Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Beyond Thoughts and Prayers: Climate Catastrophes As Teachable Moments

Opinion

Beyond Thoughts and Prayers: Climate Catastrophes As Teachable Moments
File:Flooding of the Guadalupe River near Kerrville, Texas in 2025 ...

The deadly Texas floods have receded, leaving lost and shattered lives. Donald Trump tells us not to politicize the moment, with spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt calling the floods “an act of God,” meaning no one is responsible. However, because the floods and the climate disasters that follow them make the costs heart-wrenchingly visible, they give us the chance to discuss root causes and the choices we face. If we don’t have these conversations, these teachable moments will quickly fade.

Democratic pushback has focused primarily on cutbacks to the National Weather Service and FEMA, leaving critical offices understaffed and undermining the ability to plan effectively. But the pushback has focused less on climate change, even as, the day before the floods, the Republicans paid for massive tax breaks for the wealthiest in part by slashing federal support for wind, solar, battery, and electric vehicles, energy efficiency, and other investments that gave us a chance to join China and Europe in leading the technologies of the future. So we need to discuss the choices presented to us by this tragedy — and all the others that will come.


When Democrats have held power, they’ve raised these issues far too little. No American legislation did more to fight climate change than Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, but the new Republican bill mostly gutted it. And Biden was largely quiet in the face of a succession of epic climate disasters, from the fires that destroyed the Maui town of Lahaina and the Colorado town of Superior, to the North Carolina floods on the eve of the election. He did say Hurricane Ida highlighted the “climate crisis.” But the administration never created a sustained conversation. Kamala Harris also stayed mostly silent, and when climate change was raised late in her single Presidential debate, she discussed it for only a minute and then moved on. So, although the administration addressed the issue in groundbreaking ways, it did far too little to bring it to greater public salience. That led to it receding further in perceived urgency for a public that knows climate change is real but hasn’t made it a priority.

Imagine if Biden, Harris, or other key Democrats had visited the sites of these disasters and not just offered compassion and government aid, but also an honest discussion of our choices. At the least this would have underscored the stakes --and given voters a sense that the Democrats were fighting to address it.

Consider the campaigns to prevent gun violence. For years, those who wanted common-sense gun rules resisted “politicizing tragedy.” Mass shootings kept happening, but other than those most engaged, not enough people spoke out in their wake, because it felt unseemly. Finally, more started to, including political leaders. They told the stories and drew the connections. As the public began to hear them, support for addressing gun violence increased enough to pass the 2022 bipartisan gun safety bill in the wake of the Uvalde shootings.

Those who recognize that climate change is real and urgent no longer have the bully pulpit of the Presidency. Instead, climate information is scrubbed from government sites, including guidance on how to prepare for climate disasters, and scientists are fired for even daring to address the issue. But, local and national Democratic leaders, as well as engaged citizen groups, can still speak out when disasters hit. We can mourn the lives lost and communities destroyed, while highlighting both the human costs and the technologies that offer an alternative, with 96% of new global electricity demand being met last year by renewables, as they become more affordable than fossil fuels, complemented by batteries whose cost has dropped 95% in 15 years. We can demand accountability for all the recent cuts and demand that the investments be restored.

We can also use those moments to highlight fossil fuel companies that have bankrolled climate denial. This could mean nonviolent protests at their corporate offices that highlight the recent catastrophes. Or targeting banks that fuel fossil fuel investment. Or the gas stations of companies like Exxon/Mobil, whose scientists warned of climate change risk nearly 50 years ago, then saw the company bury their warnings and promote denial instead. It also means pressuring the media to cover the crisis more robustly, including engaging conservative-leaning podcasters and influencers who shape so much of America’s current understanding, and who have started to question Trump’s immigration raids.

Drawing the links at the times when climate change’s invisible march becomes most manifest isn’t politicizing tragedy. It’s making clear that if we care about the lives that are lost, we need to prevent the future tragedies.

Paul Rogat Loeb is the author of Soul of a Citizen and The Impossible Will Take a Little While, with nearly 300,000 in print between them.


Read More

The dome of the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., stands tall against a blue sky with the American flag waving proudly

A look at this week's congressional agenda, including House votes on Iran, Ukraine, FISA, appropriations, and key legislative priorities.

Getty Images, aire images

Legislative Preview for June 1, 2026

There will be plenty of coverage around the likely drama involved in picking up where House and Senate Republicans left off before this most recent week off. (For a recap, see our last post.) So we’re not going to go into any detail about what might happen with the reconciliation bill (originally only for two departments in the Department of Homeland Security; now enlarged with funding for the President’s ballroom project and overshadowed by the announcement of the President’s plan to pay off political allies with funds from the Department of Justice) or the FISA extension or the housing bill that’s been pingponging between chambers because you can read in sources like Politico about these marquee issue.

We will note that the Iran War resolution postponed in the House before the recess may be up for a vote this week, along with a resolution to remove US troops from Lebanon and a discharge petition (number 8) to put forward a bill authorizing support for Ukraine. Three privileged resolutions, of which one is a discharge petition (meaning it has 218 co-sponsors meaning at least a few House Republican co-sponsors), is a lot for one week. Especially when all three are expressing opposition to various administration stances and might get some House Republican votes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Can Governing Survive Without Continuity?
white and black quote board
Photo by Brendan Beale on Unsplash

Can Governing Survive Without Continuity?

Modern societies depend on continuity.

Electric grids are built over decades. Infrastructure systems require long investment cycles. Defense planning depends on sustained procurement and strategic consistency. Climate adaptation, energy systems, artificial intelligence governance, public health preparedness, and fiscal stability all require institutions capable of maintaining long-term priorities across multiple administrations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Can Coalitions Built on Opposition Still Govern?

Supporters of President Donald Trump, February 09, 2024 in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Can Coalitions Built on Opposition Still Govern?

Political parties are supposed to do two things at once: win elections and govern. Those are not the same skill.

Winning elections requires assembling coalitions large enough to secure power. Governing requires maintaining enough internal agreement to make decisions, negotiate trade-offs, allocate resources, and sustain policy direction once power is achieved.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Fragile Promise of the Ballot
black and white love print crew neck shirt
Photo by Cyrus Crossan on Unsplash

The Fragile Promise of the Ballot

Recent Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee were not just redefinitions of election law; they marked a critical shift away from the federal government’s duty to ensure equal ballot access—a duty fundamental to democracy.

The consequences were swift and broad. Within hours, Shelby County, Texas, imposed strict voter ID rules that federal officials had previously blocked under the Voting Rights Act’s pre-clearance provisions. Soon after, North Carolina reduced early voting and eliminated same-day registration. Across parts of Alabama, Georgia, and other Southern states, polling places closed or moved, often in communities with large Black populations. What once required federal review could now proceed quickly.

Keep ReadingShow less