The climate implications of the 2020 debates

The presidential debates of 2020 were pivotal in setting expectations for future discussions on climate policy and environmental justice. Though climate was not initially listed as a debate topic for the first general election presidential debate of 2020, moderator Chris Wallace ultimately included a substantial discussion on climate change, seemingly in response to significant public and media pressure to include it. During the final debate of 2020, moderator Kristen Welker built on this foundation by using the climate portion of the debate to also ask the candidates about environmental justice, marking it as a pivotal moment for climate discourse in presidential debates. 

Climate discussions in the 2020 debates varied in depth, with Wallace's questions often reflecting conservative framing of climate issues while Welker mostly avoided such framing. These disparate approaches collectively raised the bar. The substantive climate discussions initiated by Wallace and expanded by Welker during the 2020 debates have established a higher expectation for the 2024 presidential debates to delve deeper into the candidates’ understanding of climate change and their approaches to climate action.

Setting the stage for 2024: Why viewers deserve a sustained and substantive climate discussion

Since the 2020 debates, the world has witnessed an increase in record-breaking climate-driven extreme weather events, including hurricanes, wildfires, and heat waves. With a record number of heat-related deaths, 2023 became the hottest year on record, and 2024 is projected to be even hotter. In fact, in the United States and around the world we have already witnessed record-breaking heat in 2024; the first debate will occur on the heels of a record-breaking heat wave that gripped much of the country.

Parallel to these rising threats, the clean energy sector has seen significant growth, hinting at the beginnings of a shift towards a more sustainable economy. Georgia, the host state for the first debate, exemplifies this trend, ranking second in the nation for clean energy projects and creating nearly 30,000 clean energy jobs. The burgeoning clean energy industry represents not only a necessary response to climate change but also a significant economic opportunity to provide new jobs and scale practical technological advancements. 

In addition, key constituencies, particularly among socially marginalized populations, are still experiencing the devastating impacts of climate change and environmental pollution. These communities often face the harshest consequences of environmental racism and neglect, emphasizing the need for focused discussions on environmental justice and equitable climate solutions.

Another climate-related issue concerns the stall in global climate action, with many countries failing to meet emissions reduction targets. This gap highlights the need for leadership and innovative policy solutions at the international level. 

Climate change and climate action resonate strongly with voters across the political spectrum. In fact, climate change unexpectedly emerged as a key issue during the first Republican presidential primary debate, illustrating its importance to the party’s younger constituents. Polls conducted during this election cycle reveal significant bipartisan concern about climate impacts and robust support for decisive government action. Addressing climate-related issues during the debates would reflect the electorate's priorities by allowing the candidates to discuss their approaches to addressing one of the most critical challenges facing our nation and the world.

Unfortunately, the public's understanding of climate issues is frequently distorted by disinformation. Clear, fact-based questions are essential to countering these pervasive myths and ensuring that viewers are well-informed about the realities of climate change and clean energy solutions.

How moderators should address climate during the 2024 debates

Moderators should be prepared to counter conservative talking points, such as the misleading narrative that America is not energy independent despite being a net exporter of oil, or the false narrative of a Biden-led “war on energy.” They should also avoid framing climate action primarily in terms of economic costs, challenge the spurious narrative that environmental regulations kill jobs, and correct misconceptions about the reliability and capacity of renewable energy sources.

It is crucial that moderators understand the basics of climate science, but they should also be well-versed in how climate change intersects with broader foreign and domestic policy issues. This will allow them to ask nuanced questions that compel candidates to address the wide-reaching effects of their climate and environmental policies, as well as how their other policies might affect climate.

Emphasizing environmental justice is also vital. Moderators should probe how candidates’ policies will address the needs of marginalized communities disproportionately affected by climate change and environmental pollution. 

Candidates’ interactions with the fossil fuel industry will be a critical area for moderators to explore as well. For example, moderators should question candidates about any potential quid pro quos made in exchange for campaign support and ask them to clarify their stances on maintaining regulatory integrity and independence from industry pressures.

Presidential debates shape public policy and voter perception, making them crucial for presenting and scrutinizing the candidates' approaches to the pressing issues around climate change. Voters deserve a thorough and comprehensive climate change discussion that highlights each candidate's strategies for tackling climate change and environmental justice. That is why it is imperative that climate discussions are given the prominence they deserve during the 2024 debates.