Federal climate policy in the United States has entered another period of reversal, with environmental protections weakened and funding streams redirected. But the response has not been a simple retreat.

Across the country, climate action is increasingly being built outside Washington—through school electrification projects, local solar campaigns, and community-led infrastructure planning. These efforts are not framed around individual consumer choices, but around coordinated, structural change at the neighborhood and state level.

What’s emerging is a different model of climate progress: one less dependent on federal continuity and more rooted in local institutions and collective action. The result is a system that may be less visible, but also more durable.

Bailey Staff was an active child, a competitive dancer, a first-degree black belt, and horserider. “I did everything under the sun,” she said—until she was 15 years old. She began to have constant pain in her right knee, and no matter what she did, it wouldn’t go away. She went to her primary care doctor, hoping that he would have some answers. Instead, he told her that her BMI was low and she was anorexic, which is probably why she was in pain.

Six months later, she began to experience a lack of feeling in her right leg. When she went back to the referred doctor, insisting something was wrong, he shrugged. Staff knew something was wrong with her body; she just couldn’t get her doctor to believe her.

Read the full feature here.

After reporting this story, what’s stayed with me is the idea that local concerns, like preventing drought or stopping a data center, can bring people together across political lines. Yes, it’s depressing that “climate change,” as a phrase, has become so polarizing. But setting that aside, I found it hopeful to see that unity and progress in the U.S. in 2026 may not be as far out of reach if folks focus on their specific concerns. It’s a reframe I’ve found helpful.

The quote I keep coming back to is from Malcom Araos, an associate professor at New York University: “Communities aren’t anti-expert. They are anti-being told one thing is going to happen, and then another thing happens.” The country’s future doesn’t have to depend entirely on Washington or international treaties. Meaningful change can also happen through collective action in people’s own backyards. But that will require sincere, sustained engagement with those communities—not just asking them to support change, but involving them in shaping it.

—Sarah Sloat

Reporter Van Jackson dives into America's global standing and delivers a sweeping reassessment of U.S. foreign policy, its costs, and the growing case for a less militarized approach to global engagement.