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

Trump’s Racism Carries No Consequences—And That’s Scary

Trump's unchecked racism reveals just how fragile the state of American democracy is.

Cage Rivera/Rewire News Group

Trump’s Racism Carries No Consequences—And That’s Scary

Donald Trump posted a video online depicting the Obamas as apes.

This isn’t shocking—or at least it shouldn’t be. Trump has built an entire political career out of saying the quiet racist part out loud and then daring the country to do something about it.

Keep ReadingShow less
Sexual Assault Thrives in Silence

Co-founder of the United Farm Workers Association, Dolores Huerta, August 16, 2025 in Austin, Texas.

.(Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images)

Sexual Assault Thrives in Silence

Dolores Huerta broke her silence 60 years after Cesar Chavez had assaulted her. In her statement, Dolores Huerta said, “I carried this secret for as long as I did because building the movement and securing farmworker rights was my life’s work”. She did not want to hurt the movement.

After 15 years of working with survivors and supporting domestic violence and sexual assault programs, I know this instinct well. Most survivors do not want to rock the boat or damage the reputation of leaders, bosses, or ex-partners. Speaking up can mean destabilizing families, workplaces, and entire communities. Survivors will deny their own pain to protect institutions and the people they care about, especially in oppressed and marginalized communities.

Keep ReadingShow less
Constitutional Barriers to Nationalizing Elections
US Capitol
US Capitol

Constitutional Barriers to Nationalizing Elections

In the run-up to the midterms, President Trump continues to call for nationalizing congressional elections. He has sought to initiate the process through executive orders, such as one proposing to set “a ballot receipt deadline of Election Day for all methods of voting.” The words and spirit of the United States Constitution—the bedrock textualism and originalism of conservative constitutional interpretation—say he can’t nationalize elections.

Unlike some consequential constitutional questions, it’s not a close call.

Keep ReadingShow less
Unpacking War Powers in the U.S.-Iran Conflict: Who Decides When America Goes to War?

Smoke billows after overnight airstrikes on oil depots on March 8, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Unpacking War Powers in the U.S.-Iran Conflict: Who Decides When America Goes to War?

What Is The War Powers Resolution of 1973?

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 is a law enacted by Congress that limits the U.S. president’s ability to wage or escalate military operations overseas. Passed on November 7, 1973 amid the Vietnam War, the War Powers Resolution reasserts Congress’ constitutional power “to declare war” and “to raise and support Armies.” A key provision of the War Powers Resolution requires the president to submit a report to Congress within 48 hours of military deployment in the absence of an official declaration of war by Congress detailing:

  • The circumstances requiring U.S. forces;
  • The constitutional or legislative justification for the president’s actions;
  • The estimated duration of U.S. involvement in the hostilities.

If Congress does not formally declare war or enact special authorization for continuation of the U.S’ involvement in a conflict within 60 days of the report’s submission, the president must withdraw U.S. troops from the hostilities. If Congress does declare war, the president is instructed under the War Powers Resolution to report to Congress periodically on the status of the hostilities no less than once every 6 months.

Keep ReadingShow less