As the climate crisis intensifies, the stark contrasts between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump’s environmental policies reveal a deep divide in the nation’s approach to sustainability.
While Harris champions aggressive climate action and clean energy investments, Trump’s legacy reflects a rollback of environmental regulations and a reliance on fossil fuels. Justice40, Project 2025 and the future of the U.S. loom as the November election approaches.
Here is the breakdown:
Harris on climate change
Sixty-three percent of Americans support the goal of the U.S. taking steps to become carbon neutral by 2050, according to a Pew Research study. This puts climate action at the top of the issues candidates need to address during their campaigns.
Harris has called the climate crisis “one of the most urgent matters of our time” and has prioritized it. As a senator, she sponsored the Green New Deal, which called for public policy to address climate change and pursue environmental justice in disadvantaged communities. The measure never got out of committee but signaled a far more leftist approach to climate policies than Biden.

Last year, Harris was the main U.S. speaker at the United Nations Climate Summit in Dubai, where she said, “We must make up for lost time.”
In 2022, Harris cast the tiebreaking vote for the Inflation Reduction Act, the most significant action Congress has ever taken on clean energy and climate change.
When Harris ran for president in 2020, she favored a ban on hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, which Biden opposed.
Last week, several climate groups began a $55 million ad campaign in support of Harris, framing the environmental support as an economically beneficial position. The ads emphasize Harris’ efforts to increase renewable energy use and lower carbon emissions through tax incentives and federal regulations.
The organizations wrote in a joint statement:
“The last three and a half years of the Biden-Harris administration could not contrast more starkly with Trump and other extreme MAGA Republicans, and the stakes for this election could not be higher. A second term would be far worse for our climate and our democracy.”
Trump and Project 2025
Trump said in his interview with Elon Musk on X climate change is “not the biggest threat” and rising oceans would “create more oceanfront property.”
Trump has promised to repeal federal regulations to decrease greenhouse gases. Additionally, plans have been made to cut staff, slash budgets and scale back the government’s ability to curb climate change.
Trump has also said he would transform the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), significantly weakening their power and prioritizing fossil fuels. While there is no concrete plan to roll back the EPA, Project 2025 outlines much more.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 is an outline of policies and regulations by conservatives to “get America back on track.” The plan is composed of four pillars: policies, personnel, training and actions.
It is important to note that in recent weeks Trump has distanced himself from Project 2025, but the document is fueling the conservative’s agenda, with many of Trump’s first term allies authoring the narrative, including Paul Dans, former chief of staff at the Office of Personnel Management, and Spencer Chretien, former special assistant to Trump.
The document covers topics ranging from immigration to the economy, but some of the significant oversight is in the climate and environmental section, which calls for slashing federal money for research in renewable energy.
The document says the next president should “stop the war on oil and natural gas” and focus on increasing energy production.
The reduction of carbon would be moved to the back burner. In a report by Energy Innovation, the implementation of Project 2025 would mean the U.S. carbon pollution would increase exponentially. The analysis also found that it would result in 1.7 million jobs lost in 2030.
Justice40 and the local issues
Justice40, an initiative that aims to ensure that 40% of the overall benefits from federal investments in climate and clean energy are directed to disadvantaged communities, has been called into question as new administrations take the stage.
The Harris administration has focused their efforts on the Inflation Reduction Act, but there is an assumption that she would continue the efforts and funding for Justice40 if she were to be elected.
Justice40 was announced in 2021, but the implementation and allocation of funding has proved to be a lengthy process. In December 2023, the Biden administration tasked 11 organizations to allocate $600 million in grant funding. In April, these groups announced they were expecting to start seeing project proposals.
On the local level, the EPA announced more than $65 million from Justice40 would be allocated to help Indiana identify and replace lead pipes for drinking water, 49% of which should be used in disadvantaged communities.
Martindale-Brightwood was identified as a disadvantaged area. At the Quality of Life Town Hall last month, this project was expected to begin officially contacting homes for lead pipe replacement.
“We’re really excited about this program,” said Alex Haverfield from Citizens Energy Group. “We have fast-tracked all of the projects in Martindale-Brightwood, so residents should be receiving notices soon.”
Under the Harris administration, these funds would likely continue. With Trump, that may not be the case.
“If it’s true that Trump is adopting the Project 2025, then that project says that it will basically eliminate all climate-related policies,” said Denise Abdul-Rahman, founder and chief equity officer of Black Sun Light Sustainability. “In my mind, that will have a negative impact statewide and locally. That means a lot of the different fundings that are flowing will, you know, cease.”
There has been some controversy in Indiana regarding the other projects proposed by Justice40.
The Indiana Department of Transportation’s National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure plan faces backlash for the lack of equity in where electric vehicle charging stations will be placed throughout the state, a lack of public engagement and lack of transparency throughout the process.
“What we’re experiencing right now with INDOT is they’re doing the bare minimum when it comes to Justice40,” Abdul-Rahman said. “We want to make them have to do more than the bare minimum.”
Although the implementation of Justice40 has faced issues on a local scale, the national outlook is net-beneficial if the funds were to continue, according to Abdul-Rahman.
“If the state governments are in alignment with the Trump administration, then they’ll be subject to a lot of policies where the state oversees what the local government can do,” Abdul-Rahman said. “If it’s a Harris administration, then I think there’ll be a continuing flow of resources and we’ll be able to continue to try to make our communities even more than resilient and thriving.”
Contact Health & Environmental Reporter Hanna Rauworth at 317-762-7854 or follow her on Instagram at @hanna.rauworth.
Hello indianapolisrecorder.com webmaster, Great job!