Episode Summary
Executive Summary: Jason Jacobs interviews Caroline Spears, founder of Climate Cabinet, about how the nonprofit helps candidates run, win, and legislate on climate by building tailored climate plans and targeting overlooked state and local races. Spears explains why local politics matters for climate progress, how political will—not technology—is the key bottleneck, and why climate advocacy must be campaign-specific, data-driven, and focused on elections where small interventions can yield outsized impact.
Main Topics: Climate Cabinet’s mission and model (Priority: 5/5): Spears explains that Climate Cabinet supports candidates through candidate engagement and accountability, helping them develop climate plans and identifying local races with major climate impact. Origin story and personal motivation (Priority: 5/5): Spears traces her path from Houston and an oil-and-gas family to climate science, solar work, and volunteering on campaigns after seeing a lack of climate support for candidates. Why state and local politics matter (Priority: 5/5): The conversation emphasizes that state and local officials influence a large share of clean-energy deployment and climate policy progress, often more than national politics suggests. Targeting elections using climate score and vulnerability (Priority: 4/5): Climate Cabinet uses a proprietary database to prioritize races based on a candidate’s climate record and the competitiveness of the election, focusing on high-leverage opportunities. Political will versus public opinion (Priority: 4/5): Spears argues the American public is often more supportive of climate action than elected officials, and that the main challenge is translating support into policy and votes. Organizational structure, funding, and scale (Priority: 3/5): The interview covers Climate Cabinet’s 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), and PAC structure, its funding sources, and the team’s staffing and support for hundreds to thousands of campaigns. Advice for climate founders and investors (Priority: 3/5): Spears urges climate entrepreneurs and investors to incorporate proactive policy strategy into their work, since lobbying and political influence can shape market outcomes.
Key Arguments: Climate change progress depends heavily on state and local offices, not just federal action, because these offices influence policy implementation and clean-energy deployment. Most candidates are under-resourced on climate and need help translating general concern into a concrete, locally relevant climate plan. The American public is broadly supportive of many climate solutions, but elected officials often underestimate that support by a wide margin. The main barrier is political will, not lack of solutions; renewable energy, batteries, transmission, transit, and electrification are already available pathways. Campaign support must be tailored to the local political landscape because what wins in one district may differ in another, even if the underlying climate principles are consistent. A data-driven approach can find overlooked races where a relatively small amount of attention or funding can produce a large climate return on investment. Climate policy work is inherently interdisciplinary, requiring campaign expertise, legislative experience, climate science, and behavioral insight. Climate advocacy should be integrated into climate investing and cleantech strategy because policy can determine whether technologies scale or face restrictions.
Data Points: MCJ membership community size: 1,300+ members - Jason describes the MyClimate Journey Slack membership community as having grown to more than 1,300 members. Climate Cabinet team size: 9 people - Spears says Climate Cabinet is a nine-person team. Campaigns supported last year: ~130 campaigns - Spears estimates Climate Cabinet worked with around 130 campaigns in the past year. Campaigns supported the year before: ~130 campaigns - She says support levels were similar in the prior year. Local elections database coverage: 3,000 state legislators - Spears says Climate Cabinet Action provides climate scores for 3,000 state legislators across the country. Political underestimation of climate popularity: 20-point gap - She cites research finding congressional staffers underestimated the popularity of climate solutions in their districts by 20 points. State and local clean energy share: Half of all clean energy built - Spears says state and local policy is already responsible for half of all clean energy built. Projected share of Paris-goal progress: Two-thirds - She cites Bloomberg Philanthropies research estimating state and local policy will drive about two-thirds of progress toward Paris goals. US officials elected per cycle: 500,000 every six years - Spears uses this to highlight the scale of local and state elections relative to federal races. Federal DC-focused climate spending share: 85% - She says about 85% of climate dollars go toward the 435/535 officials in Washington, D.C. Building electrification bans: 19 states - Spears says 19 states passed bans on building electrification the previous year, driven by gas-industry lobbying. Ballot/accountability analogy: Top 10 Facebook shares weekly dominated by Breitbart/Trump - She uses social-media and media examples to argue voters often don’t track local legislative behavior.
Pivotal Quotes: "We know state and local policy is absolutely critical for solving climate change." — Caroline Spears: Explaining why Climate Cabinet focuses on overlooked local and state races rather than only federal politics. "Our goal is every candidate should be equipped with the boldest climate policy possible that will help them win." — Caroline Spears: Describing how Climate Cabinet balances ambition with electoral viability. "What we need is political will for climate solutions." — Caroline Spears: Responding to what single change would most improve climate outcomes across local races.
Implications: The episode argues that climate progress depends on building political infrastructure at the state and local level. For listeners in climate, the takeaway is to treat policy as a strategic lever, not an afterthought, and to support candidates and organizations that can convert public support into governing action.