Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Empower local government to develop environmental solutions

Opinion

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.

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 solution s 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

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less
Five men sitting on one side of a table, as a panel at an event.

Harvard's Guy-Uriel Charles (left) listens to David Walker, Chair of the Federal Fiscal Sustainability Foundation. Fellow panelists (L-R) are Michael Farris, Convention of States Project; Samuel Fieldman, Wolf Pack; and Jim Rubens, FFSA and American Promise.

Photo by Martha Stewart

Congressional Inaction Raises Constitutional Change Alternative

Voting is the anchor of democracy, as we are reminded every two years. But this anchor rests on unstable ground today, signaling that our political roots need examining too.

In the United States, the Constitution itself becomes the focus when serious problems prompt such foundational civic dives. Our current challenges may not be as severe as the Civil War or the excesses of the Gilded Age, which produced waves of amendments, but today’s erosion of our system of checks and balances requires us to revisit our constitutional underpinnings.

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less