Executive Theory.
  • Separation of Powers: Critics argue that the Unitary Executive Theory undermines Congress’s power of the purse.
  • Moral Conflict: Expanded ICE enforcement has sparked a moral debate, as concerns over due process and civil liberties clash with claims of increased public safety and national security.

Where is ICE Funding Coming From?

Since the beginning of the current Trump Administration, immigration enforcement has undergone transformative change and become one of the most contested issues in the federal government. On his first day in office, President Trump issued Executive Order 14159, which directs executive agencies to implement stricter immigration enforcement practices. In order to implement these practices, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a budget reconciliation package that paired state and local tax cuts with immigration funding. This allocated $170.7 billion in immigration-related funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to spend by 2029.

Keep ReadingShow less
Talent Isn’t the Problem. Belonging Is.

Zaila Avant-Garde on stage at the 30th Anniversary Bounce Trumpet Awards at Dolby Theatre on April 23, 2022 in Hollywood, California.

Getty Images, Alberto E. Rodriguez

Talent Isn’t the Problem. Belonging Is.

Every spring, as the Scripps National Spelling Bee captures national attention, we celebrate the brilliance of young spellers—children who command stages and spell words that even confuse adults. This time of the year makes me think back to when I was 9 years old, when I won my school’s spelling bee and advanced to the county competition. Standing in a large, crowded room, surrounded by what felt like hundreds of faces that didn’t look like mine, I whispered to myself: “I can’t do this.” Maybe I wasn’t supposed to be there at all.

So instead of showcasing my own brilliance, I committed self-sabotage by intentionally misspelling each word on the spelling test.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person at home feeling tired and stressed.

How positive male leadership is critical to the mental health and development of young men.

Getty Images, kieferpix

The Problem isn’t Masculinity – It’s the Men Modeling It

From the White House to Harvard to Buckingham Palace, 2026 has become a masterclass in how men should not behave. Donald Trump tweeted in expletives on a religious holiday, threatening to decimate “a whole civilization.” Larry Summers—one of the world's most powerful academics—resigned in disgrace from Harvard. Before that, Prince Andrew was arrested. This year alone, Bill Gates, George Mitchell, and other prominent men have been exposed for inappropriate, abusive, or generally shameful behavior.

In short, men aren't looking good right now—especially as role models for young men. Now more than ever, we need good men to step up for our boys.

Keep ReadingShow less
Towards a Reformed Capitalism
oval brown wooden conference table and chairs inside conference room

Towards a Reformed Capitalism

Despite all the laws and regulations that apply to corporations, which for the most part are designed to make corporations more responsive to the greater good, corporations have wreaked great harm on our environment, their workers, their customers, and the general public. Despite all the rules, capitalism can still pretty much do what it wants.

The problem is not that the laws and regulations are not enforced, although that is partly true. The problem is more that the laws and regulations are weak because of the strong influence corporations have on both Congress (this is true of Democrats as well as Republicans) and those responsible for regulating.

Keep ReadingShow less