As a Republican, I support clean air, clean soil and clean water. As a Christian, I believe mankind is called to serve as a caretaker of the environment. We must ask ourselves what role the government has to play in the protection of the environment and decide how we want to speak about the issue. Many Republicans view environmental issues as “lose/lose” and choose to ignore them all together. This is a grave error and the reason why nearly everyone to whom the environment is a priority votes Democrat.
We can win these people back to the Republican Party if, as a party, we demonstrate that we actually do care a great deal about the environment. The Democrats don’t make it easy on us. They can always out-green Republicans by offering new federal or state programs aimed at eliminating, banning, taxing, or regulating one thing or another. The reality is, however, Democrats really don’t care about the environment.
Climate change has become a terrifying religion for many people across the world. They treat environmentalism like a religion, totally disconnected from economy and human behavior. Their first thought is always force. We’ll force people to stop polluting. We’ll tax people who are polluting. We’ll even invent new pollutants.
Toby Mirman, writing for Forward, argues that the election in the United States will have a tremendous impact on the future of Israel’s survival (Forward). He believes that human beings determine the climate and that Donald Trump wants to ruin the climate for Israel. He believes that bureaucratic regulation is more powerful than the sun and more powerful than the earth. His words tremble as he imagines what a Trump presidency would mean for Israel.
Donald Trump has promised to rescind many of President Obama’s steps toward a sustainable future, including the Clean Power Plan, Climate Action Plan, and Waters of the U.S. Rule, as well as “cancel” the U.S.’ commitments to the Paris agreements within his first 100 days in office. Moreover, Trump has declared his intentions to eliminate entirely the Environmental Protection Agency. These actions would have catastrophic effects on our ability to combat climate change, not to mention put millions of Americans in immediate and grave danger of being poisoned by pollution currently controlled by government regulation.
You see, this is why Republicans don’t talk about the environment. Without being an environmental scientist, how can you possibly convince someone who believes that Donald Trump is going to poison America that he’s crazy? I am not an environmental scientist, so I’m not going to advocate for any new environmental policy. I do believe, however, that clean air, clean soil and clean water are a great place to start. Truly, who doesn’t want clean air, soil and water?
Environmental Policy should have two fundamental starting points. On the one hand, anyone who pollutes the property of another should be fiscally liable for doing so. As I understand it, this is already the case. Second, air and water are public goods. This means that there is some justification for government action. However, it doesn’t seem controversial to me to require polluters to pay the government to clean up their own mess. This should be done, however, on a strictly quantifiable level. Air quality would have to actually show hazardous levels of pollutants for humans before we begin taxing or penalizing firms. Water would have to actually show hazardous levels of pollutants to wildlife (and therefore humans) and those pollutants would have to be proven to come from a specific plant.
There is no reason for a large federal EPA. The States all have their own environmental agencies. The federal EPA should be more of an environmental court than a bureaucratic agency. It should solve disputes between the states when state environmental agencies have a disagreement; and issue general guidelines that all state agencies should follow.
Back to Mr. Mirman – he doesn’t care about the environment.
“If the U.S. takes a strong stance against climate change, Israel will benefit greatly from increased American investment in its environmental sector.”
He wants the United States to subsidize green energy companies in Israel. That’s all he really cares about. I think it is time for Republicans to begin talking about the environment, to establish consistent messaging based on science and experience, not on environmental mysticism or corporate welfare. We can take this issue back from the Democrats by pointing out over and over again, how they use “environmentalism” to enrich themselves and their corporate friends. Al Gore made a fortune promoting fraudulent energy companies; and he’s not alone.
21 comments
[…] Republicans need new messaging on environment […]
I am an environmental engineer with 30 years experience. Even decades ago, the environment was showing trends of getting cleaner as technology improved, though early environmental statutes and regulations achieved what looked like significant gains by taking care of “low hanging fruit.” Some of us remember form back in the 1970s that “global cooling” was going to be the crisis, and mankind could be blamed.
We have gotten to a point in which incremental improvements in the environment, particularly in the U.S., have been getting smaller and smaller. However, we have a large regulatory state, and there is probably a real need to look at the structure and see if it fits our modern environment and economy. I would add that based on personal experience, I would not trust an environmental modeler quite as far as I would throw one. Our experience with dire warning of global warming help reinforce my assessment.
Speaking of which, what also drives skepticism are those in politics and entertainment who demand an austere lifestyle of the public, but themselves live lives of ostentatious conspicuous consumption. An environmentalist reason to vote for Trump over Clinton is that, as a private citizen, Hillary Clinton will have more of an opportunity to demonstrate how she can actually live the lifestyle of one who takes things like global warming seriously. You know, she will, just the same way people like Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio do! LOL
Thank you, this is all absolutely true. It is important to point out, however, that as the environment gets cleaner, the cost-benefit of spending new dollars becomes less efficient. If I said, let’s spend $10 million to clean up a river because fish are dying. Everyone will support that. If I we say, let’s spend $1 million to remove some trash build up along an already cleaned up river, people might think, wouldn’t it be better to use volunteers?
“I think it is time for Republicans to begin talking about the environment, to establish consistent messaging based on science. . . ”
Never happen. Science relies on facts. You republicans live in a science-free, fact-free universe.
Your science relies on personal greed and on incentive based conclusions and fraud. Just saying.
The problem is that science is absolutely dependent on constant challenge. Once it “settled”, impossible by the way, it is no longer science. People like Gore and old Redneck talk about science but know nothing about its processes. Unfortunately, the EPA has succumbed to politics and has driven actual environmental and climate science into disrepute. Frankly, the EPA long ago completed its mission and is now just another power hungry bureaucracy that throws its weight around for no real purpose other than its own interests.
I upvoted the troll because I think he had a good point…
Touche
The troll from Sorosland speaks. How’s the monitoring coming to correct the record and spread Clinton’s manure? Loved the FBIs, Trumps, Right Wingers connection to Russian espionage… those are some humdinger facts that you have…
Conservation, yes. Waste not, want not.
Environmentalism (21st century Druidism), no. Trees are not more important than people.
Neither are fish that close down an entire community in California. The key is management w/common sense, and shutting down the EPA.
Common sense would solve so many problems in government. Republicans really need to commit themselves to that truth.
This will be much more difficult then you may think.. The democrats and democrat controlled government organizations have been telling so many lies about the environment. it will years to just get the truth out.
Shut the EPA down and terminate everyone in government that has been pushing the man-made global warming scam would be a good start. That alone would come close to balancing the federal budget.. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1e75bb09138324061d888a24633b23175ec2effc7e8358faabcca75a99e34dd7.png
Exactly. Conservation, yes. Mysticism, no.
I agree. The GOP needs to present a reasoned, logical alternative to the left’s crazy, anti-human cult of climate change.
Just not really sure how important it is right now. I know that the democrats, hollywood, and the media make a big deal about climate change. But polling shows that the voters aren’t overly concerned, its usually not in their top 10-15 issues.
The reason I feel like it’s important, is because it is important to Democrats and it is important to Millennials. Republicans tend to be older, which is not good for the party’s future in general. We need to win over Millennials by addressing issues they care about, even if they aren’t the highest priorities for us.
I am a conservative. And, essentially, I take steps to conserve and not abuse the environment. Unfortunately, we have environmental wackos so driven against anything they see as an abuse that they have become utterly unreasnable – thus destroying the message of hope. We can point out the ugliness of Gore but that is not positive. I say we keep it simple so that even we believe in what we say.
Outstanding point. I couldn’t agree more. Clean air, Clean soil and Clean water is simple. It’s basic. Property rights and industrial accountability are essential and, also, simple.
I read two blogs to keep up.
http://realclimatescience.com/
This is the second blog which everyone and I do mean everyone in the climate field reads.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/
http://www.climatedepot.com/