Don’t Ask Congress for Environmental Action

States are far more effective at passing climate legislation

The U.S. Congress is generally about as popular as Kevin Durant was when he joined the 73-9 Warriors, shown by their consistently low approval ratings according to Gallup. Citizens from all parts of the country can become frustrated with the governing body’s inability to pass major legislation, forgetting that it was designed that way. 

With so many competing interests in one legislative body, the U.S. Congress understandably fails to pass major legislation on a consistent basis. 

Climate change is an issue that should have everyone’s attention, regardless of political affiliation. There is increasing pressure for federal legislators to address the issue. It has become commonplace to think about a far-reaching issue like climate change and immediately ask, “What is the federal government doing to solve the problem?”

There is data from CQ, a policy research organization, that shows the limited potential for the federal government to pass major legislation, and state governments are statistically six times more productive at making bills into laws. 

Historically, state legislatures have proved themselves much more adept at passing bills on the more “controversial” political topics. Several states acted on gay marriage before the Obergefell v. Hodges decision, while others passed their own immigration laws when the federal government’s efforts fell short of passing a bill. Texas’ deregulation of the energy market began just before the turn of the century, and that combined with a strong policy framework has made Texas the largest source of American wind energy.

Political candidates from both parties routinely campaign with strong stances on topics like abortion and immigration. At the federal level, little to nothing has been done in these areas. Amidst all the rhetoric, state legislatures have been far more effective vehicles for passing laws on these major issues.

Conservatives are often hesitant to look to Washington, D.C. to solve issues, and that opposition to a top-down approach does not need to change when it comes to issues of the environment and climate change.

We’ve seen a rise in state-led climate change initiatives over the past several years, with governors across the country coming up with their own climate goals and joining regional agreements to reduce emissions.

Let’s also be clear, the federal government does have a role in helping protect and preserve the environment. 

There are currently several bills in Congress that can help us reduce emissions in the energy sector, such as the USE IT Act and Nuclear Energy Leadership Act. The importance of bipartisan efforts like these should not be overlooked in the fight against climate change.

Still, the fact remains that states need not wait for the federal government to deal with environmental concerns. States can reduce their carbon dioxide  output with more localized solutions like zoning laws, or ensuring that their regulatory environments allow renewable energy to compete in the open market. 

With a country as geographically diverse as the U.S., there is a bevy of clean energy options that states can turn to for emissions reductions. Hydropower thrives in the Northwest, but centralized states that don’t have access to as much naturally running water might instead turn to wind or nuclear power to generate electricity. Further, our ability to combat climate change is not limited to government action alone.

It would be foolish to ignore the private sector’s ability to help our environment as well. The Ocean Cleanup’s goal is to complete the largest cleanup of ocean plastic in history. We are seeing more and more major companies become aware of their climate footprint and work to address the issue. Adidas even has an entire line of tennis shoes that are made from recycled ocean plastic. Patagonia is all-in on sustainability too, with goals to be carbon-neutral in its production by 2025.

There’s something to be said for leading by example, and the private sector has the ability to do that on the issue of climate change. Many on the left lament that Congress has not passed a major piece of climate change legislation, but in 2019, U.S. emissions declined by 2.1 percent without any drastic reforms.

Every state has the ability to take emissions reductions into their own hands. In Texas, wind energy has thrived because of a conservative approach to embracing the free-market. In Oregon and Washington, hydropower generates over half of each state’s electricity, a power source often criticized by the left. We are now seeing Florida take action on climate change independent of the federal government, and there’s no reason other GOP-led states can’t become champions of a state-level approach as well.

Conservatives should be embracing the opportunity to lead on environmental issues at the state level. Waiting for the federal government to pass major climate legislation is often not an efficient use of time or energy. States have proven themselves time and time again to be more effective at addressing major issues, and that is how it should be done. 

Spencer McLaughlin is a senior majoring in political science and Spanish.