The climate case against Trump and for Harris

See Disclaimer. Please also read “The case for Kamala Harris” and (from 2020) “Letters to an unfit president”

Just like millions across the US, I followed with trepidation Helene and Milton as they ravaged the communities in their path. My concern extended to all affected, but I was also thinking of family and friends on the ground—including a very close relative who both resides and is part of the local response team in a severely affected county. In the aftermath of these devastating hurricanes, I am relieved that family and friends are safe (if significantly inconvenienced) and their homes spared. But I grieve the losses of life, property and social fabric to so many others.

Hurricanes are part of nature, as are other hazards. But climate change has increased the frequency and intensity of natural hazards from hurricanes and flood to droughts and wildfires. For Helene and Milton, for example, it is well established that hurricane intensification was directly tied to climate-induced unusually high temperatures in the Gulf waters.  This is all a prequel to even more significant and frequent hazards to come over time, putting more and more people in ever increasing jeopardy—something predicted decades ago by efforts like the scientifically rigorous Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Climate change is bigger than the responsibility of any specific US Administration. But the urgency of the threat makes every 4-year presidential cycle critical, because the US is both one of the giant climate offenders and one of the best hopes for effective mitigation and adaptation actions.

During his 2016 campaign, Donald Trump systematically called climate change a hoax. Once elected, his administration withdrew from the landmark 2016 Paris Climate Agreement, continued to deny or downplay climate change, and directly and indirectly slowed down the path to reducing carbon emissions (the essential step to slow and mitigate climate change). The damage of his (and his government) actions were enormous and irreparable. In the broadest sense, some of those actions can be seen as crimes against humanity.

By contrast, the Biden Administration rejoined the Paris Agreement on its first day in office, recognizing this legally binding international treaty as the “unprecedented framework for global action” it in fact is. The treaty’s goal is to hold “the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and pursue efforts “to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.” Limiting warming to 1.5°C (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) is recognized as critical, because crossing that threshold will unleash far more severe climate change impacts than what we are already experiencing. For global warming to stay below the threshold, consensus is that emissions must peak before 2025 at the latest and decline by at least 43% by 2030.

Consistently, the Biden-Harris Administration has set ambitious goals:

• reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 50-52% below 2005 levels in 2030;
• reaching 100% carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035;
• achieving a net-zero emissions economy by 2050; and
• delivering 40% of the benefits from federal investments in climate and clean energy to disadvantaged communities.

Towards these goals, bipartisan legislation has been passed and executive orders have been issued. Of note, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act (“the most significant investment in U.S. history to tackle the climate crisis”) and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Together, “these bills are saving families hundreds of dollars per year on energy bills; creating millions of good-paying jobs for American workers through clean energy manufacturing; strengthening our resilience to extreme weather events; and delivering cleaner air and water for our children and grandchildren.” Quotes are from the White House agenda on climate, a document worth reading.

Through these achievements, the Biden Administration has effectively flipped paradigms from ‘climate mitigation vs economic development’ to ‘climate mitigation as an economic engine.’ Much more remains to be done. In many fronts, including more aggressive (and yet balanced) climate policies. But it all starts with people (truly!) understanding that (a) climate action is (truly!) an existential priority for humanity and (b) climate mitigation and adaption can (truly!) be a powerful catalyst for the economy. Unfortunately, in an era of widespread misinformation, what should be a simple unifying cry for action is still perceived by too many as a hoax or a lesser priority. Even with the evidence of increased frequency and intensity of natural hazards in plain evidence (Helene and Milton as a recent reminder of climate-aggravated draughts, floods, wildfires, and more).

Electing Trump would set us back to chaos, at a time when we cannot afford to be distracted and to not make real and decisive progress on climate. Think of a self-serving amoral leader, in cognitive decline, lying and misleading Americans for political expediency, continuing to deny or trivialize climate change all the way into irreversible catastrophe.  A leader unprepared and incapable (even if he were willing) to act where action is needed. The consequences on climate would be unthinkable yet verging the unavoidable: a US and world where extreme natural hazards become the norm rather than the exception, compromising any hope for sustained economic health and (ultimately) even the survival of Humanity.

Instead, we must elect Harris and a supportive Congress in November to further steer the federal government into thoughtful and effective action. To address climate change. To address widespread misinformation. To unify rather than divide us. To bring back the blend of optimism and pragmatism that made us—prior to MAGA—a powerful nation and an (imperfect I know) force for good. And so much more that continues to need focused attention and consensus building: the economy, a next-generation national infrastructure, health in all its forms, political representation, … . None of these are simple problems. None of them can be truly solved without a level of national dialogue that, ultimately, builds a sustainable consensus where solutions are not prevented or delayed every new electoral cycle.

This is not the time to ask whether Harris is perfect. She is not, no one is. Or to ask whether she has ready solutions to all problems, from climate change to our everyday issues and to war & peace. Those solutions take time, thoughtfulness, patience, and a renewed alliance between government and all people. What Harris offers us is the opportunity to elect the impactful leader we need at this time: cleared eyed, knowledgeable, ethical, politically inclusive, strategic, driven by a vision that is both optimistic and pragmatic, and deeply committed to country and Constitution.

With Harris, we can bridge our differences and work together towards the needed solutions to climate mitigation and adaptation—and so much more. Regardless of political affiliation or any of our other differences (real or perceived). One step at a time, but with a sense of purpose and urgency!

— Antonio Baptista