Blog

On November 13, 20 folks attended the second annual rural clean energy convening in Roanoke Rapids, North Carolina, co-sponsored by the Center for Progressive Reform and the Center for Energy Education. Attendees included academics, energy policy advocates, small-scale developers, technical experts, and government representatives. We built off last year’s convening, addressing the new North Carolina policy landscape and context given the repeal of federal funding, the state’s proposed unfavorable carbon plan, and rising energy burden in communities.

This November, we honor the leadership, knowledge, and resilience of America’s first peoples, who have safeguarded the land, water, and air that sustain us all.

Although Congress vetoed California’s most recent vehicle regulations, the state can pass new regulations so long as there are significant differences from the ones Congress overturned. The Trump administration has been arguing all along that California lacks the power to regulate greenhouse gases from vehicles. Those regulations are a crucial part of the state’s climate policy. Sooner or later, courts will need to decide the extent of California’s legal authority over vehicle emissions. The issues are complex, involving an unusual statutory scheme. Here’s what you need to know, and why I think California should win this fight.

After nearly five years of serving this amazing organization and its inspiring community of scholars, advocates, and activists, I’ll be stepping down as executive director of the Center for Progressive Reform.

The current Trump administration has made individualized exceptions and waivers one of the signature features of its governing approach.

The Congressional Review Act (CRA) provides the U.S. Congress with an expedited procedure to review and potentially overturn final rules issued by federal agencies. Despite being touted as a critical avenue for congressional oversight, the CRA is often deployed as a partisan tool that replaces agency expertise and democratic consideration with political maneuvers and slim voting majorities. The use of the CRA in the current Congress so far has shown us how easy it is to misuse “resolutions of disapproval”—the specialized form of legislation it creates—both in numbers and the scope of its application.

Since Day One, the Trump administration has aggressively pursued policy actions that match the recommendations contained in Project 2025. We have been tracking the administration’s actions since February, and our Executive Action Tracker (jointly maintained by the Center for Progressive Reform and Governing for Impact) highlights the speed and effectiveness with which the administration has advanced Project 2025’s goals.

In the past year, Maryland residents have seen their heating bills skyrocket, which has largely been tied to increased costs of methane gas distribution. These costs are expected to worsen as increased spending on the distribution system must be repaid over the next several decades. At the same time, greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels in the home contribute substantially to climate change, and pollution from fossil fuel heating also has a substantial impact on residents’ health. In a new report published today, we explore policies designed to tackle these challenges and provide analysis and recommendations on how to make the transition to updated heating technologies and building electrification more equitable and effective for low-income Marylanders.

The Presidential Memorandum (NSPM-7) on Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence released last week pushed the United States one step closer to a country where the right of freedom of speech and peaceful protest no longer exists.