[[link removed]]

HERE’S THE DATA SHOWING WHY DEMS MUST KEEP TALKING ABOUT CLIMATE  
[[link removed]]


 

Aaron Regunberg
November 20, 2025
The New Republic
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Centrist groups want to see Democrats retreat from climate policy.
That’s the wrong thing to do—both morally and strategically. _

Virginia Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger speaks at a campaign event in
Annandale, Virginia, on October 30., Photo by Jared Serre / FFX Now

 

Over the last several months, reports from billionaire-funded centrist
advocacy groups, like WelcomePAC [[link removed]] and
Searchlight Institute
[[link removed]],
have insisted that Democrats stop talking about climate
change—either in their campaigns or while governing. Climate change
has little resonance for voters, they claim, comparing
[[link removed]]
the polling on reliably unpopular policies like “create a carbon
tax” with reliably popular policies like “lower the gas tax.”

Unfortunately, this message appears to be reaching its intended
audience. In just the last week, New York Governor Kathy Hochul
[[link removed]]
approved a new gas pipeline that President Donald Trump has been
championing, while Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro
[[link removed]]
dropped his state’s effort to join the Regional Greenhouse Gas
Initiative.

The idea that Democrats should abandon the most existential fight
human civilization has ever faced is a particularly bizarre lesson to
draw following Democrats’ huge wins this November, when many of the
party’s victorious candidates explicitly championed
[[link removed]]
clean energy investments and accountability for fossil fuel company
profiteering as solutions to rising energy costs.

A memo
[[link removed]]
published Wednesday by Data for Progress and Fossil Free Media
therefore makes the exact opposite argument: Democrats shouldn’t run
from climate. Instead, they should translate both the impact of
climate change and the benefits of climate action for voters. The new
memo, which I participated in drafting, points to evidence showing
that, contrary to WelcomePAC’s and Searchlight’s portrayal of
climate change as a niche social issue, climate-related costs already
are top-of-mind, pocketbook concerns for most Americans.

A majority of voters
[[link removed]]
say they believe climate change will have a direct financial impact on
their families. Millions of voters are already feeling the pain of
skyrocketing home insurance rates, which are driven by the increased
risk of severe weather from climate change. Millions more are
confronted each year with the staggering costs of disaster recovery
from extreme weather events exacerbated by the climate crisis. And a
strong majority
[[link removed]]
of Americans are struggling with rising electricity prices, a problem
that just 5 percent of voters blame on renewables versus corporate
profits (38 percent), data centers (14 percent), and grid pressures
from extreme weather (11 percent). On the flip side, expanding clean
energy is the fastest way to produce cheap electricity needed to lower
utility rates—and Democrats hold a massive trust advantage over
Republicans when it comes to clean power.

This trust gap is a key part of the argument that Data for Progress
and Fossil Free Media are making. Their memo points to findings that,
right now, neither party has a significant trust advantage on
“electric utility bills” (D+1) or “the cost of living” (R+1).
But Democrats do have major trust advantages on “climate change”
(D+14) and “renewable energy development” (D+6). By articulating
how their climate and clean energy agenda can address these
bread-and-butter concerns, Democrats can leverage their advantage on
climate to win voters’ trust on what will likely be the most
significant issues in 2026 and 2028.

The formula for doing this is pretty simple: First, explain why bills
are rising and who’s to blame (utilities, fossil fuel volatility,
data-center demand, climate disasters); second, commit to implementing
visible cost relief (rate freezes, clean energy buildout); and third,
name who will pay (polluters and profiteers, not regular people). Or,
to simplify all this into one clear campaign-ready sentence:
“We’ll take on rising electricity bills by building the cheapest
power and stopping monopoly price-gouging, all while making polluters,
not families, pay their fair share.”

The best part about this populist approach to climate is how obviously
it contrasts with Trump and the Republicans. Imagine being able to
tout this contrast in every stump speech in 2026: Democrats are trying
to expand cheap, clean energy to secure lower rates, while Trump is
trying to keep outdated coal plants
[[link removed]] running, forcing
ratepayers to shoulder billions in extra costs. Democrats are getting
tough on price-gouging utilities, while Republicans are giving these
corporations free rein. Democrats are fighting to make polluters pay
for increasingly costly climate disasters; Republicans want all of us
to pay for the damage Big Oil caused.

Abandoning the climate fight would be a profoundly morally
reprehensible course of action. (It’s a particularly unforgivable
message when it comes from billionaires like Reid Hoffman, who are
funding [[link removed]] the groups
telling Democrats to forget about climate while building their own
luxury bunkers for “apocalypse insurance
[[link removed]].”)
It’s also a huge political mistake. To give up on climate, an issue
that Democrats are trusted on, is to throw away a tool that Democrats
can use to offer credible solutions to the cost-of-living crises
affecting working people throughout the country.

“Heading into 2026,” the memo reads, “Democrats have a chance to
define themselves as the party that will build the cheapest energy,
crack down on profiteering, and make polluters, not families, pay for
the climate damage they’ve caused.” That is, substantively, a
great climate agenda. It’s also a winning electoral message, and one
Democrats should be running on, not from.

_[__AARON REGUNBERG_
[[link removed]]_ is a contributing
editor at The New Republic, a climate lawyer, and a progressive
organizer.]_ 

* Climate Change
[[link removed]]
* Climate Crisis
[[link removed]]
* pollution
[[link removed]]
* polluters
[[link removed]]
* Democrats
[[link removed]]
* Democratic Party
[[link removed]]
* 2025 Elections
[[link removed]]
* Elections 2026
[[link removed]]
* 2026 Midterms
[[link removed]]
* Kathy Hochul
[[link removed]]
* Josh Shapiro
[[link removed]]
* Abigail Spanberger
[[link removed]]
* disaster relief
[[link removed]]
* extreme weather events
[[link removed]]
* Renewable energy
[[link removed]]
* clean energy
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Bluesky [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]