Institute for Progress — September 2022 Update
Hello!
Hope you are enjoying the beginning of fall. Here’s what the IFP team has been up to recently:
✍️ Published Work
Alec wrote an article for The Atlantic arguing that climate relief can’t wait for utopia — which means climate activists should take ideas like nuclear, direct air carbon capture, geothermal, and permitting reform seriously
“Yet we cannot succeed in the fight against global warming without giving many alternatives to the status quo an opportunity to evolve and prove themselves. In reality, the false solution to climate change isn’t geoengineering or nuclear energy—it’s the belief that we can decarbonize the economy only by upending our economic system, categorically rejecting certain technologies, and spurning private investment.”
Alec and Brian published a new report with Arnab Datta from Employ America about what’s gone wrong with permitting and how to fix it
Draft legislative text for our policy recommendations
We joined a coalition letter with a number of other science and immigration groups calling for improvements to the State Department’s visa processing procedures to aid international students coming to the U.S.
🎤 Interviews & Events
Alec participated in an expert roundtable with Jason Crawford, Brad DeLong, Hannah Ritchie, Saloni Dattani, and others for the inaugural special issue from Big Think on progress
IFP co-hosted a screening with Lincoln Network of the new Stewart Brand documentary from Stripe Press called “We Are As Gods”
📰 Media
Ezra Klein spoke with Heidi for his recent op-ed in The New York Times about biomedical innovation
“Democrats should braid policies to make drugs cheaper with policies to make drug innovation easier and, in some cases, more profitable. I spent some time this week talking to Heidi Williams, an economist at Stanford who studies drug development, and the point she made is so obvious it’s a wonder we haven’t done more about it. We spend a lot on the beginning of drug development — basic science and research — and even more on the products that ultimately get developed. But we neglect the middle: All the unglamorous, difficult infrastructure needed to turn a promising molecule into a miraculous treatment.”
Reihan Salam cited our work on high-skilled immigration reform in a recent piece for Foreign Policy
“Even if one stipulates that the descendants of all immigrants will fare equally well in the long run, a claim that goes beyond the historical evidence Abramitzky and Boustan carefully present, a more selective approach could yield large dividends in the interim. As the immigration advocates Alec Stapp and Jeremy Neufeld of the Institute for Progress recently put it, ‘for a given level of immigration, scientists, engineers, inventors, and entrepreneurs deliver the largest benefits.’”
Suraj Patel cited our report on permitting reform in a piece for Time
“The Institute for Progress has outlined a list of policy suggestions to prevent NEPA from being used to harm the environment including giving clean energy the same regulatory treatment that fossil fuels already receive, establishing limits on judicial review arising from NEPA, establishing ‘energy security corridors’ to incentivize state and local governments to streamline their own permitting and review processes.”
Jeremy’s research on the importance of STEM immigration to the U.S. defense industrial base was cited in a new video from Kite & Key Media
Joel Dodge cited our work on permitting reform in an article for Washington Monthly making the case for liberals to support the deal
“The coal state senator may be more amenable to proposals from the Institute for Progress, a nonpartisan think tank, which would put clean energy projects on an equal regulatory footing with fossil fuel projects (which receive numerous exemptions from environmental review law).”
Corbin Barthold referenced our idea for a science funding lottery in a piece for City Journal
“Clever people are thinking hard about how to combat sludge. Alec Stapp, co-founder of the Institute for Progress, suggests that we try to reduce paperwork in the field of scientific research by handing out grants (in part) by lottery.”
James Coleman mentioned our permitting work in an op-ed for The Hill
“As the Institute for Progress explains, ‘The time limit that would likely have a major impact is restricting the ability of the courts to issue injunctions against projects that have undergone extensive environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act. This change would provide developers the certainty they need to invest in large-scale … solar, wind, transmission and other clean energy infrastructure.’”
James Broughel quoted Alec in a piece for Forbes about permitting reform
“As Alec Stapp of the Institute for Progress recently stated on Twitter, ‘My worry is that policymakers will say this bill ‘fixed permitting,’ and then we don't get any more reform for years.’”
☀️ New Things Under the Sun by IFP Senior Innovation Economist Matt Clancy
🏗️ Construction Physics by IFP Senior Fellow Brian Potter
👀 Progress Is Possible in DC (what we’re watching)
In exchange for his vote on the Inflation Reduction Act, Senator Manchin secured a commitment from President Biden, Majority Leader Schumer, and Speaker Pelosi for a vote on permitting reform this year
Due to Republican opposition, permitting reform did not have the 60 votes necessary in the Senate to be added to the Continuing Resolution (which needed to pass by September 30th to avoid a government shutdown)
However, permitting reform could still be added to either the National Defense Authorization Act or the omnibus appropriations bill, both of which are expected to pass during the lame duck period following the midterms
The current bill text is a step in the right direction, but could be made considerably better
Republican senators would be smart to ask for stronger reforms to judicial review, such as a time limit on judicial injunctions
Progressives could use this opportunity to push for more categorical exclusions from NEPA review for clean energy projects such as solar, wind, and geothermal
Senator Durbin and Senator Rounds introduced a bipartisan amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would create a green card cap exemption for STEM PhD and master’s graduates from U.S. universities
This is a continuation of the effort over the summer to include a similar amendment in the CHIPS and Science Act
Previous IFP research emphasizes the importance of international talent for national competitiveness:
82% of companies in the defense industrial base report that it is difficult to find qualified STEM workers
50% of the advanced STEM degree holders working in the defense industrial base are foreign-born
👋 Tweet for the Road
