As Democrats consider their post-midterm environmental agenda, ongoing Trump administration attacks on climate regulations are forcing them to take a more pragmatic posture.
Democrats could take over both the House and the Senate, but White House actions like the recent repeal of a scientific finding underpinning many federal climate rules are forcing congressional climate hawks to acknowledge progress will be limited next year no matter what happens at the polls.
That’s prompted groups like the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition (SEEC) to begin shaping environmental agendas that either garner broad bipartisan support or look beyond the conclusion of President Donald Trump’s time in office.
Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.) said that she is chairing a Congressional Progressive Caucus working group focused on climate agendas for both the 2026 and 2028 election cycles.
“The reality is, Trump will still be president, and so we have to make sure that we put forward a proactive vision, even though we know there’ll be pushback from the president, to prepare for hopefully something big in 2029,” she said.
That is not to say there is no appetite for legislation to address greenhouse gas emissions. Stansbury said the administration’s posture lays bare the need to pass new climate laws.
“I think we need climate legislation,” she said. “It’s time to create the actual legislative framework to ensure that this can’t happen again.”
SEEC, which is composed entirely of Democrats, has a similar outlook. Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) is leading a project alongside the SEEC Institute — a nonprofit associated with the House coalition — to identify potential bipartisan environment and energy initiatives for Democrats to target in the coming years.
The effort, dubbed the “Thriving Economy Project,” will culminate in a broad set of policy recommendations geared at “broadly unobjectionable targets” that could garner bipartisan support, said SEEC Institute executive director Max Frankel.
“Obviously there is a recognition that there is an election in November, and the 120th Congress will not look exactly like the 119th Congress,” Frankel said. “But we know who the president will be. So if we want to do things, it needs to have bipartisan agreement.”
Policy recommendations may focus on things like rural economic priorities, agricultural policies and permitting reform, and will be announced in the fall, Frankel said.
On the Senate side, Environment and Public Works ranking member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) similarly said the legislative path to combat the White House’s climate agenda will be tricky while Trump remains in office.
He said his colleagues should instead continue messaging on climate action to shore up support among the public and potentially pressure Republican leaders to act.
“I think there’s a role for Congress to play in aggressively making the case that the American public has been lied to, that it has been a massive scheme and that the economic leading edge of this crisis has already landed in insurance markets,” Whitehouse said.
Planning for victory
The cautious posture doesn’t mean Democrats are giving up on all of their energy and environment priorities when looking ahead to the midterms.
Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz — who is likely to take on the Democratic whip position next year — said that the party would look to promote clean energy should it take back power.
“We’re working with all of the stakeholders to develop a legislative climate action plan for if and when we are in power,” Schatz said, citing the need to pressure the administration renewable energy project approvals.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) also said earlier this year that Democrats would work to reinstate clean energy tax credits should they regain control of the chamber.
Trump’s persistent animosity toward climate action and renewable energy may help Democrats with voters, said longtime climate hawk Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.).
“It’s going to energize the climate movement across our country, especially young people, and it’s going to drive it into this election, and then incentivize Democrats next year on wind, on solar, to reinstitute the tax breaks, to put all those programs back on the books,” Markey said.
Endangerment legislation?
The Trump administration’s recent repeal of the Obama-era endangerment finding — one of the White House’s most substantial climate rollbacks so far — received widespread condemnation from congressional Democrats.
But while fierce fights are playing out over the repeal in court, it is unlikely that similar fights will be brought to the halls of Congress — at least not in the near future.
Democratic lawmakers have launched probes and made speeches on the repeal, but they have stopped short of announcing plans to fight back in law.
“Because this is a 100 percent fossil fuel corrupted administration, they weren’t going to do anything useful or good with the endangerment finding anyway. So the effect in this administration of a repealed endangerment finding is mostly symbolic,” he said.
It is not just Democrats shying away from legislation related to the endangerment finding. Environment and Public Works Chair Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said last month that Congress could try to codify the endangerment finding repeal to provide regulatory certainty for manufacturers.
But in a follow-up interview with POLITICO’s E&E News, Capito acknowledged that such legislation would likely not fly under the Senate’s 60-vote approval threshold. She has no plans to introduce a bill on the issue.
“In a divided Senate, there’s no way that we can pass anything to assure that that’s what’s going to happen,” Capito said.
