Responses to the Clean Power Plan: Factors Influencing State Decision‐Making

Abstract

In 2015, President Obama introduced the Clean Power Plan (CPP), a federal plan aimed at reducing the production of carbon pollution from power plants. In response, some used legal action to try and stop the plan, while others supported the plan and proceeded with plans for its implementation. This research investigates responses taken by state government in terms of legal remedies and planning for implementation, and what explains those responses. Findings suggest that partisanship plays a key role. Specifically, the partisanship of the attorney general is correlated with the legal response, and the governor with implementation planning. Coals, and perhaps renewables, also seem to play a role, even controlling for partisanship. There is only weak evidence for the effect of policy experience and none for the estimated cost of the policy. The article concludes by discussing the implications of these results for the future of climate policy in the United States.

Administration, rhetoric, and climate policy in the Obama presidency

“…Further connecting this to larger trends, the climate policy void experienced in the 21st century is as much by design as by default, as President Bush and later Trump purposely retreated from the policy area while Obama aggressively inserted the federal government into policy space occupied by others, leaving states and NGOs to address concerns and create certainty (Konisky & Woods, 2018 Rabe, 2007, 2011). Notably, a significant amount of state climate action has been driven by partisanship, so that a divergence between Republican and Democratic‐led states has grown for two decades (Besco, 2018; Glasgow et al, 2021; Rabe, 2007). By extension, future policy is likely dependent on following Obama's example, with Biden and subsequent presidents' abilities to justify going it alone, more so than their ability to find bipartisan compromise, a key to successfully moving the needle on climate change.…”