Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Empower local government to develop environmental solutions

Litter on the street

The best solutions to fighting erosion damage and litter on streets combine the pocketbook of the federal government with the accountability and stewardship of local ones.

Nadieshda/Getty images

Patrohay, a graduate of Clemson University, has been awarded a Fulbright scholarship to research the effects of climate change on Arctic ecosystems in Tromsø, Norway. He worked with the American Conservation Coalition on this piece.


You don't have to look far to see examples of environmental degradation in America. Garbage litters our streets, erosion damages our land and waterways, and carbon emissions are an ever-present threat.

For decades, these issues have been viewed as a federal problem. But since the 1970s, conditions have stagnated despite increasing environmental regulations. Practically no tangible progress can be attributed to global emissions agreements either. Currently, 75 of the biggest emitters are predicted to decrease emissions by just 1 percent of 2010 levels by 2030. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change target? More than 45 percent.

The only true way to erect support for federal and international environmental initiatives is to start by raising a passion for the local environment in our towns, cities and states. Local communities must have a greater role in American environmental policy in order to achieve effective solutions. These communities know the consequences of environmental policies firsthand, have intimate knowledge of their unique environmental needs, and possess the ability to generate an organic consensus.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

One of the greatest impediments to meaningful change is a lack of political trust. But while a measly 20 percent of Americans trust the federal government, 72 percent trust their local governments. Local solutions can be tailored to a community's specific natural environment and allow residents, fed up with pollution or waste, to take matters into their own hands.

The best solutions combine the pocketbook of the federal government with the accountability and stewardship of local ones. Our environmental problems are too large to tackle alone. But it is critical that local governments retain their sovereignty and self-determination, and these powers — already long in decline — have come under a renewed threat from the Biden administration.

Costly federal environmental regulations that fail to actually solve anything disproportionately affect low-income Americans when their utility bills rise. For instance, a 2018 National Energy Assistance Survey revealed that 6 million low-income households needed federal assistance to pay utility bills and half forwent food or medical care for at least a day to pay them. Despite this, more than two-thirds of Americans say the government ought to do more to solve our pressing environmental problems.

Buried amongst President Biden's recent jobs plan is a pledge to federalize local zoning powers, representing a dangerous destruction of an important duty of state and local government. Without these powers of self-determination, the same politicians making costly, ineffective environmental regulations hurting everyday Americans would have full reign to chart future American environmental policy.

Studies show that zoning ordinances should be updated to encourage sustainable development, as older ordinances are simply too outdated to mention new eco-friendly technologies. But federal zoning regulations mandated without the input of localities risk erasing existing regulations that work and foster the illusion that individual environmental responsibility is unnecessary. As Edmund Burke once wrote, small communities have a "plastic" nature; they can implement sustainable zoning practices with a precision that the federal government can't match.

That's not to say the federal government ought to be excluded from environmental policy altogether. We must create a system in which the federal government builds incentive structures that allow states and localities to make informed decisions.

This idea has begun to catch on. The global organization Local Governments for Sustainability has enabled partnerships between over 2,500 local and regional governments across more than 125 countries, working to implement smart regulations. In the United States, the landmark Conservative Climate Caucus, started by Republican Rep. John Curtis of Utah, will encourage partnerships with state and local governments, returning to the party's conservation roots. This opens the door for bipartisan environmental solutions that recognize policies work best when designed close to home.

These principles are at play in my own backyard too. The recent Lowcountry Lowline project, a green infrastructure initiative in Charleston, S.C., to manage stormwater, has gathered federal interest and opened the possibility of a $25 million stimulus from Washington.

So don't allow the Biden administration to wipe away state and local input on our zoning laws and environmental policy. Notify your congressional representatives about the consequences of erasing local self-determination. Help strengthen the underappreciated power that our communities have by joining local green initiatives too. Everyone can and should play a part in their own community.

Read More

Project 2025: The Department of Labor

Hill was policy director for the Center for Humane Technology, co-founder of FairVote and political reform director at New America. You can reach him on X @StevenHill1776.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a right-wing blueprint for Donald Trump’s return to the White House, is an ambitious manifesto to redesign the federal government and its many administrative agencies to support and sustain neo-conservative dominance for the next decade. One of the agencies in its crosshairs is the Department of Labor, as well as its affiliated agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

Project 2025 proposes a remake of the Department of Labor in order to roll back decades of labor laws and rights amidst a nostalgic “back to the future” framing based on race, gender, religion and anti-abortion sentiment. But oddly, tucked into the corners of the document are some real nuggets of innovative and progressive thinking that propose certain labor rights which even many liberals have never dared to propose.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less
Preamble to the U.S. Constitution
mscornelius/Getty Images

We can’t amend 'We the People' but 'we' do need a constitutional reboot

LaRue writes at Structure Matters. He is former deputy director of the Eisenhower Institute and of the American Society of International Law.

The following article was accepted for publication prior to the attempted assassination attempt of Donald Trump. Both the author and the editors determined no changes were necessary.

Keep ReadingShow less
Beau Breslin on C-SPAN
C-CSPAN screenshot

Project 2025: A C-SPAN interview

Beau Breslin, a regular contributor to The Fulcrum, was recently interviewed on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal” about Project 2025.

Breslin is the Joseph C. Palamountain Jr. Chair of Political Science at Skidmore College and author of “A Constitution for the Living: Imagining How Five Generations of Americans Would Rewrite the Nation’s Fundamental Law.” He writes “A Republic, if we can keep it,” a Fulcrum series to assist American citizens on the bumpy road ahead this election year. By highlighting components, principles and stories of the Constitution, Breslin hopes to remind us that the American political experiment remains, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, the “most interesting in the world.”

Keep ReadingShow less
People protesting laws against homelessness

People protest outside the Supreme Court as the justices prepared to hear Grants Pass v. Johnson on April 22.

Matt McClain/The Washington Post via Getty Images

High court upholds law criminalizing homelessness, making things worse

Herring is an assistant professor of sociology at UCLA, co-author of an amicus brief in Johnson v. Grants Pass and a member of the Scholars Strategy Network.

In late June, the Supreme Court decided in the case of Johnson v. Grants Pass that the government can criminalize homelessness. In the court’s 6-3 decision, split along ideological lines, the conservative justices ruled that bans on sleeping in public when there are no shelter beds available do not violate the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

This ruling will only make homelessness worse. It may also propel U.S. localities into a “race to the bottom” in passing increasingly punitive policies aimed at locking up or banishing the unhoused.

Keep ReadingShow less
Project 2025: A federal Parents' Bill of Rights

Republican House members hold a press event to highlight the introduction in 2023.

Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Project 2025: A federal Parents' Bill of Rights

Biffle is a podcast host and contributor at BillTrack50.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for a second Trump administration, includes an outline for a Parents' Bill of Rights, cementing parental considerations as a “top tier” right.

The proposal calls for passing legislation to ensure families have a "fair hearing in court when the federal government enforces policies that undermine their rights to raise, educate, and care for their children." Further, “the law would require the government to satisfy ‘strict scrutiny’ — the highest standard of judicial review — when the government infringes parental rights.”

Keep ReadingShow less