This is the first in a series about episodes in season seven of Connect the Dots, the Center for Progressive Reform’s podcast on climate solutions. Subsequent posts will be posted in the coming weeks.
The latest season of our podcast, Connect the Dots, has just dropped, and We. Are. Here for it!
This season, host Rob Verchick, a law professor at Loyola University in New Orleans and president of the Center for Progressive Reform, is joined by guests from around the country to talk about climate wins. While the news is rife with negativity these days, we'll be hearing stories of progress in the face of climate policy.
Our first episode — Climate Win: Maryland’s Climate Solutions Now Act— takes us to Maryland for a major legislative win and its key elements to success. Verchick spoke with the Center’s Katlyn Schmitt, a senior policy analyst who helped steer the Climate Solutions Now Act into law last year.
The act sets an interim goal of 60 percent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2031 in order to achieve net zero by 2045, pilots an electric school bus system in Montgomery County, and establishes a building energy performance standard, requiring buildings to reach net zero by 2040.
The law also establishes a comprehensive definition of “underserved” and “overburdened” communities to better identify communities impacted most by the climate crisis, who are disproportionately low-income people, including communities of color. The definition will also help ensure equitable assistance and benefits from climate-related funding, mitigation, and adaptation efforts throughout the state. In many ways, this law creates a standard for future climate legislation throughout the US.
To support underserved and overburdened communities, the law allocates funding to improve homes to be more energy efficient and weatherized to withstand natural disasters. It also establishes specific tenant protections to prevent landlords from passing the costs of home improvements on to tenants.
Coalition Support Critical to Passage
The act, passed under Republican Gov. Larry Hogan, became law not only because of supportive lawmakers but also because the Center and other community organizations and nonprofits advocated on behalf of its climate justice provisions, Schmitt said.
Together, the coalition drafted talking points and fact sheets to clarify the fine points of the bill, and its urgent need as our climate changes, for constituents and their elected officials. She also emphasized the importance of countering misinformation spread by the opposition. “There’s that tension from opposing viewpoints,” she told Verchick. “Sometimes misinformation is spread, and that's really where a group like us can come in and really make an impact.”
Verchick makes this impact clear at the end of the episode: “Our mission depends on our ability to deeply research the facts, develop our own opinions, and communicate them to people like you. That’s what democracy is all about.”
For all the details to this episode, listen to Connect the Dots on your favorite podcasting platform and be sure to subscribe to catch the next episode which features a youth activist from Portland, Oregon who took on state government.
For more content related to Connect the Dots, visit us on Instagram (@progressivereform).
Showing 2,819 results
Faith Duggan | June 9, 2023
Our first episode of Connect the Dots Season 7 — Climate Win: Maryland’s Climate Solutions Now Act— takes us to Maryland for a major legislative win and its key elements to success. Verchick spoke with the Center’s Katlyn Schmitt, a senior policy analyst who helped steer the Climate Solutions Now Act into law last year.
Daniel Farber | June 8, 2023
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was passed over 50 years ago. It created a new tool for environmental protection — the environmental impact statement. It also created the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), which issued guidelines for implementing NEPA in 1978. Lawyers will need to retool quickly because of recent changes. Here’s a roadmap to recent developments.
Robert L. Glicksman | May 30, 2023
The following post provides detailed analysis of the recent Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Supreme Court decision. It was originally posted to The George Washington Law Review and is cross-posted with permission. The current Supreme Court is not a friend of the administrative state. A majority of its members seem to take particular umbrage at administration of the regulatory programs […]
David Driesen | May 30, 2023
In Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed the federal government’s power to protect wetlands. The Court required “Congress to enact exceedingly clear language if it wishes to significantly alter the balance between federal and state power and the Power of government over private property.”
William Buzbee | May 25, 2023
On May 25, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-awaited decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This is the Supreme Court’s fourth foray over several decades into what count as protected “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) under the Clean Water Act. This language provides the key jurisdictional hook for all important federal powers under the Act.
Sidney A. Shapiro, Sophie Loeb | May 25, 2023
There are ways to meet North Carolina's carbon reduction goals and protect ratepayers from catastrophic increases in the cost of electricity, but the regulatory system is set up in a way that makes it more difficult to get to this result.
James Goodwin | May 24, 2023
Gone are the days when people thought little about energy policy — when little more was demanded than reliable access to electricity at affordable prices. Rather, more and more Americans are becoming aware how our energy choices are inextricably intertwined with other shared values. A new report from the Center for Progressive Reform looks at this growing awareness and more through the lens of energy democracy.
Daniel Farber | May 23, 2023
We’ve already started to hear claims that the Biden power plant rule falls under the major questions doctrine, which the U.S. Supreme Court used to strike down former President Obama’s Clean Power Plan. Are those claims plausible?
Daniel Farber | May 15, 2023
Although the U.S. Constitution does not say so directly, the U.S. Supreme Court has said there are implied limits on state regulations that interfere with interstate commerce. This is known as the dormant commerce clause doctrine. State clean energy laws have been bedeviled by challenges based on this doctrine. The Supreme Court has just made it easier for states to fend off those claims.