ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - Polarization is seen as a growing problem in the United States, and many blame social media. But polls show Americans agree on many hot-button issues - and the divide may be more emotional than ideological.
One example is gun control. A majority of Americans polled agree that stricter laws should be enacted for firearms sales. And Rachel Kleinfeld of Santa Fe, a senior fellow with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said there's also some common ground on immigration and abortion. Kleinfeld said she believes polarization is less about ideas and more about emotions that cause people to identify with a "tribe" with similar beliefs. She suggested that curiosity could be the antidote.
"It is extremely hard to be curious and to hate at the same time," she said. "When you're curious, it doesn't mean you agree, but it does mean you have to find out more."
According to a recent Gallup poll, 57% of Americans favor tougher gun-control laws, while only 9% want to see fewer gun restrictions and 34% support the status quo.
Social scientists often recommend limiting internet and media consumption to avoid hot topics such as economics or politics - and when consuming news, trying to seek out balanced reporting. Kleinfeld said social-media users often gravitate to sites that reinforce their own beliefs, and young people can become polarized because they avoid anything they think might inflict trauma.
"Polarization, of course, is not just about young people," she said, "but there is something particular that does seem to be going on with young people about a lack of ability to handle too much complexity in their thinking."
While it might not be as extreme as sometimes portrayed, Kleinfeld said polarization is worrisome because what we're seeing in America now also has been observed in other countries with extreme violence.
get more stories like this via email
Recent Supreme Court rulings on air pollution are affecting Virginia and the nation.
Climate advocates said the court overstepped its bounds in ruling the Environmental Protection Agency's Good Neighbor Rule was improperly enacted and repealing the so-called "Chevron deference." Without it, judges have to rule on ambiguous regulatory laws with no agency expertise.
Craig Segall, vice president of the advocacy group Evergreen Action, said the court is diminishing the capacity of Virginia's federal climate partners like the EPA.
"By creating room to attack, for instance, carbon standards for power plants federally, that Virginia might want to implement," Segall outlined. "Or by making it harder for U.S. EPA to move us toward electric vehicles that would create jobs in Virginia and that would, you know, clean up the air, especially in Northern Virginia where it's so congested."
He added it creates an opportunity for states to lead on climate action. But partisan opinions on climate change vary across the country. In Virginia, it means mixed efforts from utility companies and lawmakers. Dominion Energy is developing offshore wind, but it is also pressing on with a natural gas plant residents vehemently oppose.
The rulings, coupled with decisions on presidential immunity and what constitutes bribery have eroded the Supreme Court's perception of impartiality. Polls show most Americans across party lines feel the Court puts political ideology first.
Quentin Scott, federal policy director for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said it opens the floodgates to government corruption.
"We can't have this blatant, open corruption or it will diminish our effectiveness of government and enforcement of some very important rules related to pollution," Scott asserted.
He stressed climate action will be a top ballot priority along with preserving democracy. Some of his group's top issues for the next presidency will be improving grid interconnection of clean energy projects and approving certain reforms for the Supreme Court.
Disclosure: Chesapeake Climate Action Network contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, and Sustainable Agriculture. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Vice President Kamala Harris, now the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, delivered a powerful message in Indianapolis.
Speaking at a Zeta Phi Beta Sorority event, just days after President Joe Biden dropped out of the race and endorsed her candidacy, Harris emphasized her dedication to affordable healthcare, student debt relief, and gun control measures, including universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.
She also hammered home that, if she is elected president, she would restore a woman's right to choose an abortion.
"When I am President of the United States and when Congress passes a law to restore those freedoms, I will sign it into law," Harris said. "We are not playing around."
Harris expressed her belief that the current administration has made progress toward a better future by implementing such initiatives as capping insulin prices for more affordable healthcare, passing the Child Tax Credit, and forgiving student loan debt for millions of Americans.
GOP Vice-Presidential nominee J.D. Vance was also in Indiana Wednesday. He spoke at a private event in Ft. Wayne.
Criticizing Project 2025, a conservative plan drafted by the Heritage Foundation, Harris warned it would take the country backward in the areas of medical freedom and education.
"This represents an outright attack on our children, our family, and our future. These extremists want to take us back, but we are not going back. We are not going back," she said.
Harris called for unity in defending freedom and stated there are two different visions for the country. Her vision, she said, looks to the future; the other, she said, looks to the past. Harris urged the community to mobilize and vote, stressing the significance of this moment in shaping the nation's future.
get more stories like this via email
A sweeping conservative plan to shape a possible second Donald Trump presidency is making headlines, even as the GOP candidate claims to know little about it.
"Project 2025" from the conservative Heritage Foundation includes standard conservative ideas, such as slashing regulations, but also firing thousands of civil servants, dismantling the Department of Education and giving more power to the states.
David Nevins, co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder of the Bridge Alliance, a network of organizations working to promote healthy self-governance, has enlisted experts to share their thoughts on each of Project 2025's 30 sections.
"The cross-partisan approach that we believe in is, in some cases, the federal government can do certain things more effectively - in some cases not as effectively - and that's the discussion we need to have as a nation," Nevins said.
Alarming to New Mexico conservationists, Project 2025 proposes slashing federal money for research and investment in renewable energy, and replacing carbon-reduction goals with efforts to increase energy production and energy security.
Nevins believes many on the far right want to "turn back the clock" and erase societal changes that have occurred in the last 20 to 30 years. He said people can be afraid of change - especially when things are moving fast - but thinks Project 2025 represents a lack of open-mindedness rather than seeking common ground to take democracy to its next level.
"The reality of America is that we are a diverse country, in terms of racial, ethnic, sexual preferences, religion - that is the reality. And if we're going to live into the pluralistic dream of our founding fathers and mothers, we have to learn to make that work," he explained.
While Trump has denied knowing much about Project 2025, nearly two-thirds of the authors behind the plan served in his former administration.
get more stories like this via email