19-member Democrat-led Congress delegation to head to COP31 as US midterm results offer hope for climate action

The visit comes days after Democrats secured control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate in the November 3 midterm elections, a result that is expected to constrain Trump's legislative agenda. However, the new Congress will take office only in January 2027, meaning the lawmakers will attend COP31 as members of the incoming opposition-to-majority transition, without any formal negotiating role on behalf of the US government.

Also, the Democrats' electoral gains do not automatically translate into an immediate reversal of Trump's climate agenda. The president retains veto powers, and the new Congress will have to contend with an administration that has made fossil fuel expansion and deregulation central to its energy policy.

"You know, as far as what we do with the majority, I think in the immediate term, we have a really important diplomatic function. There's going to be about 20 of us going to the COP. We will not, of course, be in the majority at that point, but we will be received with the understanding of what just happened. We will be the entirety of the United States federal delegation in Turkey," Casten said on November 4, as part of a webinar.

He also cautioned against assuming that the rest of the world would overlook the US's repeated retreats from global climate commitments, citing its failure to ratify the Kyoto Protocol and its twice-under-Trump withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.

"But I think also there's a real value in us being able to convey to the world, number one, that America has spoken, and number two, that so many of the challenges we face are the same. We are all grappling with climate refugees being moved around. We are all grappling with the way that climate change is distorting and introducing volatility into our financial systems," he said.

Globally, the US remains among the most influential developed nations, with a renewed presence at COP31, likely to signal hope for some form of negotiations ahead.

Casten added that the economic case for clean energy could create opportunities for bipartisan support, particularly as countries grapple with energy security and affordability.

"The climate demands action, the economy demands action, the rest of the world is already making that transition that the United States is making, but not as quickly as we should. But we need to do that with an appropriate amount of empathy and with an appropriate amount of urgency to make sure that we make this transition in as fast a way as possible," he said.

Former Washington governor Jay Inslee said the results represented a strong rejection of Trump's energy policies, arguing that voters were concerned about rising energy costs and restricted access to cheaper alternatives such as wind and solar power.

"One of the beauties of this election is that every Democratic candidate who won ran first on the costs of the energy crisis he has imposed on us, and had a solution that simultaneously would help us reduce pollution associated with climate change. It was a twofer, and Americans responded," Inslee said.

He added that the result could allow the US to once again assume a leadership role in developing a clean energy economy, with Democrats pushing for greater access to EVs, heat pumps, solar and wind energy.

Gretchen Goldman, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the election largely reflected public concern over the Trump administration's attacks on clean energy and environmental safeguards, even as affordability remained a central concern for voters.

"The Trump administration has moved full speed ahead with repealing popular vehicle emission standards among the strongest policies we've had to curb fossil fuel pollution and save drivers money at the pump," she said.

Goldman also pointed to a Yale Program on Climate Change Communication poll which found that 75% of registered voters supported regulating carbon dioxide emissions. She said the administration's moves to undo carbon standards for power plants and repeal the scientific basis for federal climate policies ran counter to public support for science-backed environmental protections.