When President Donald Trump announced Thursday that he was moving to scrap the Environmental Protection Agency’s Obama-era “endangerment finding,” the left erupted on cue. That 2009 determination declared greenhouse gases a threat to public health and handed the EPA sweeping authority to regulate them.
For years, that ruling served as the legal backbone for an avalanche of climate regulations — empowering unelected bureaucrats to clamp down on industry, energy production, and manufacturing in the name of combating emissions. Critics have long argued it became a regulatory bludgeon, used to justify policies that drove up costs and throttled economic growth.
How dare the president try to unleash the full economic power of the United States and let consumers — not bureaucrats — decide what they buy.
Predictably, the Usual Suspects immediately went into meltdown mode. The activist class, the climate lobby, and their media allies are clutching their pearls as if economic growth itself is some kind of scandal.
And right on schedule, a certain former president decided to reinsert himself into the conversation — apparently under the impression that Americans are still hanging on his every word:
Today, the Trump administration repealed the endangerment finding: the ruling that served as the basis for limits on tailpipe emissions and power plant rules. Without it, we’ll be less safe, less healthy and less able to fight climate change — all so the fossil fuel industry can make even more money.
“We’ll be less safe,” Obama declared.
That’s the talking point. The fear pitch. The same recycled warning Americans have heard for years whenever someone dares to challenge the regulatory machine.
What he didn’t mention is the other side of the ledger: igniting economic growth, stripping away layers of suffocating regulation, lowering energy costs, and ensuring the United States has the power capacity to fuel the next generation of industry, innovation, and opportunity.
And never mind that unleashing American energy will drive down the cost of practically everything, making things more (wait for it) “affordable.” Like President Trump promised he would do. That doesn’t mean anything to the millionaire class Obama belongs to, but for the 95 percent of the rest of us, it does.
And speaking of climate grifters, was there ever any doubt about who would be furious over Trump taking the brakes off American energy?
Of course — the original high priest of climate alarmism himself, Al Gore:
And Trump is “trying to deny science and reality?” Seriously? You said that? Might want to harken back to several of your earlier “we’ve only got a few years left!” predictions that were wrong.
And what would a liberal climate meltdown be without Gavin Newsom making an appearance?
The governor of California — a state drowning in regulation, sky-high costs, and an ongoing exodus of businesses and residents — is, predictably, distraught that Trump is moving to curb a federal agency’s power to throttle economic growth:
To borrow a phrase from Al Gore’s climate crusade, here’s an inconvenient truth for him and his allies: the so-called endangerment finding concentrated enormous power in the hands of unelected agency bureaucrats and gave them sweeping authority to dictate policy to the entire country.
For years, that determination served as a regulatory blank check — empowering officials to impose rules with massive economic consequences, often far removed from voters or direct congressional approval.
Gore, Obama, and Newsom may not like seeing that authority challenged. But critics argue that reining it in is about restoring balance, curbing bureaucratic overreach, and putting economic decisions back in the hands of elected leaders and the American people.
Whether supporters cheer it or opponents decry it, Trump’s move is undeniably bold — and for many who have long opposed expansive regulatory power, it’s been a long time coming.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D–NY) is facing bipartisan backlash after he declared that the ongoing federal government shutdown is “getting better for us every day,” prompting sharp condemnation from the White House and Republican lawmakers.
The controversy erupted Thursday after Punchbowl News reported that Schumer told colleagues the prolonged shutdown—now entering its second week—was politically beneficial for Democrats. The shutdown began after negotiations collapsed over Democrats’ push to restore health care funding for undocumented immigrants, a measure Republicans have rejected as “reckless and unfair to taxpayers.”
“Every day gets better for us,” Schumer said, according to Punchbowl News. “It’s because we’ve thought about this long in advance, and we knew that health care would be the focal point on Sept. 30, and we prepared for it… Their whole theory was — threaten us, bamboozle us, and we would submit in a day or two.”
The remark was followed hours later by a heated exchange on the Senate floor. Schumer accused House Speaker Mike Johnson (R–LA) of “killing his own constituents” by refusing to reopen the government on Democratic terms.
“Hear that, Mr. Speaker?” Schumer shouted. “Good Americans in your own state… will die. All because the Speaker chose to keep the House on vacation rather than negotiate with Democrats and end their Trump shutdown. Shameful.”
Republicans immediately denounced Schumer’s comments as inflammatory and cruel, while the White House — led by President Donald Trump — called the remarks “disgusting and revealing.”
“Chuck Schumer just said the quiet part out loud: Democrats are gleefully inflicting pain on the American people over their push to give illegal aliens free health care,” said White House deputy press secretary Abigail Jackson.
“Workers are missing paychecks; travelers are missing flights; businesses are struggling; military families are forced to rely on food pantries. But to Chuck Schumer, that means ‘every day gets better.’ No matter what he thinks, Americans struggling is not good — and Democrats must stop inflicting this pain on them and reopen the government now,” Jackson said.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt echoed that sentiment in a post on X, writing: “While federal workers stress over missed paychecks, military families turn to food pantries, and airports around the country face delays — Chuck Schumer and the Democrats are bragging that ‘every day gets better’ for them. What a disgusting and revealing statement.”
The standoff has now entered its tenth day, leaving hundreds of thousands of federal workers without pay and halting nonessential government services. Economic analysts estimate that the shutdown is costing the U.S. economy up to $2 billion per week in lost productivity and delayed federal contracts.
During a Cabinet meeting Thursday, President Donald Trump accused Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D–NY) of “holding the entire federal government hostage.”
“So Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries and the Congressional Democrats are holding the government hostage,” Trump said. “They’re doing it because they want free healthcare for illegal immigrants, and because Chuck’s afraid Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is going to run against him. He’s terrified of his own party.”
Trump went on to predict that Schumer would “retire soon,” citing declining polling numbers and growing frustration from moderate Democrats.
Meanwhile, internal party tensions are intensifying for Schumer. In New York, the communist candidate Zohran Mamdani has taken an early lead in the city’s mayoral race, while speculation continues that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–NY) could challenge Schumer for his Senate seat in 2026 — though she has not announced a campaign.
For now, there is no end in sight to the shutdown or to the political escalation surrounding it. Congressional leaders are expected to reconvene negotiations Friday, though both sides remain far apart on spending priorities — and increasingly bitter about who’s taking the blame.
NewsNation political contributor Chris Cillizza said during a recent live stream on his YouTube channel that Vice President JD Vance is a formidable potential 2028 presidential candidate whom Democrats underestimate “at their own peril.”
An Emerson College poll published last week showed Vance with a 46 percent favorability rating, leading several prominent Republicans and Democrats, including potential 2028 contenders.
Reacting to the poll on X, Cillizza said the numbers reinforced his belief that Democrats fail to grasp “Vance’s appeal,” a point he reiterated during his live stream.
“I’m pretty bullish on JD Vance,” Cillizza said. “I think Democrats underestimate JD Vance at their own peril, which I think they’re doing.”
CNN chief data analyst Harry Enten said recently that Vance appeared to be in a strong position to secure the Republican presidential nomination in 2028.
Enten cited Vance’s large advantage in early polling and the historical success rate of sitting vice presidents when seeking their party’s nomination.
“Look, this is early polling, but look, for the GOP nomination, it’s JD Vance at 40 percent,” Enten said. “There’s no one even close to him.”
“Keep in mind that early favorites have actually gone on to win the nomination 63 percent of the time, those who have run since 1980,” Enten added.
WATCH:
Grassroots conservatives expressed strong early support for JD Vance as a potential 2028 presidential candidate, according to a straw poll conducted at Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest.
Vance received 84.2% support among respondents, far outpacing other potential Republican contenders.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio placed second with 4.8%, followed by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis at 2.9% and Donald Trump Jr. at 1.8%, according to the poll results.
“JD Vance won the 2028 nomination straw poll by more than Donald Trump won the 2024 one we did two years ago,” Blake Neff, producer of the “Charlie Kirk Show,” said on X. Two years ago, President Trump clinched 82.6% support, followed by DeSantis at 7.6%.
Vance was the final featured speaker at the AmericaFest gathering in Phoenix. Ahead of his remarks, Turning Point USA Chief Executive Officer Erika Kirk offered remarks that attendees interpreted as an endorsement of Vance for the presidency in 2028.
The country’s No. 2 elected official has led early polling among potential Republican contenders for the 2028 presidential election. He has publicly stated, however, that he is not currently focused on a future presidential bid.
“We’re going to win the midterms. We’re going to do everything that we can to win the midterms,” Vance told Fox News’ “Hannity” when asked about his 2028 plans earlier this month. “And then after that, I’m going to sit down with the president of the United States and talk to him about it.”
Nevertheless, that doesn’t prevent him from occasionally targeting potential Democratic rivals for 2028.
“Democrats are already talking about 2028 and it looks like they’re going to nominate a California liberal who’s presided over rolling blackouts, open borders and unchecked violent gangs,” Vance said during his AmericaFest speech Sunday. “They’re just trying to settle on whether it’s going to be Gavin Newsom or Kamala Harris.”
Trump has not endorsed a potential successor, with the next presidential election still three years away. The president continues to maintain strong support among grassroots conservative activists, according to the straw poll results.
Nearly two months after a widely shared embrace between the two, Erika — who has assumed leadership of the organization following her husband’s assassination — appeared on stage at the Phoenix Convention Center last month to formally back Vance’s anticipated White House bid.
“We are going to get my husband’s friend JD Vance elected for 48 in the most resounding way possible,” she told thousands of activists, per video of her speech that was posted online.
The announcement was met with loud applause.
If he does run, Turning Point USA could offer a significant boost.
The nonprofit has become a major force in conservative youth organizing and MAGA politics, building substantial influence within the Republican grassroots through its nationwide campus network, expansive digital reach, and ability to mobilize activists on behalf of candidates.