Connect with us

Politics

Editorial: How California leaders can protect the environment from another Trump administration

Published

on

Editorial: How California leaders can protect the environment from another Trump administration

Of the many ways Donald Trump’s return to the White House promises to upend federal policy, few are more predictable or damaging than the U-turn he and his allies threaten to take on climate change and environmental protection. Fortunately, California has considerable power to counter the onslaught.

Trump’s first administration rolled back more than 100 regulations on clean air and water, toxic chemicals and wildlife conservation. He called global warming a hoax, pulled out of the Paris climate agreement, shrank national monuments and appointed Environmental Protection Agency administrators who helped polluters at the expense of public health.

Many experts believe Trump’s election is a last “nail in the coffin” for efforts to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. He did, after all, urge oil executives to underwrite his latest campaign in exchange for undoing environmental rules.

Given Republican majorities in the House as well as the Senate and the conservative Supreme Court’s hostility to environmental regulation, Trump’s anti-environmental excesses will have to be checked at the state and local levels.

Advertisement

To that end, as part of his plan to wage a second high-profile campaign against Trump’s policies, Gov. Gavin Newsom has called a special session of the Legislature to ready California’s legal defense. Newsom, state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and other leaders in California and like-minded states can form an important bulwark against attacks on environmental protections, much as they did eight years ago. Former state Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra filed more than 100 lawsuits against the first Trump administration, many concerning environmental matters, and won far more than he lost.

But California officials can’t just play defense. They should use the state’s power and influence to mount a pro-environment offense, counteracting as much of the impending damage as possible.

With Trump’s team expected to kill President Biden’s electric vehicle tax credit, among other reversals, California can cement its reputation for consistently committing to its climate policies. A federal retreat from those policies will make the United States less competitive by ceding leadership on clean energy technology to China, Europe and other rivals. The strength and stability of the world’s fifth-largest economy, meanwhile, makes it an attractive innovation and investment partner while the federal government seesaws chaotically. That worked in California’s favor in 2019, when Ford, Honda and other automakers sidestepped the Trump administration’s efforts to weaken emissions standards and made a deal with California, citing the need for “regulatory certainty.”

“It wasn’t that they hated Trump,” said Mary Nichols, who chaired the California Air Resources Board at the time. “They wanted relief, but they wanted to have the discussion with people driven by science and data, not ideology.”

Also bolstering California’s position is a climate and energy landscape that has shifted dramatically in eight years, putting Trump’s agenda at odds with economic realities.

Advertisement

Electric vehicles are surging globally. One in five new cars sold are now battery-powered, with 1.7 million electric vehicles expected to be sold in the U.S. this year, more than eight times more than at the start of Trump’s first term. More than 40% of the nation’s electricity now comes from carbon-free sources, twice as much as in 2016.

The Inflation Reduction Act, the landmark climate law Biden signed, has unleashed a boom in electric vehicle and battery manufacturing and other clean energy technology that has disproportionately benefited red states and districts. While Trump has pledged to “rescind all unspent funds” under the law, 18 House Republicans have urged Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) not to repeal its clean energy tax credits, noting that they have “spurred innovation, incentivized investment, and created good jobs in many parts of the country — including many districts represented by” Republicans.

Trump may face pressure not to renege on commitments to cut greenhouse gas pollution from other unexpected places. The head of Exxon Mobil cautioned him against withdrawing from the Paris agreement on the grounds that the world needs a system to manage emissions.

Then there are obstacles of the self-imposed variety, including Trump’s choice to head the EPA: former Rep. Lee Zeldin of New York, whose main qualification seems to be loyalty. Zeldin’s lack of environmental experience could impede efforts to dismantle regulations, which takes loads of expertise, legal rigor and time.

Trump’s plan to purge the federal ranks of career civil servants and replace them with loyalists could further undercut his ability to roll back regulations, said Ann Carlson, a UCLA environmental law professor and former acting administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. “The reality is you can’t get anything done without good civil servants,” she said.

Advertisement

Still, Trump can do real damage by going after the states trying to deal with climate change. Expect new efforts to revoke California’s waivers to set tougher vehicle emissions standards, several of which have yet to be approved by Biden’s EPA. The state’s ability to respond to climate-fueled disasters is also in jeopardy: Trump has repeatedly threatened to withhold federal aid to fight California wildfires, and the Project 2025 playbook for his second term calls for dismantling the National Weather Service.

For its own safety, California will need creative new policies that can stand on their own. That means tough measures from state regulators such as the state Public Utilities Commission and Air Resources Board and local authorities such as the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which has dragged its feet for years in advancing stricter rules for some of Southern California’s biggest polluters, the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

Local leaders such as Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass will need to do more. So far, she has failed to use her control of the Port of L.A. to take meaningful steps to clean up dirty diesel emissions.

We are facing the threat of years of lost ground on climate at a moment when we can ill afford it. It’s time for state and local leaders to get to work and show that in spite of a second Trump administration, environmentally responsible policy is still possible if they fight for it.

Advertisement

Politics

Video: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

Published

on

Video: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

new video loaded: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

transcript

transcript

Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

President Trump did not say exactly how long the the United states would control Venezuela, but said that it could last years.

“How Long do you think you’ll be running Venezuela?” “Only time will tell. Like three months. six months, a year, longer?” “I would say much longer than that.” “Much longer, and, and —” “We have to rebuild. You have to rebuild the country, and we will rebuild it in a very profitable way. We’re going to be using oil, and we’re going to be taking oil. We’re getting oil prices down, and we’re going to be giving money to Venezuela, which they desperately need. I would love to go, yeah. I think at some point, it will be safe.” “What would trigger a decision to send ground troops into Venezuela?” “I wouldn’t want to tell you that because I can’t, I can’t give up information like that to a reporter. As good as you may be, I just can’t talk about that.” “Would you do it if you couldn’t get at the oil? Would you do it —” “If they’re treating us with great respect. As you know, we’re getting along very well with the administration that is there right now.” “Have you spoken to Delcy Rodríguez?” “I don’t want to comment on that, but Marco speaks to her all the time.”

Advertisement
President Trump did not say exactly how long the the United states would control Venezuela, but said that it could last years.

January 8, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump calls for $1.5T defense budget to build ‘dream military’

Published

on

Trump calls for .5T defense budget to build ‘dream military’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump called for defense spending to be raised to $1.5 trillion, a 50% increase over this year’s budget. 

“After long and difficult negotiations with Senators, Congressmen, Secretaries, and other Political Representatives, I have determined that, for the Good of our Country, especially in these very troubled and dangerous times, our Military Budget for the year 2027 should not be $1 Trillion Dollars, but rather $1.5 Trillion Dollars,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Thursday evening. 

“This will allow us to build the “Dream Military” that we have long been entitled to and, more importantly, that will keep us SAFE and SECURE, regardless of foe.” 

The president said he came up with the number after tariff revenues created a surplus of cash. He claimed the levies were bringing in enough money to pay for both a major boost to the defense budget “easily,” pay down the national debt, which is over $38 trillion, and offer “a substantial dividend to moderate income patriots.”

Advertisement

SENATE SENDS $901B DEFENSE BILL TO TRUMP AFTER CLASHES OVER BOAT STRIKE, DC AIRSPACE

President Donald Trump called for defense spending to be raised to $1.5 trillion, a 50% increase over this year’s record budget.  (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

The boost likely reflects efforts to fund Trump’s ambitious military plans, from the Golden Dome homeland missile defense shield to a new ‘Trump class’ of battleships.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget found that the increased budget would cost about $5 trillion from 2027 to 2035, or $5.7 trillion with interest. Tariff revenues, the group found, would cover about half the cost – $2.5 trillion or $3 trillion with interest. 

The Supreme Court is expected to rule in a major case Friday that will determine the legality of Trump’s sweeping tariff strategy.

Advertisement

CONGRESS UNVEILS $900B DEFENSE BILL TARGETING CHINA WITH TECH BANS, INVESTMENT CRACKDOWN, US TROOP PAY RAISE

This year the defense budget is expected to breach $1 trillion for the first time thanks to a $150 billion reconciliation bill Congress passed to boost the expected $900 billion defense spending legislation for fiscal year 2026. Congress has yet to pass a full-year defense budget for 2026.

Some Republicans have long called for a major increase to defense spending to bring the topline total to 5% of GDP, as the $1.5 trillion budget would do, up from the current 3.5%.

The boost likely reflects efforts to fund Trump’s ambitious military plans, from the Golden Dome homeland missile defense shield to a new ‘Trump class’ of battleships. (Lockheed Martin via Reuters)

Trump has ramped up pressure on Europe to increase its national security spending to 5% of GDP – 3.5% on core military requirements and 1.5% on defense-related areas like cybersecurity and critical infrastructure.

Advertisement

Trump’s budget announcement came hours after defense stocks took a dip when he condemned the performance rates of major defense contractors. In a separate Truth Social post he announced he would not allow defense firms to buy back their own stocks, offer large salaries to executives or issue dividends to shareholders. 

“Executive Pay Packages in the Defense Industry are exorbitant and unjustifiable given how slowly these Companies are delivering vital Equipment to our Military, and our Allies,” he said. 

“​Defense Companies are not producing our Great Military Equipment rapidly enough and, once produced, not maintaining it properly or quickly.”

U.S. Army soldiers stand near an armored military vehicle on the outskirts of Rumaylan in Syria’s northeastern Hasakeh province, bordering Turkey, on March 27, 2023.  (Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images)

He said that executives would not be allowed to make above $5 million until they build new production plants.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Stock buybacks, dividends and executive compensation are generally governed by securities law, state corporate law and private contracts, and cannot be broadly restricted without congressional action.

An executive order the White House released Wednesday frames the restrictions as conditions on future defense contracts, rather than a blanket prohibition. The order directs the secretary of war to ensure that new contracts include provisions barring stock buybacks and corporate distributions during periods of underperformance, non-compliance or inadequate production, as determined by the Pentagon.

Continue Reading

Politics

Newsom moves to reshape who runs California’s schools under budget plan

Published

on

Newsom moves to reshape who runs California’s schools under budget plan

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday unveiled a sweeping proposal to overhaul how California’s education system is governed, calling for structural changes that he said would shift oversight of the Department of Education and redefine the role of the state’s elected schools chief.

The proposal, which is part of Newsom’s state budget plan that will be released Friday, would unify the policymaking State Board of Education with the department, which is responsible for carrying out those policies. The governor said the change would better align education efforts from early childhood through college.

“California can no longer postpone reforms that have been recommended regularly for a century,” Newsom said in a statement. “These critical reforms will bring greater accountability, clarity, and coherence to how we serve our students and schools.”

Few details were provided about how the role of the state superintendent of public instruction would change, beyond a greater focus on fostering coordination and aligning education policy.

The changes would require approval from state lawmakers, who will be in the state Capitol on Thursday for Newsom’s last State of the State speech in his final year as governor.

Advertisement

The proposal would implement recommendations from a 2002 report by the state Legislature, titled “California’s Master Plan for Education,” which described the state’s K-12 governance as fragmented and “with overlapping roles that sometimes operate in conflict with one another, to the detriment of the educational services offered to students.” Newsom’s office said similar concerns have been raised repeatedly since 1920 and were echoed again in a December 2025 report by research center Policy Analysis for California Education.

“The sobering reality of California’s education system is that too few schools can now provide the conditions in which the State can fairly ask students to learn to the highest standards, let alone prepare themselves to meet their future learning needs,” the Legislature’s 2002 report stated. Those most harmed are often low-income students and students of color, the report added.

“California’s education governance system is complex and too often creates challenges for school leaders,” Edgar Zazueta, executive director of the Assn. of California School Administrators, said in a statement provided by Newsom’s office. “As responsibilities and demands on schools continue to increase, educators need governance systems that are designed to better support positive student outcomes.”

The current budget allocated $137.6 billion for education from transitional kindergarten through the 12th grade — the highest per-pupil funding level in state history — and Newsom’s office said his proposal is intended to ensure those investments translate into more consistent support and improved outcomes statewide.

“For decades the fragmented and inefficient structure overseeing our public education system has hindered our students’ ability to succeed and thrive,” Ted Lempert, president of advocacy group Children Now, said in a statement provided by the governor’s office. “Major reform is essential, and we’re thrilled that the Governor is tackling this issue to improve our kids’ education.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending