Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

Blog

Showing 38 results

Federico Holm

Research Scientist

Federico (Fede) Holm, Ph.D., M.S., is a Research Scientist with the Center for Progressive Reform. He joined in February 2023. Prior to joining the Center, Dr. Holm held research appointments as a postdoctoral research fellow at the University of Michigan and Colorado State University. His research on environmental policy and governance has been published in journals such as Climate Policy, Energy Research & Social Science, Review of Policy Research, and Society & Natural Resources, among others.

Federico Holm | May 27, 2025

CRA By the Numbers 2025: Update for May 27, 2025

Since our last update on May 19, we have seen some critical developments regarding  Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions. In addition to the relentless progression of some resolutions towards becoming law, the most troublesome was the decision in the Senate to vote on the CRA resolutions ending Clean Air Act waivers issued to California. As James Goodwin said in a recent blog post on the matter, this represents a clear example of Senate Republicans “failing to follow the rules that they agreed to — and doing so to advance their policy agenda without heed to the rule of law wreckage they leave in their wake."

Federico Holm | May 19, 2025

CRA By the Numbers 2025: Update for May 19, 2025

Since our last update (May 12), we have seen some movement regarding Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions. The pace has remained high, with outlets like The Hill and Banking Dive reporting that President Trump has signed multiple resolutions into law. Oddly, no official sources (like the White House’s website or congress.gov) reflect these developments.

Federico Holm | May 12, 2025

CRA By the Numbers 2025: Update for May 12, 2025

Since our last update (May 6), we have seen some movement regarding Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions. The pace in the Senate remained high, and we have seen lawmakers try to maximize their output before the CRA cutoff date.

Federico Holm, James Goodwin | May 7, 2025

Project 2025 at 100 Days: Part III

In two previous posts, we discussed the major findings of the Project 2025 tracker we created along with our partners at Governing for Impact for monitoring the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to implement its recommendations over its first 100 days. We also began offering some insights into making sense of these findings and how to interpret them. The basic finding was that the administration has fulfilled more than a quarter of Project 2025’s recommended executive actions affecting domestic policy. This raises a natural follow-up question: Is that a lot? In this post, we continue to provide analytical tools for answering that question.

Federico Holm | May 6, 2025

CRA By the Numbers 2025: Update for May 6, 2025

Since our last update (April 28), we have seen some important developments regarding Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions. In the past week, we have seen legislators take up new resolutions for a vote, address the controversial issue of the California Clean Air Act waivers, and send new resolutions to the president to be signed into law. Things seem to be accelerating in Congress (and especially in the Senate), as legislators are approaching the CRA cutoff date.

Federico Holm, James Goodwin | May 6, 2025

Project 2025 at 100 Days: Part II

In the first part of this series, we introduced the major findings of the tracker we built with our colleagues at Governing for Impact for monitoring the Trump administration’s progress in implementing Project 2025’s comprehensive policy blueprint, Mandate for Leadership. Specifically, we found that over its first 100 days, the administration pursued or completed 28 percent of the more than 530 recommended domestic policy executive actions that we included in our tracker. The post went on to provide context for these findings by tracing Project 2025’s circuitous route from obscure presidential transition report to controversial playbook for the Trump administration. Here, we provide further context for our findings by examining some factors that shed light on how significant this progress really is.

Federico Holm, James Goodwin | May 5, 2025

Project 2025 at 100 Days: Part I

The extent of harm that the Trump administration inflicted over its first 100 days was nothing short of breathtaking. That it accomplished much of this by transforming our regulatory system into a tool of authoritarian rule speaks to the influence that the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 has had on this agenda, despite Trump’s half-hearted attempts to disavow the playbook on the campaign trail.

A coal power plant emitting carbon emissions into the air

Bryan Dunning, Federico Holm | April 29, 2025

Trump Gives Exemptions to Some of the Most Polluting Power Plants in the Country

In April, the Trump administration published an executive order (EO) boosting the coal industry in hopes of a grand revival for an energy source that has been in stark decline since more cost-effective sources, including gas and renewables, drove it from its peak nearly two decades ago. Included in this order was a two-year exemption to a rule that would have required some of the country’s most polluting power plants to reduce emissions of mercury and other hazardous air pollutants that harm our health.

Federico Holm | April 28, 2025

CRA By the Numbers 2025: Update for April 28, 2025

Since our last update (April 21), we have seen some important developments regarding Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions. So far, three resolutions have become law and four more have cleared both chambers. Although we have not received any information that these will be sent to the president’s desk in the coming days, we continue to monitor their status as they could soon be on the move. The most consequential development is the announcement that House Republicans will press ahead and vote on three resolutions that target waivers granted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the state of California to develop vehicle emissions guidelines.