How Fighting Climate Change Can Address Voters' Economic Woes
The OAJ is currently looking for interested students to join our team! If you’ve read our work before (or if this is your first time), and you like what we do, please email OAJ Executive Editor Paulina Campos at openair@brandeis.edu to join the journal.
The piece below is part of our weekly blog post series written by the Open-Air Journal team where we explore issues at Heller, current events, or whatever is presently on our minds.
As we approach the 2024 presidential election and with the economy dominating voters' concerns, the next president will face immense pressure to tackle both economic recovery and public sentiment on financial security. At the same time, fears of climate change have worsened. However, there’s a path forward that could simultaneously bolster the economy and improve the quality of life for American families: prioritizing policies that financially incentivize combatting climate change.
Investing in climate-focused initiatives is an effective and multi-dimensional solution to spur economic growth. These policies would not only address environmental concerns—they would also reduce long-term costs for families nationwide, building momentum toward mitigating the impacts of the climate crisis. A climate-centered approach addresses voters’ immediate economic concerns, like daily fuel costs and the impacts of natural disasters, while building a foundation for long-term resilience—making it essential for the next administration.
One of the most common measures of how well the economy is doing is the price of gas. While many place blame on the sitting president, climate change has a much greater impact on the price of gas than many realize. As global temperatures rise, especially in oil-rich Arctic regions, the ice that companies depend on to support drilling infrastructure is forming later and melting earlier each year, with projects originally planned to take one winter season stretching into two, as warmer conditions delay and disrupt drilling operations. Hotter and hotter temperatures affect production abilities and, ultimately, raise gas prices at the pump.
The next president should also consider how oil extraction has built up to a breaking point in fuel consumption. This area may yield a multi-faceted solution. By reinforcing the production of electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure that makes it easier to afford and own one, fewer people will need to rely on fossil fuels or be bogged down by rising prices due to climate change. Theoretically, if EV infrastructure improves, we should also see a dip in gas prices due to less demand, as EVs present an alternative in the market. While policies that promote EVs and alternative energy sources are essential, we also need broader policies to address the escalating impacts of climate change, which drives more frequent and severe environmental crises in addition to economic harm.
In the face of disasters, economic growth is failing in certain industries that are unable to keep up with the environmental damage, such as insurance. Following the damage done by Hurricanes Helene and Milton, insurance companies have repeatedly denied insurance claims to Floridians impacted by the storms. Similar cases have been found in California amid repeated wildfires that displace people after their homes are severely damaged. In the face of heightened risks, not only are insurers raising prices to account for the likelihood of filing claims, but many Californians are unable to find insurance at all. Rather than having insurers and customers struggle in the face of environmental danger, it would be more efficient to address the root cause of these costs. Otherwise, the country will continue to experience worsening climate crises, which then contribute to a worsening insurance crisis, leading to a stagnant economy.
Another major issue contributing to this damage is the widespread denial of a climate crisis among actors to virtue-signal to their base. Donald Trump stated on his first day in office, “we will drill, baby, drill,” However, we also see the irresponsibility of Kamala Harris stating how she would not ban fracking as president, shifting from previous statements. Unfortunately, both candidates seem to offer little hope at present and both will have to change their framing for conditions to improve.
To effectively address climate change, the next president must also face a herculean challenge: holding corporations accountable for their outsized role in pollution and carbon emissions. Given that a majority of global emissions can be traced to a relatively small group of multi-billion dollar corporations (and the US military), the next president must be prepared to face these petrol superpowers. They must wield stricter emissions standards, sustainable practices, and hefty fines, as well as policies that limit carbon emissions while also incentivizing investments in clean energy technologies. Furthermore, the administration must require corporations to publish their environmental impacts so consumers and investors may make informed decisions. Similarly, politicians must disclose their donations from these companies to ensure their own transparency and accountability in order for the public to adequately assess the influence of corporate funding on environmental policy decisions. These practices would foster public trust, while simultaneously promoting more effective climate action.
As we near the presidential election, it is imperative that climate change becomes a central focus for the next administration. By implementing robust policies that foster accountability and sustainability, the incoming president may finally begin addressing the complex challenges of economic recovery and environmental degradation. Though addressing climate change is challenging due to its polarizing and pervasive nature, failing to act would only deepen existing inequalities and perpetuate harm. Prioritizing climate action is vital not only for a resilient economy but also for ensuring an equitable economic and social future.