This past January, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island began calling out fellow Democrats he dubbed “climate hushers,” colleagues who have retreated from the public discussion of climate change. To get a handle on the practical effect of climate hushing, Inside Climate News analyzed data from Congress Press, an archive of congressional press releases; the numbers showed a precipitous drop in mentions of climate change since 2025. 

Pollsters and political consultants are advising Democratic candidates that climate change is a losing topic for the 2026 midterm elections—a turn-off for average voters who find it too complicated and too polarizing. Their advice: stick to affordability issues like the cost of energy, home insurance and health care without referencing the climate connection. 

Sen. Whitehouse, who has addressed the Senate about climate change more than 300 times, thinks this is both a strategic mistake and a disservice to voters. In a recent interview, he urged his colleagues not to sideline the climate issue but to improve how they connect it to voters’ pocketbook concerns in a unified way. As an example, he cited the way extreme weather events have driven up the cost of homeowners’ insurance in traditionally red states like Texas, Louisiana and Florida, an issue he says voters of both parties connect clearly to climate change, a connection we should be talking about more, not less. 

There is plenty of opinion research to back this up. The Yale Program on Climate Change Communication has been surveying Americans’ views on climate change for more than 20 years, documenting growing majorities across the country who understand that global warming is real, human-caused and affecting their lives. The Spring 2026 edition of the “Climate Change in the American Mind” survey found that 66 percent of respondents were “somewhat” or “extremely” worried about the impacts of climate change. They worry about climate-related extreme events in their own communities such as water pollution (79 percent), diseases like Lyme and West Nile Virus spread by ticks and mosquitoes (79 percent), electricity power outages (78 percent), air pollution (77 percent), extreme heat (77 percent), droughts (72 percent), water shortages (70 percent), wildfires (63 percent) and flooding (63 percent). 

Majorities reported that they are interested in news stories about the effect of global warming on the cost of living (76 percent), the U.S. government’s actions to respond to global warming (75 percent) and impacts on their own communities (74 percent). They want to know what U.S. businesses (74 percent) and their local communities (72 percent) are doing to respond and what actions are making global warming worse (73 percent) or operating to oppose climate solutions (69 percent). A majority of registered voters (58 percent) said they prefer candidates who support action on climate change.

Another recent survey confirms that Americans are increasingly aware that rising health risks, chronic health problems and spiraling long-term medical costs are connected to toxic chemicals in our air, water and household products. 

The survey of 2,025 registered voters was conducted this past April by YouGov on behalf of the Environmental Protection Network (EPN), an organization founded in 2017 that now includes more than 750 former employees and confirmation-level staff of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), spanning both Republican and Democratic administrations. My thanks to the wonderful Rebekah Creshkoff for making me aware of this organization and the EPN health survey.

Regardless of party affiliation or political ideology, voters identified concerns that rolling back EPA regulations would increase the cost of living and the cost of health care, concerns the survey identified as “overarching.” Concerns about pollution-related health issues and corporate influence at the current EPA were especially high among working-class Americans who “can’t afford to get sick.” By a 7-to-1 margin, respondents said they wanted the EPA to be strengthened or expanded rather than weakened. By an 8-to-1 margin, respondents wanted the EPA to prioritize protection from toxic chemicals over the trend towards deregulation, even if it resulted in higher costs. 

Only 16 percent agreed with current EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin’s goal of making the U.S. the “AI capital of the world,” and 63 percent were concerned that the EPA would fast-track approvals of AI data centers without the usual pollution safeguards. 

Vaccine safety and fluoride in drinking water scored the lowest as sources of voter concern. Across geographies from urban to rural, voters are opposed to cuts to the EPA’s scientific staff and research efforts.

Both the Yale and the EPN surveys reveal that Americans want more information about climate, the environment and health, not less. Leaders who truly want to lead should embrace that task by improving their own mastery of the facts and honing their message. Shying away from the climate discussion underestimates voters and cedes the ground to fake science and false priorities.