What Pennsylvania Teaches Us About Bipartisanship
Screenshot - Pennsylvania Climate Change - gis.dep.pa.gov
'My district itself is 40% Democrat, 40% Republican, and 20% independent. So I'm a good kind of little Petri dish case study of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the country at large,' Pennsylvania Congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan told me in an exclusive interview on Electric Ladies Podcast. With all walks of life – urban, suburban, rural, Democrats, Republicans, independents, Pennsylvania is the ultimate swing state and could teach us about how to move forward on a bipartisan basis. They voted for Donald Trump in 2016, for Joe Biden in 2020, and then back to Donald Trump by less than 1% in 2024.
Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA 06). ca. 14 November 2018. (Photo by: HUM Images/Universal Images Group ... More via Getty Images)
Houlahan represents Pennsylvania's sixth district as a Democrat, bringing her experiences as an Air Force veteran, an educator who worked with Teach for America and taught 11th grade science in Philadelphia, and an entrepreneur. She also comes from an immigrant background, with her grandparents and parents as Holocaust survivors, and from a military family (her father and grandfather served in the Navy). She's also one of only a couple of dozen Members of Congress with a STEM background – in science, technology, engineering and math – which concerns her since nearly every issue intersects with STEM today. She earned her engineering degree at Stanford (with an ROTC scholarship) and her Master of Science degree in Technology and policy from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). That's why she founded and Co-chairs the Women in STEM Caucus too, which she told me is bipartisan.
She's also Co-Chair of the 60-member Bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus. Pennsylvanians reflect bipartisan support for clean energy and the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Act. The majority supports increasing clean energy in the state, 76% overall, including 84% of independents and 59% of Republicans, according to research by the Global Strategy Group.
'I just believe that we're fundamentally a very pragmatic people who really think hard, are well educated, in different ways, to understand the complexity of all problems that we have,' including energy, 'and we can find solutions that are pragmatic as well,' Houlahan insisted.
Graphic on support for energy in Pennsylvania, Global Strategy Group research - 2025
'Our planet is under attack and we do have an energy crisis and we do need to move towards renewable and sustainable energies more rapidly than we are. And I think the people of our community, my community, recognize that.'
Despite the report's finding that 'Overwhelming majorities of voters support significantly increasing the use of clean energy in Pennsylvania,' in 2024, Pennsylvanians voted for Donald Trump and a Republican Senator both of whom are against those programs, while also voting for Houlahan and other Democrats, who do support those programs.
So, how do you reach bipartisanship on climate and clean energy issues?
Here are issues Houlahan said she focuses on to do so:
Pennsylvania is slated to receive over $16.7 billion in funding from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), with the majority earmarked for desperately needed repairs and upgrades to roadways, bridges, water systems, public transit, and airports, according to the US Department of Transportation. It's all at risk in the GOP-led bill.
American Society of Civil Engineers, Pennsylvania infrastructure report card 2025
Sherri Goodman book - Threat Multiplier, Island Press 2024
Sherri Goodman, former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Environmental Security, coining the phrase 'threat multiplier,' to describe climate decades ago, because it exacerbates all other security threats. She explained it in her new book, 'Threat Multiplier: climate change, military leadership and global security.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
29 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Xi Bets Trump Detente Will Lead to Future Wins on Chips, Tariffs
In the early hours of Wednesday, Donald Trump declared that Xi Jinping was 'VERY TOUGH, AND EXTREMELY HARD TO MAKE A DEAL WITH!!!' Some 36 hours later, the US leader said he got what he wanted: A commitment to restore the flow of rare earth magnets. It's less clear what Xi got in return, apart from putting a lid on further punitive US measures. One of the few clear takeaways appeared to be an assurance for the US to welcome Chinese students, a major issue in China but also not one that would explain why Xi got on the phone after making Trump wait for months.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Nvidia Just Became the World's Most Valuable Company. Here's What May Happen Next.
Nvidia, with a market value of $3.444 trillion, topped software giant Microsoft. This happened a week after Nvidia's report of double-digit revenue growth and strong demand for its artificial intelligence chips. 10 stocks we like better than Nvidia › Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA) might be the company everyone's talking about thanks to its dominance in the high-growth area of artificial intelligence (AI), but it remained behind one other tech player, Microsoft, in terms of market value. Until this week. On June 3, Nvidia roared past the software giant to become the world's most valuable company with a market value of $3.444 trillion. Microsoft's market value totaled $3.441 trillion at the close of trading. This happened a week after Nvidia's fiscal 2026 first-quarter earnings report, one that maintained the company's track record of surpassing analysts' estimates and delivering double-digit revenue growth. And even though investors questioned the strength of AI demand and spending in recent months, Nvidia's words -- and comments from its biggest customers -- showed business still is booming. All of this is great news, but can this AI chip powerhouse maintain this position in the market cap top spot? It's important to note that this isn't the first time Nvidia has claimed the title of the world's most valuable company. In fact, just a few months ago, in January, Nvidia's market value surpassed those of Microsoft and smartphone giant Apple. But concerns about technology spending weighed heavily on Nvidia shares in recent months, and that pushed market value lower once again. Now, though, two elements clearly are driving this rebound in the AI giant. First, market sentiment and stock performance have improved in recent weeks on optimism that President Donald Trump's import tariffs won't result in extreme headwinds for corporate earnings. The U.S. struck an initial trade deal with China at lower-than-expected tariff levels and is working on a permanent arrangement. Lower tariffs suggest less strain on companies' budgets and on the consumer's wallet. Second, as mentioned, Nvidia reported strong demand for its latest release, the Blackwell architecture and chip, and noted that customers are rushing to the company for inferencing power. Nvidia's chips -- graphics processing units (GPUs) -- fuel this process that allows large language models to think through problems and generate answers. All of this helped Nvidia report a 69% increase in revenue to $44 billion in the quarter and deliver strong profitability on sales. Even including a charge Nvidia took for canceled sales to China following U.S. export controls, Nvidia's gross margin came in at more than 60%. And excluding the impact of the charge, Nvidia met its forecast of gross margin in the low-70% range. On top of this, forecasts showing the AI market will increase from hundreds of billions of dollars today to trillions of dollars by early next decade suggest there's room for Nvidia and other AI leaders to grow. So, will Nvidia keep its title as the world's biggest company? One potential risk to Nvidia's share price performance -- and market value gains -- is the situation concerning the export of AI chips to China. Today, U.S. restrictions prevent Nvidia from selling its H20 chip -- one that it designed specifically for the Chinese market -- to that country. If Nvidia remains completely blocked from the Chinese market, revenue growth and stock performance could suffer, at least in the short term. But any progress in that area, even small, could act as a catalyst for share gains. Considering all of these elements, the positive and the negative, I think Nvidia may once again remain neck and neck with Microsoft and Apple when it comes to market cap in the months and quarters to come. We might see each of these companies periodically take the top spot. If tariff issues and the China export situation are completely resolved, though, Nvidia could have the advantage. Nvidia's leadership and innovation in the high-growth AI market as well as its double-digit revenue increases quarter after quarter could eventually push it ahead, making it the world's biggest company for the long term. Before you buy stock in Nvidia, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Nvidia wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $656,825!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $865,550!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 994% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Adria Cimino has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Apple, Microsoft, and Nvidia. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Nvidia Just Became the World's Most Valuable Company. Here's What May Happen Next. was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
USA Today
32 minutes ago
- USA Today
Who would want to have babies under a Trump administration? Not me.
Who would want to have babies under a Trump administration? Not me. | Opinion The Trump administration does not care about what is medically necessary to save someone's life. They care about controlling women. Why would anybody want to have a child under that way of thinking? Show Caption Hide Caption Trump rescinds Biden-era emergency abortion care guidance The Trump administration rescinded guidance clarifying that hospitals in abortion-ban states must treat pregnant patients during medical emergencies. unbranded - Newsworthy Despite declarations that something needs to be done about the declining birth rate in the United States, neither President Donald Trump nor the Republican Party has the desire to protect pregnant people. If they did, the Trump administration wouldn't have made its latest move to restrict abortion nationwide. On Tuesday, June 3, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services rescinded a Biden-era policy that directed hospitals to provide emergency abortions if it was needed to stabilize a pregnant patient. The guidance and communications on it apparently 'do not reflect the policy of this Administration.' I, like many people who support abortion rights, know what this will lead to. It means more pregnant people will die. Does that reflect the policy of the administration? Having a baby in America is dangerous. Republicans aren't helping. The Biden policy was implemented in 2022, following the fall of Roe v. Wade, and argued that hospitals receiving Medicare funding had to comply with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). The former administration argued that this included providing emergency abortions when they were needed to stabilize a patient, even in states that had severe abortion restrictions. Opinion: A brain dead pregnant Georgia woman is a horror story. It's Republicans' fault. This wasn't entirely a surprise. In 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that Texas could ban virtually all abortions in the state, including abortions that would have occurred under the old EMTALA guidelines. Still, it's terrifying to see this crucial policy eliminated. It's already dangerous to be pregnant in the United States. Our maternal mortality rate is much higher than in other wealthy countries. Same with our infant mortality rate. This will only exacerbate these tragedies. In states with abortion bans, the risks are even greater. A study from the Gender Equity Policy Institute found that people living in states with abortion bans were twice as likely to die during or shortly after childbirth. This is also backed by anecdotal evidence, including the 2022 deaths of two women in Georgia after the state passed a six-week ban. A different study found that infant mortality rates increased in states with severe restrictions on abortion, including an increase in deaths due to congenital anomalies. The Trump administration does not care about what is medically necessary to save someone's life. They don't care about whether the children supposedly saved by rescinding this policy will grow up without their mother. They care about their perceived moral superiority. They care about controlling women. Why would anybody want to have a child under that Republican way of thinking? Opinion: We're worrying about the wrong thing. Low birth rate isn't the crisis: Child care is. None of this is surprising from Republicans. It's just sad. I want to say I'm surprised that the Trump administration would allow women in need of emergency care to die. Yet this is clearly aligned with the Republican stance on abortion, just like it's aligned with the actions that the party has taken to make it harder for women to access necessary care. Whether you like it or not, abortion is a necessary part of health care. It saves lives. Alexis McGill Johnson, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood, laid it out plainly. 'Women have died because they couldn't get the lifesaving abortion care they needed,' she said in a statement. 'The Trump administration is willing to let pregnant people die, and that is exactly what we can expect." Again, this is the administration that wants young women like me to have children and improve the country's birth rate. This is an administration that claims to care about women and children. I know I wouldn't want to have a child while Trump continues to make it unsafe to be pregnant and give birth. I hate that this is the reality. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter, @sara__pequeno
