By Melissa O’Rourke, Daily Caller News Foundation | July 09, 2025
Democrats are reconsidering some of their key environmental policies due to rising costs. Analysts suggest these changes are mostly symbolic rather than real reform.
Recently, Democratic leaders have made adjustments to climate regulations, particularly in California. Governor Gavin Newsom revised the state’s environmental review law in June. This shift indicates that lawmakers are realizing the economic burden of these policies could hurt their chances in elections.
On June 30, Newsom approved modifications to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Critics say CEQA delays projects and worsens the housing crisis. In the same month, California’s energy regulator pushed to pause limits on oil refinery profits after two major refineries announced closures.
“It’s a recognition that these policies come with a hefty price tag,” said Wayne Winegarden, a senior fellow in business and economics. “Voters are starting to feel the pinch, and that can cost elections.” He pointed out that Newsom’s ambitions for a presidential run hinge on winning over average voters.
In California, the median home price hit nearly $850,000 in early 2025, which is over double the national average. Gas prices are also among the highest in the country, partly due to strict energy policies.
“People often support these policies in theory, but when you explain it’ll cost them more—like an extra $1,000 a year—they hesitate,” Winegarden added.
In New York, Governor Kathy Hochul is also retracting some parts of the state’s climate policy. She has been reevaluating the cap-and-invest program, a crucial part of the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA).
Ken Girardin, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, pointed out that New York didn’t have a clear plan for its climate goals. Recently, Hochul made a deal involving a gas pipeline project, indicating a willingness to compromise on some climate initiatives.
Despite acknowledging the state would not meet its renewable energy targets for 2030, New York continues to pursue ambitious climate policies, making life more costly for residents.
“Keeping the CLCPA’s goals in place while admitting they won’t be met creates uncertainty for businesses,” Girardin noted.
According to a recent Pew Research survey, 75% of Americans recognize climate change as a serious issue, yet support diminishes when it becomes a financial burden. This illustrates the delicate balance politicians must strike.
Many environmental groups are disappointed with these shifts. Jamie Court of Consumer Watchdog stated, “It’s a letdown. We’re not fully surrendering, but it feels close.”
There’s debate over whether California’s status as a climate leader is fading. Chris Chavez from the Coalition for Clean Air raised concerns about the state’s commitment.
“California was a leader during previous administrations. Now, it’s questionable,” Chavez observed.
Some analysts argue that reforms like CEQA changes are not true rollbacks but rather adjustments that still favor big developers, often at the community’s expense. Edward Ring from the California Policy Center echoed this sentiment, warning that underlying agendas may not be changing.
Even as some states adjust their climate policies, others, like Hawaii and Maryland, continue to declare ambitious zero-emission goals, even if they struggle to achieve them.
Ring expressed skepticism about the long-term direction of these policies. “They’re slowing down just enough to keep the public calm, but they’ll resume their agenda when they can,” he said.
In response to these critiques, Newsom remains optimistic about balancing climate objectives with economic realities. A spokesperson said, “Smarter housing is also climate policy—it reduces emissions.”
This ongoing debate highlights the complex relationship between policy, public opinion, and economic realities in the quest for effective climate action.
Melissa O’Rourke is a contributor at the Daily Caller News Foundation.