Category: Uncategorized

PPI Warns That Hospital Takeovers of Physician Practices Are Driving Up Costs and Reducing Patient Access

Posted on by Alex Terr

WASHINGTON — The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) today released a landmark report detailing how a wave of hospital acquisitions of independent physician practices is restricting consumer access to health care, driving up prices and costs, and accelerating the erosion of physician autonomy. The study, “Fixing a Broken System: Policy Responses to Hospital Acquisitions of Physician Practices That Limit Health Care Access for U.S. Consumers,” analyzes national data from 2017 to 2024 and reviews more than 70 economic studies to unveil the mounting consequences of unchecked vertical consolidation.

Led by Diana Moss, Vice President and Director of Competition Policy, with coauthors Alix Ware, Director of Health Care Policy, and Lief Lin, Policy Research Fellow, the report shows that the share of independent physician practices has fallen sharply across the country as hospitals and large health systems absorb local providers. In many specialties, independent practices declined by up to 40%, with the steepest losses occurring in general surgery, oncology, and cardiology. Rural communities were hit hardest, experiencing a 34% decline in independent practices, compared to 22% in urban areas.

“The collapse of independent physician practices is not an isolated trend. It is a major structural shift that threatens affordability, choice, and the long-term resilience of our health care system,” said lead author Diana Moss. “Hospitals are acquiring local practices at a lightning pace, and consumers are paying the price through higher bills and fewer options.”

Key findings from the report include:

  • Most economic studies show hospital acquisitions of physician practices lead to higher prices and increased spending, with average price hikes of 14% and some exceeding 30%.
  • Nearly half of post-acquisition price increases stem from hospitals exploiting Medicare’s site-of-service payment differentials.
  • Large health systems are driving consolidation, with some expanding their ownership of  physician practices by several hundred percent between 2017 and 2024.
  • Current antitrust enforcement is far below average for the hospital and ambulatory health services sectors, despite mounting evidence of harm.

PPI’s analysis also underscores how state-level policies such as certificate of need (CON) laws and certificate of public advantage (COPA) agreements often exacerbate consolidation by raising barriers to entry and shielding hospital mergers from antitrust scrutiny. States without CON laws show significantly higher survival rates for independent physician practices and more new entry.

To address the crisis, PPI calls for a five-part federal and state policy strategy:

  1. Enact site-neutral Medicare payment reform to eliminate the financial incentives driving hospital purchases of physician practices.
  2. Strengthen antitrust enforcement to scrutinize hospital acquisitions of physician practices and challenge harmful transactions.
  3. Consider reforms to state CON and COPA laws that restrict competition and reinforce hospital market power.
  4. Protect physician autonomy by modernizing governance, compensation rules, and related federal policies that limit physician-led models.
  5. Strengthen rural health care access through targeted reinvestment, value-based care, and innovative delivery models.

“This is a moment for urgent, bipartisan action,” said co-author Alix Ware. “If policymakers fail to reform the incentives that fuel consolidation, patients will face even higher costs and fewer choices. The time to intervene is now.”

Read and download the report here.

Founded in 1989, PPI is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Find an expert and learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org. Follow us @PPI. 

###

Media Contact: Ian O’Keefe – iokeefe@ppionline.org

Fixing a Broken System: Policy Responses to Hospital Acquisitions of Physician Practices That Limit Health Care Access for U.S. Consumers

Posted on by Alex Terr

The Progressive Policy Institute’s new study unpacks ongoing hospital acquisitions of independent physician practices in the U.S. This vertical integration reduces vital competition in critical health care markets. The result is reduced access to health care for Americans, through higher prices and spending, less choice in health care delivery models, and the erosion of physician decision-making autonomy in patient care.

The loss of independent physician practices (IPPs) from hospital and health system acquisitions is a major component of the broader absorption of physician practices into corporate owners such as commercial health insurers, private equity firms, and retail conglomerates such as pharmacy chains. Between 2019 and 2023, the percentage of IPPs owned by hospitals/ health systems and other corporate entities increased from 39% to 59%, while the percentage of physicians employed by these same entities increased from 62% to 78%.

American consumers are already struggling with less access to health care, including what they pay, how easily they can obtain health care services, whether they have choice in facilities and providers, and the overall stability and resiliency of the health care system. The looming disappearance of the IPP compounds this formidable problem.

A review of 70 economic studies shows that hospital acquisitions of IPPs have myriad adverse effects. This includes higher prices and health care spending and the loss of decision-making autonomy for physicians because of changed corporate financial objectives. The elimination of the IPP as a vital health care delivery model has also reduced access to health care by eliminating an important source of choice for consumers.

PPI’s study advances the state of policy analysis regarding the impact of consolidation by tracking the recent decline in IPPs in the U.S., against the backdrop of economic evidence that acquisitions by hospitals harms consumers. PPI looked at the decline in IPPs across nine major medical specialties at the national, state, regional, and rural vs. urban levels in 2017 and 2024. The results of PPI’s study highlight several major takeaways:

  • There is mounting economic evidence that vertical integration of hospitals and IPPs increases prices and spending.
  • The U.S. health care system has sustained a significant decline in IPPs as a result of being acquired by hospitals. These decreases range from 4% to 42% across nine medical specialties.
  • Hospital acquisitions of physician practices have an outsized impact on rural areas of the U.S. IPPs in rural areas declined by 34%, versus only 22% in urban areas and were the highest in the western Midwest and New England.
  • Hospitals focus on acquisitions of larger physician practices in establishing or scaling up their market position in a medical specialty area. Large IPPs decreased by 45% and medium size IPPs declined by 36%.
  • Some of the largest health systems in the U.S. are the most active acquirers of physician practices, exacerbating already high levels of concentration in hospital and medical specialty markets.

When considered in light of evidence from existing economic studies showing that hospital acquisitions of IPPs increase prices and spending, policy approaches to addressing the precipitous decline in IPPs in the U.S. take on new urgency. For example, studies show average price increases of about 14%, with some increases as high as 33%, and higher increases in markets where a hospital has a dominant position. Evidence also shows that approximately 45% of price increases are due to exploitation of Medicare site-of-service reimbursement rules. The majority of studies also show that hospital acquisitions of IPPs result in increased spending.

PPI’s study concludes that better policies, achieved through comprehensive policy reform, are needed to address the loss of IPPs in the U.S. In framing this approach, PPI unpacks the multiple, flawed policies that bear directly on the anticompetitive effects of hospital acquisitions of physician practices. These policies have collectively failed to rein in consolidation and, in some cases, even incentivize it.

Major policy areas that bear directly on hospital acquisitions of IPPs and their outcomes include: (1) Medicare reimbursement rules that incentivize vertical integration, (2) below average merger enforcement, (3) state regulations that limit market entry, immunize hospitals from antitrust liability, and encourage gaming of the rules and exceptions to facilitate consolidation; (4) the absence of coherent policy to address a loss of physician autonomy that results from selling an IPP to a hospital; and (5) the need for a policy on health care access for rural areas.

Because of the lightning speed at which hospitals have acquired IPPs over the last two decades — and especially in the last eight years covered by PPI’s study — policymakers are now working against the clock. PPI’s “call to action” is for policy reform to protect American consumers and physicians, and improve access to the health care system. This effort should garner broad, bipartisan support from Congressional sponsors of site-neutral payment reform, state lawmakers, and federal and state antitrust enforcers. PPI recommends a five-part plan to address rampant hospital acquisitions of IPPs.

  • Pass federal legislation for site-neutral payment reform to remove the major incentive that drives hospital acquisitions of IPPs.
  • Strengthen federal and state antitrust enforcement to ensure that anticompetitive hospital acquisitions of IPPs are blocked or adequately remedied.
  • Consider reforming or revisiting state laws that govern hospital entry and shield powerful companies from antitrust scrutiny.
  • Protect physician autonomy by advancing policies that focus on quality of care, physician leadership in governance in hospital settings, physician-led initiatives, and telemedicine.
  • Develop policies to ensure access to health care in rural areas by reinvesting in rural hospitals, moving to value-based care, and supporting innovative business models and technology use.

Read the full report.

Manno for Forbes: Rebuilding The First Rung Of The Opportunity Ladder

Posted on by Alex Terr

America’s Informal Apprenticeship System Is Changing.

Work-Based Learning Closes The Experience Gap And Makes Experience The New Currency of Mobility

For generations, young people entering the U.S. job market followed a predictable script. They went to school, graduated, landed an entry-level first job, learned on the job, and accumulated the experience they needed to advance.

Today, that system is disappearing, along with the first rung on the hiring ladder that moved individuals from school to work to opportunity. In its place, a new reality has emerged: an experience gap that quickly becomes an opportunity gap for those entering the workforce.\

Read more in Forbes. 

Mandel for The Hill: Local news has been pummeled by change. How AI can help.

Posted on by Alex Terr

The list of troubles facing local news operations seems to go on forever.

The rise in big box stores and ecommerce has made local newspaper retail advertising almost superfluous.

The long-term decline in the population of small cities like Cairo, Illinois has narrowed the subscriber base of many local papers, forcing closures and consolidations.

And the fall in the price of newspaper advertising — an analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data by my organization, Progressive Policy Institute, shows it’s down 15 percent since 2019 — has undercut the traditional business model of local news even further.

Read more in The Hill. 

Jacoby on Background Briefing with Ian Masters: What Impact Will the Resignation of Ukraine’s Negotiator Yermak Have on Peace Talks?

Posted on by Alex Terr

We assess the multiple and confusing Trump teams of negotiators trying to make a deal Putin clearly has no interest in peace with Ukraine unless he gets all of his maximalist demands. We also examine the impact of Zelensky’s right hand man Yermak’s resignation under a cloud of corruption accusations. Joining us for Kyiv is Tamar Jacoby, the Kyiv-based director of the Progressive Policy Institute’s New Ukraine Project. She was a senior writer and justice editor at Newsweek and, before that, the deputy editor of the New York Times op-ed page. Now a regular contributor to Forbes.com, she is the author of Displaced: The Ukrainian Refugee Experience and has an article at The Washington Monthly, “Three Lessons From Trump’s Latest Plan for Ukraine: Whatever emerges from U.S.-Ukrainian talks in Geneva, nothing good is likely to come from this recipe for appeasing Moscow.”

 

Background Briefing with Ian Masters · What Impact Will the Resignation of Ukraine’s Negotiator Yermak Have on Peace Talks?

U.S. food prices up 3% this year

Posted on by Max Sherrill

FACT: U.S. food prices up 3% this year.

THE NUMBERS: Food costs as a share of household income –

2023*   9.8%
2016   9.6%
2012 10.0%
2000 13.6%
1984 14.0%

* BLS Consumer Expenditure Survey. 2023 is the most recent year available; due to the government shutdown, 2024 figures are delayed until December.

WHAT THEY MEAN: 

Two first-hand accounts of the 1621 “First Thanksgiving” event survive, both concise one-paragraph reports.  Despite the Pilgrims’ austerely religious reputation, both are secular pieces focusing on the food and the participants. Governor Bradford mentions ducks, “great store of wild Turkies, of which they tooke many,” plus venison, “about a peck a meale a weeke to a person,” and “Indean corn.” His lieutenant Edward Winslow, relating the event to friends in Britain, adds codfish, bass, and the five deer Massasoit and his 90 sachems carried in. Neither mentions cranberries or pumpkin pie. Winslow’s conclusion does, though, offer some reflection on the Pilgrims’ good fortune that year:

“And although it be not always so plentifull, as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so farre from want, that we often wish you partakers of our plentie.”

Four centuries on, the BLS says that as of 2023, Americans spent on average $6,050 a year on “food at home,” and another $3,930 eating out. Taking all these together, the ‘food price’ burden on American families — that is, the cost of food relative to income — has fallen by half since the 1970s and by about 75% in the last century, but not at all over the last decade:

Year Food Budget “Food at Home” Only
2023               9.8%                             5.9%
2016               9.6%                             5.4%
2010               9.8%                             5.8%
2000             13.6%                             6.8%
1984             14.0%                             8.4%
1973             19.1%                                n/a
1950             26.7%                                n/a
1918             38.3%                                n/a

In sum, a very long period of falling food costs appears to have stopped somewhere in the 2010s, and meals now take a bit more of American families’ income than they did during the Obama presidency. This year’s bill is likely to be higher still.  BLS won’t have this year’s consumer spending stats for a while, but the Economic Research Service predicts that food prices will end 2025 about 3% higher than they were last year. So American families aren’t wrong to feel pressure from rising food costs, nor to worry that government policy is pushing them up: tariffs appear to be adding about $1 billion a month to food costs.

Nonetheless, most Americans are still “farre from want.” And as they prepare for this Thursday’s Thanksgiving observance, they have many more choices than the turkeys, fish, corn, and venison available to the Pilgrims and Wampanoags. In that spirit, we wish PPI’s readers, friends, and critics a joyful holiday.

FURTHER READING

Then:

The Pilgrim Hall Museum in Plymouth has two contemporary notes on the first Thanksgiving.

Now:

The Agriculture Department’s Economic Research Service reports that Americans spent $2.92 trillion on food last year, with 81% grown, ranched, or otherwise produced locally and 19% brought in from abroad. The 19% “international” share divides into two parts:

  • About 15% of the foods Americans eat arrive for direct sale to consumers. Say, manchego and olive oil from Spain, French wine, Indian spices, Canadian eggs and mushrooms, Thai and Ecuadoran shrimp, winter grapes and raspberries from Chile and Peru, Mexican avocados, South African oranges and wine, Sri Lankan and Kenyan tea and coffee. This has drifted up from 9% in 2000 and 13% in 2013.
  • The other 4% are inputs for U.S. processed-food producers. Think West African cocoa beans for chocolatiers, Canadian flour for bakers, etc, but also inputs such as energy and paper packaging for U.S. food companies. While direct consumer imports have risen, input costs have dropped slightly from the 5% ERS reports for the mid-2010s.

Tariffs:

According to the USDA’s “Global Agricultural Trade System,” Americans bought $212 billion worth of agricultural goods from abroad last year. Seafood, considered a ‘natural resource’ in their accounting, added $25 billion more.

Tariff collection on these products has jumped by about $1 billion a month since Mr. Trump’s April 2 “international emergency” decree: $290 million in August 2024; $1.25 billion in August 2025. With about $20 billion in food products a month, tariffs overall appear to be adding about 5% to the cost of imported food. This month’s retreat on coffee, bananas, cocoa beans, beef, etc. will ease that a bit, but a threatened new 91% tariff on Italian pasta (on top of the 15% coming from the most recent version of the April 2 decree) in January will add some back. More on this one next month.

Data:

BLS’ Consumer Expenditure Survey tells you how much Americans spend, and what they spend it on.

USDA’s “Global Agricultural Trade System” tallies ag exports and imports.

USITC’s Dataweb reports tariff collection (“calculated duties”) by product.

And the UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s “FAOSTAT” system provides a worldwide context.

And last:

George Washington’s 470-word 1789 Thanksgiving Proclamation — the U.S. government’s first official Thanksgiving observance — came a year after the approval of the Constitution and four days after the first session of Congress closed down. Washington’s government and Congress had achieved quite a lot that year, setting up government departments, creating a revenue system and the Customs Service, organizing federal courts, etc. He strikingly doesn’t brag about it, but instead asks the public to join him in seeking forgiveness for national misdeeds, living up to responsibilities, and trying to do better:

“… that we may unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions — to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually — [and] to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed.”

ABOUT ED

Ed Gresser is Vice President and Director for Trade and Global Markets at PPI.

Ed returns to PPI after working for the think tank from 2001-2011. He most recently served as the Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Trade Policy and Economics at the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR). In this position, he led USTR’s economic research unit from 2015-2021, and chaired the 21-agency Trade Policy Staff Committee.

Ed began his career on Capitol Hill before serving USTR as Policy Advisor to USTR Charlene Barshefsky from 1998 to 2001. He then led PPI’s Trade and Global Markets Project from 2001 to 2011. After PPI, he co-founded and directed the independent think tank ProgressiveEconomy until rejoining USTR in 2015. In 2013, the Washington International Trade Association presented him with its Lighthouse Award, awarded annually to an individual or group for significant contributions to trade policy.

Ed is the author of Freedom from Want: American Liberalism and the Global Economy (2007). He has published in a variety of journals and newspapers, and his research has been cited by leading academics and international organizations including the WTO, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund. He is a graduate of Stanford University and holds a Master’s Degree in International Affairs from Columbia Universities and a certificate from the Averell Harriman Institute for Advanced Study of the Soviet Union.

Read the full email and sign up for the Trade Fact of the Week.

Libert for The Well News: The Blueprint for Democratic Renewal Lies in New Jersey and Virginia

Posted on by Max Sherrill

Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral victory in New York City, while historic, is not the story Democrats should focus on as they look to regain majorities in 2026 and win the presidency in 2028.

Why? Because Mamdani won just 50% of the vote in a reliably blue city — one that has voted Democratic for generations and likely will for generations to come. The real lessons for Democrats can be found in New Jersey and Virginia, where Govs.-elect Mikie Sherrill and Abigail Spanberger showed us how Democrats can win, and win big, by reconnecting with voters who have largely felt left behind by the Democratic Party.

At the Progressive Policy Institute, we have been speaking with these same kinds of voters. In a report authored by Claire Ainsley and Deborah Mattinson, PPI found plenty of evidence that the Democratic Party has moved further from the mainstream values of most Americans.

Keep reading in The Well News.

Mandel in the Wyoming Star: EXCLUSIVE: The Great Build-Out. Part 3. Economics of Data Center Construction.

Posted on by Alex Terr

Dr. Michael Mandel, Chief Economist and Vice President at Progressive Policy Institute, by contrast, leans into the idea that this build-out is more like building railroads than building Pets.com:

“We’ve gone through a long period where “physical” industries such as agriculture, construction, manufacturing, and much of mining have stagnated compared to digital industries. This stagnation in physical industries has especially hurt states such as Wyoming, which has barely grown since 2019.

AI has the potential to transform physical industries, boosting productivity and incomes and opening up new markets. AI will be especially beneficial to states such as Wyoming, which has shown no productivity growth over the past 15 years.

The growth of AI requires investment in large-scale data centers. Data centers are necessary, both to train the underlying models and to power the applications. This investment is no different, conceptually, from laying down rails for trains or drilling for oil. You need to spend on technology to get the benefits of technology, especially when dealing with the complications of the real world.

Indeed, China is pouring hundreds of billions into advanced technology industries, including AI. In this context, the US wave of data center construction and grid modernization looks like a necessity rather than an optional choice.”

Read more in the Wyoming Star. 

Jacoby for Washington Monthly: Three Lessons From Trump’s Latest Plan for Ukraine

Posted on by Alex Terr

The world appears to have dodged a bullet. Donald Trump and team are walking back from their latest and most outlandish proposal for peace in Ukraine. American and Ukrainian negotiators meeting in Geneva are working to revise the plan, and U.S. and European officials have agreed to meet separately to discuss its implications for NATO and the European Union. The outcome of these talks is unknown, and it’s hard to imagine a deal that will satisfy all parties—the Russian, Ukrainian, and European positions remain starkly at odds. But whatever the result, some things are already clear—including three lessons for the U.S. and Europe.

Kyiv and its European allies have long feared that Trump would betray Ukraine by using U.S. leverage to impose an unfair, unrealistic peace settlement modeled on a real estate deal—splitting the difference between two sides, in this case, a rapacious aggressor and its much smaller neighbor struggling to defend itself. In fact, the 28-point peace plan leaked last week was far worse than that. It didn’t even pretend to split the difference. With a few minor exceptions, Moscow got everything it wanted, and Ukraine got nothing. The deal rewarded the aggressor and pummeled the victim, strengthening a voracious Russia while enriching the U.S.

But Washington wasn’t just betraying Ukraine—the proposed deal would also be disastrous for Europe. With Ukraine sidelined—its large, experienced army and cutting-edge weapons neutered—nothing would stand between Europe and Russia, now armed to the teeth, invigorated by four years of war, and openly hungry to reclaim more of what it considers its historic sphere of influence.

Read more in Washington Monthly. 

New PPI Report Warns New York’s Climate Strategy Is Failing as Energy Costs Surge

Posted on by Max Sherrill

WASHINGTON — Today, the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) released a new report warning that New York is entering a climate and energy cost crisis as the state falls far behind its statutory decarbonization mandates. The report, “New York’s Climate Crossroads: Assuring Affordable Energy,” finds that New York’s current energy strategy is driving up costs for families, constraining reliable supply, and jeopardizing the political viability of the state’s climate agenda. PPI produced the analysis to help lawmakers, regulators, and stakeholders chart a practical path that aligns climate ambition with affordability and reliability.

Authored by Neel Brown, Managing Director at PPI, and John Kemp, an internationally recognized expert on energy markets and systems, the report outlines how New York is off track on key goals ranging from emissions reduction to renewable generation to offshore wind deployment. Distributed solar is the only measure on pace to meet statutory targets. According to the state’s own data, offshore wind and energy storage are classified as severely behind schedule, underscoring systemic challenges in the state’s planning and execution.

“New York set bold climate targets, but ignored the economic and technical realities required to achieve them,” said Brown. “The result is an energy system that is less reliable, more expensive, and now politically unsustainable. Unless policymakers course correct, the state risks turning a climate leadership story into a cautionary tale.”

Key takeaways from the report include:

  • New York’s emissions per capita are already among the nation’s lowest at 8.4 tons, more than 40% below the U.S. average.
  • Electricity prices are 44% higher than the national average, and residential rates have risen 36% since 2019, nearly three times faster than the rest of the country.
  • New York is behind on nearly every major climate mandate, including offshore wind, which is 1% operational, and energy storage, which is 8% operational toward 2030 goals. Only distributed solar is on track.
  • Fossil fuels still supply nearly half of New York’s electricity, and the closure of Indian Point erased a major source of zero-emission power, slowing the state’s progress.
  • Utilities are pursuing additional rate hikes of roughly 20%, driven by aging infrastructure, storm repairs, and rising operating costs, adding further pressure on households already facing higher energy bills.

The report highlights a growing collision between shrinking dispatchable power supply, state-driven increases in electricity demand, and rising ratepayer costs. The closure of the Indian Point nuclear facility removed a major source of zero-emission electricity, while state policies have blocked upgrades to aging natural gas plants and restricted natural gas pipeline capacity. These decisions have tightened supply and added cost pressures.

According to the analysis, residential electricity prices in New York have risen at nearly three times the national average since 2019. Utilities have requested further rate hikes of roughly 20%, citing infrastructure needs, storm recovery, and rising operating costs.

The authors outline a set of pragmatic considerations for policymakers, including shifting from technology mandates to outcome-driven policies, modernizing existing natural gas infrastructure to preserve reliability, and prioritizing affordability to maintain public support.

Read and download the report here.

New York’s Climate Crossroads: Assuring Affordable Energy

Posted on by Alex Terr

INTRODUCTION: THE CHALLENGE OF BALANCING AMBITION WITH REALITY

New York has established some of the nation’s most ambitious decarbonization targets, positioning itself as a leader in climate policy. However, the immense economic burden and practical challenges of implementing these mandates threaten their political viability. As the costs of this transition fall heavily on ratepayers and working families, a critical tension emerges between state-level climate objectives and the everyday financial realities faced by New Yorkers. This paper analyzes the state’s progress toward its climate targets, diagnoses the underlying pressures on its energy system, and evaluates more pragmatic policy pathways that can align climate goals with economic sustainability for its residents.

New York’s historical success in reducing emissions was achieved largely through the cost-effective strategy of retiring coal-fired power plants and replacing them with natural gas generation. The state is now entering a much more difficult and expensive phase, focused on displacing firm, base-load energy sources like natural gas generation with intermittent renewables like wind and solar. This shift fundamentally alters the economic and political calculus of decarbonization, raising questions about the feasibility of the current strategy and its impact on consumers already facing high energy prices.

To fully understand the challenges ahead, it is essential to first appreciate New York’s unique high-cost and high-efficiency energy profile. The latter is not a story of a decarbonized grid won by environmental activism, but of remarkable, nation-leading energy efficiency resulting from urban density and a less energy-intensive economy.

Read the full report.

Ryan for Washington Examiner: Bill Gates is right: It’s time to put people at the center of climate policy

Posted on by Alex Terr

Bill Gates dropped a truth bomb that has the potential to fundamentally reshape the climate conversation in our country. After years of aligning with the doomsday narrative that focuses exclusively on arbitrary, short-term emissions targets, he reversed course. Gates admitted what many of us in the heartland have known all along: While climate change poses serious challenges, our primary focus should be one thing — improving people’s lives.

Gates’s memo marked a significant shift in his climate narrative, reflecting his simple truth that doomerism of the past simply isn’t resonating. He is right. In the recent elections in New Jersey and Virginia, climate was not a top concern for voters or candidates. Govs.-elect Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) and Abigail Spanberger (D-VA) won by distancing themselves from the apocalyptic crisis language of the past and focusing on what matters most to Americans: energy affordability.

Our country is facing unprecedented energy demand with the buildout of new data centers and other energy-intensive technologies. And electricity costs are a simple function of supply and demand. What candidates such as Sherrill and Spanberger rightly recognize is that protecting everyday Americans struggling to keep their lights on and homes heated requires more power, and fast.

Read more in the Washington Examiner. 

Marshall for The Hill: Wanna Be Radical? Make the Government Work.

Posted on by Max Sherrill

The media is puzzling over voters choosing centrist Democrats in Virginia and New Jersey and democratic socialists in New York City and Seattle.

Take a step back, though, and this election looks a lot like President Trump’s sweep last year: An unsettled electorate still in revolt against the status quo and punishing whoever’s in power.

The voters’ message was less about ideology than institutions. Americans believe their political and governing institutions are broken and want someone who can fix them. They are frustrated with leaders who inflame tribal partisanship rather than forging consensus around tackling pressing national problems. And they think the government has grown too big, costly and stuck in a “can’t do” mentality that puts process over results.

Such attitudes are particularly a problem for Democrats, who present as defenders rather than reformers of failing public institutions. The problem isn’t lack of resources. Former President Joe Biden’s prodigious spending didn’t lower living costs or improve economic prospects for the non-college majority. Voters’ shifts towards Democrats this month, however, indicated that Trump’s tariffs and power grabs aren’t doing the job, either.

When things aren’t working, radical change becomes the pragmatic course for political leaders. But radical change in which direction?

Keep reading in The Hill.

Stablecoins Could Hurt Local Economies. Voters Agree.

Posted on by Alex Terr

With the recent passage of the GENIUS Act earlier this year, stablecoins — digital assets used for transactions and pegged to the value of the dollar — are expected to become more commonly used as a payment tool. But do Americans fully understand the consequences of greater stablecoin usage?  A new poll from Data For Progress provides some important answers; and policymakers should take notice.

In our paper Stablecoins Will Lessen Community Lending, Alex Kilander and I argue that the expansion of stablecoin usage, as envisioned by some proponents of the GENIUS Act, will likely lead to a decline in the number of small banks and in turn, less credit for households, local businesses, and farmers. Why? Because the provision in the law to prevent payment-stablecoins from paying interest/yield can be easily circumvented. Even now, some companies are exploring ways to offer rewards to stablecoin holders, emphasizing that such rewards are not technically “interest” and are offered for reasons other than merely holding the stablecoin itself.

Interestingly, when presented with this information, voters recognize the seriousness of the threat posed by stablecoins to local communities.

According to the Data For Progress poll, a sizable majority (65%) of respondents think that an uptake in stablecoin usage will likely hurt local economies. The results hold true among Democrats (71%), Independents (68%), and Republicans (58%).

The strong bipartisan response should not be considered surprising, given the important role that community banks play in rural areas across the country. Along those same lines, the results should give pause to Senators and Members of Congress, who are considering whether to tighten restrictions on companies’ ability to offer non-traditional forms of yield on payment-stablecoins.

Bureaucracy Blocks Green Progress: 9 Ideas for Democratic Permitting Reform

Posted on by Max Sherrill

In the waning days of the Biden administration, Senators Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and John Barrasso (R-Wy.) introduced the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024. It represented the culmination of years of debate to streamline and modernize the approval process for infrastructure and energy projects by reducing the time and complexity of environmental reviews and litigation. The aim was to accelerate construction of critical projects — from transmission lines and renewable energy facilities to roads and public works — while still preserving essential environmental safeguards. But under pressure from some members of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, as well as hardline Republicans unwilling to assist Biden’s environmental agenda, the effort failed.

However, even with a new president and a Republican congressional majority, permitting reform hasn’t disappeared from the legislative agenda. Bipartisan proposals such as the Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development (SPEED) Act, have emerged, designed to shorten review timelines, reduce litigation delays, and modernize the permitting pipeline.

Yet, Democratic hesitation remains a major obstacle to comprehensive, legislative permitting reform. Many congressional Democrats continue to view permitting reform with suspicion, worried that legislative changes could weaken basic environmental protections. Others warn that certain proposals risk benefiting fossil fuel development at the expense of clean energy.

But there is a strong case that Democrats have much to gain by engaging in the permitting debate. Permitting reform cannot be a rollback of environmental safeguards. Instead, it is an opportunity to find bipartisan compromise and advance core Democratic priorities: accelerating the clean energy transition, modernizing infrastructure, making energy more affordable, lowering costs for families, and strengthening resilience against climate threats. By engaging in the permitting reform debate, Democrats can ensure that reforms balance speed with environmental safeguards and deliver a cleaner, cheaper, and more affordable energy future.

Read the full report.

PPI Proposes Nine Reforms to Fix America’s Broken Permitting System

Posted on by Alex Terr

WASHINGTON — Today, the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) released a new report outlining nine concrete reforms to fix America’s broken permitting system and accelerate the clean energy transition while preserving strong environmental protections. The report, “Bureaucracy Blocks Green Progress: 9 Ideas for Democratic Permitting Reform,” makes the case that modernizing federal permitting is essential to lowering energy costs, strengthening national security, and building the infrastructure required for long-term economic growth. The report is designed to help Democratic lawmakers identify practical reforms they can champion as part of a bipartisan permitting deal.

Authored by Colin Mortimer, PPI’s Senior Director of Partnerships, the report argues that outdated and duplicative review processes have become a major obstacle to building both clean energy projects and traditional infrastructure. From transmission lines to renewable power to wildfire mitigation efforts, years of delay and litigation are driving up costs for families, deterring investment, and slowing America’s ability to compete globally.

“Permitting reform is not about weakening environmental protections. It is about making sure the projects that cut emissions, lower costs, and strengthen our grid are no longer trapped in regulatory limbo,” said Mortimer. “Democrats in Congress have a strategic opportunity to lead, shape bipartisan outcomes, and ensure reforms deliver both climate progress and economic gains.”

The report highlights the significant national consequences of inaction. According to recent industry and economic analyses, permitting delays have cost the United States more than $100 billion in lost investment, delayed 150,000 jobs, and led to hundreds of millions of tons of additional carbon emissions this decade. With electricity demand expected to rise sharply due to AI, manufacturing growth, and electrification, the need for a modernized permitting framework has never been more urgent.

PPI’s nine recommendations include:

  1. Establishing firm environmental review deadlines to prevent endless analysis
  2. Codifying Supreme Court limits on overly expansive environmental reviews
  3. Adopting a 150-day statute of limitations for lawsuits that challenge approved projects
  4. Creating a true federal single front door to coordinate and accelerate multi-agency reviews
  5. Reforming private right of action rules to curb abuse without silencing legitimate concerns
  6. Expanding FERC’s authority to site critical transmission and modernize natural gas review processes
  7. Providing agencies with the resources needed to conduct faster and more rigorous reviews
  8. Encouraging revenue sharing to strengthen local support for clean energy and infrastructure
  9. Limiting unilateral executive power to revoke major projects that have already met the required standards

“These ideas show that permitting reform can be both pro-environment and pro-growth,” added Mortimer. “If Democrats help shape the conversation, they can secure reforms that speed clean energy deployment, create jobs, and give communities a direct stake in America’s energy future.”

The report emphasizes that durable permitting reform must also be bipartisan. With Congress preparing for major legislative negotiations, PPI argues that Democrats in Congress have much to gain by putting forward solutions that align climate ambition with practical implementation and affordability.

Read and download the report here.

Founded in 1989, PPI is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Find an expert and learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org. Follow us @PPI. 

###

Media Contact: Ian O’Keefe – iokeefe@ppionline.org