OPINION

The opinions published by The Match are solely those of the author, and not of the entire publication, its staff, or Collegiate School. The Match welcomes thoughtful commentary and response to our content. You can respond in the comments below, but please do so respectfully. Letters to the Editors will be published, but they are subject to revision based on content or length. Letters can be sent to match@collegiate-va.org.

By Maia Zasler

The US Capitol. Photo credit: Architect of the Capitol via Wikimedia Commons.

Let’s talk about the IRA. No, not the Irish Republican Army, or an individual retirement account. The Inflation Reduction Act. The IRA (the recent, not-so-aptly named legislative bill signed into law by President Joe Biden on August 16) marks historic climate change initiatives and puts a spotlight on the polarized politics we all seem to have grown tired of. 

Although it actually does little to address inflation, the IRA does provide $369 billion in climate solutions and provisions dedicated to environmental justice. It promises action: 40% carbon emission reduction in the U.S. by 2030, $60 billion in infrastructure funding (solar panels, batteries, clean energy technology, etc.), and $9 billion in home energy rebate programs. The IRA also takes on prescription drug price reform, allowing Medicare to negotiate the prices of certain prescription drugs. Starting in 2025, Medicare recipients will have a $2,000 cap on out-of-pocket, annual prescription drug costs. The initiative has also created a 15% minimum corporate tax rate (for corporations with at least $1 billion in income). 

Above all, this is a climate change bill with a dash of health reform. It does, however, vary slightly with its predecessor, the Build Back Better (BBB) proposal. The IRA does not include much social spending—child tax credits and universal pre-K, for example—and concessions to representatives such as Senator Joe Manchin, D-WV,  who uphold fossil fuel interests, had to be made for the legislation to pass. Despite allowances such as tax credits for carbon capture and sequestration (which extends the life of coal manufacturing plants) and new oil and gas leases on federal land in the Gulf of Mexico, the 730-page deal is largely a win for climate control advocates. 

The REPEAT Project, a compilation of independent environmental and economic evaluation of federal energy and climate policies put together by the Princeton ZERO Lab, produced a side-by-side comparison of emissions cut by the IRA and the BBB. It’s estimated that by 2035, the IRA will achieve 90% of the emission reductions as the “more progressive” BBB. The IRA gives the United States credibility to assume a leading role in tackling the climate crisis. It gives hope to future generations, setting a precedent for following climate legislation. 

Yet, of all the numbers listed above, likely the most important one has been neglected: 0. That is how many Republicans voted to pass the IRA in the US House and Senate. The comprehensive legislation passed solely on party lines. But why? What does this mean?

Most of the GOP has had a longstanding issue addressing climate change; the terrifying reality often does not serve its political agenda. Meanwhile, many Democrats’ actions do not align with their “pro-climate” propositions, with carbon-emitting private jets, defense of policies that are environmentally detrimental but politically expedient, and the frequency of empty promises. Even so, Biden was able to keep most of his climate action guarantees intact (while also lacking Republican party support).

But what does single-party support for climate action and health reform mean for our democratic experiment? We’ve grown accustomed to politicians slinging ridiculous insults and propagating harmful conspiracy theories. We’re desensitized to political violence covered in the news. We have not just strayed from George Washington’s founding vision of the absence of political parties, but we have turned it into a “hot mess inside a dumpster fire inside a train wreck.” If we can’t even agree on a shared reality, how can we expect to go forward as a nation? How can we tackle the greatest existential threat against humanity if half of our government refuses to talk about it as a legitimate problem?

The symptoms of the climate crisis already ravage sections of our country. There has been an increase in devastating hurricanes. Intense heat waves happen at a higher frequency and greater temperature. For example, Richmond, Virginia currently averages 10 dangerous heat days a year, whereas by 2050 we are projected to hit 60 dangerous heat days annually. There have been calamitous snow storms in normally snow-free southern states. Flooding has become more frequent along coastlines as a result of rising sea levels. 40% of Americans live near a coast; $1 trillion worth of property is at risk as well as millions of people in communities around the country. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claims that “by increasing the risk that drinking water and wastewater infrastructure will fail [puts] people at risk of being exposed to pathogens and harmful chemicals.” Climate change brings more drought and higher temperatures. These conditions have created, over the past few decades, the need for over $1 billion in U.S. government money to fight the increase of wildfires. 

These statistics are depressing; however, there is hope. The IRA alone does not do enough to solve the climate crisis, but it will ameliorate the lives of Americans and is a significant step forward to achieving sustainability. In order to continue this progress, we will need to see bipartisan support on a federal and state level. This is not a fight for one politician, one political party, one government agency, or one NGO. The climate crisis affects us all, and we need to be willing to work together to create a liveable future that functions for everyone.