Michael Greenstone

Despite an expected shift in energy and environmental priorities in the coming years, several key challenges present clear opportunities for bipartisan cooperation. On March 27, The Hamilton Project and the Energy Policy Institute at University of Chicago (EPIC) co-hosted a forum exploring opportunities for progress on energy and climate policy. The forum included a series of roundtable discussions, with a focus on two Hamilton Project policy proposals on fuel economy regulation and enhancing urban resilience to new climate risk.

In this paper, Greenstone, Sunstein and Ori propose two major steps towards simplifying fuel efficiency standards and refocusing the program on achieving guaranteed emissions reductions at lower cost to automakers. First, they propose targeting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions directly, without differentiating by vehicle types and sizes, using data to project a given vehicle’s lifetime greenhouse gas emissions. Second they recommend establishing a robust cap-and-trade market to reduce compliance costs for automakers while providing considerably more certainty about the future path of carbon dioxide emissions. 

There is growing public debate over whether, when, and to what extent policymakers should take action to stem climate change. On September 22nd, The Hamilton Project at Brookings will host a forum to explore the economics of climate change, and the potential costs of inaction to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. U.S Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew will give keynote remarks, followed by a roundtable discussion with Robert E. Rubin, Co-Chair of the Council on Foreign Relations and former U.S. Treasury Secretary, and Michael Greenstone, The Milton Friedman Professor in Economics and Director of the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago.

Michael Greenstone explains why we should care about the economic costs of climate change, in advance of next week’s webcast and forum with Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and former Secretary Robert Rubin.

On October 21st, THP hosted a forum and release three new policy proposals by outside experts focusing on the evolving role of higher education, and how changes in student lending and financial aid policies can help improve college outcomes. Thought leaders in higher education from around the country—including Vassar College President Catharine Bond Hill; LaGuardia Community College President Gail Mellow; University of North Carolina President Thomas Ross; Wesleyan University President Michael Roth; and Brookings’ Brown Center for Education Policy Director Grover “Russ” Whitehurst—joined the discussion to comment on the proposals, and provided their thoughts on the future of higher education in American society.

Despite the consistent pattern of modest jobs growth over the last several years, the nation’s goal of a full recovery from the Great Recession remains elusive. One factor contributing to this outcome is an unclear definition of what “recovery” means, as policymakers have suggested a wide variety of economic goals. In this month’s employment analysis, The Hamilton Project explores the “jobs gap,” or the number of jobs the economy would have to add to offset the effects of the Great Recession, which we offer as a useful target for economic recovery. The analysis discusses how changes in population and labor-force participation rates will affect the time it takes to close the gap and how we measure progress toward our economic recovery.

The Hamilton Project examines how future immigration trends could impact American wages, using targets set in the recently-passed Senate bill as a signpost. Understanding that S.744 is just the first piece of legislation out of the gate, the new analysis suggests that the average impact of new immigrants on the wages of U.S.-born workers would be positive (based on CBO estimates, the analysis assumes approximately 9.6 million additional immigrants by 2013 due to the legislation). The analysis also suggests that American workers are likely to gain through other channels, based on evidence that immigrants enhance purchasing power of consumers, increase demand for goods and services at businesses, and contribute to innovation that boost living standards over time.

Despite the positive return to higher education, many Americans are concerned about their ability to pay for college, and there is increasing focus on the rising burden of student loans on recent graduates. Although average net tuition—the actual cost to students after grant aid, scholarships, and other financial aid—has increased somewhat over the last two decades, the volume of student debt has increased far more dramatically, as has the default rate on student loans. In this month’s employment analysis, The Hamilton Project examines possible explanations for the recent increases in student debt and default rates.

On June 26th, The Hamilton Project at Brookings hosted a forum on the importance of expanding college opportunity for more Americans. Harvard College’s William Fitzsimmons and The Brookings Institution’s Grover J. “Russ” Whitehurst were among the distinguished experts joining a roundtable discussion focusing on a proposal for targeting and reaching low-income, high-achieving students by Caroline Hoxby of Stanford University and Sarah Turner of the University of Virginia. In a second panel discussion, higher education leaders—including The College Board’s David Coleman and Syracuse University’s Nancy Cantor—focused more broadly on the role of higher education in American mobility.

In this set of economic facts, The Hamilton Project examines the relationship between growing income inequality and social mobility in America. The memo explores the growing gap in educational opportunities and outcomes for students based on family income and the great potential of education to increase upward mobility for all Americans.

The role of education in improving social mobility is well-known, and new evidence identifies promising ways to help more low-income students improve their educational opportunities. The Hamilton Project compares a range of interventions aimed at boosting college attendance and completion among low-income students.

In recent years there has been increasing concern about students who begin two- and four-year college programs but fail to complete a degree—particularly in light of the large increase in student debt and concerns about the high costs of college. In this month’s employment analysis, The Hamilton Project examines whether starting college is worth it for students who fail to complete a degree. The findings show that students who complete “some college” earn about $100,000 more throughout their lifetime than their peers with only a high school education, and the rate of return to their investment exceeds the historical return on practically any conventional investment, including stocks, bonds, and real estate.