In a February Pew survey, Americans were asked to rank their priorities of 20 major issues for 2022 and climate change came in 14th. In the partisan divide the survey found only 11% of Republicans even thought it was a priority. (On the Democratic side it was 65%)

Former President Donald Trump still holds considerable sway within his party and he pulled the United States out of the Paris Accords and has repeatedly referred to global warming as a Chinese hoax designed to make US industry non-competitive.

Swimming against this tide is the American Conservation Coalition. Their mission statement includes, not just a commitment to the environment, but to capitalism. “Strong property rights, competitive markets, and trade, coupled with a culture of environmental stewardship, produce the best environmental outcomes.”

We recently sat down with the ACC’s president, Benji Backer, to talk about the future of environmental politics on the center-right.

Subscribe to In Trump's Shadow: The Battle for 2024 in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.

Published in: Environment, Podcasts, Politics

Now become a Ricochet member for only $5.00 a month! Join and see what you’ve been missing.

There are 8 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Ricochet Audio Network: Swimming against this tide is the American Conservation Coalition

    You can put “conservative” in the name, but that doesn’t make it conservative.

    What the hell is “center-right” supposed to mean anyway? What does it stand for?

    • #1
  2. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):
    What the hell is “center-right” supposed to mean anyway? What does it stand for?

    That’s a good question. 

    • #2
  3. I Walton Member
    I Walton
    @IWalton

    We know very little about the future on this issue, but we do know who pollutes more.  It’s not us, not by a long shot, so if the issue is serious, what we need to do is work with other countries to solve their issues and if they don’t deal with them do something about it. He says do it ourselves and it will lead the world toward solving these problem.  The world doesn’t work that way, unless what we do makes us stronger as well as cleaner and even then it doesn’t necessarily lead.      He  wants to use the US Federal government do help solve the domestic problems.  What the Federal government should do is  deal with other countries but only to force them to improve.  At the end of it all he sort of gets there, but he doesn’t understand that our Federal government is part of the problem and the more power we give it the worse it gets.  So the only thing he gets right is a tone but he misses the critical politics going on. 

    • #3
  4. namlliT noD Member
    namlliT noD
    @DonTillman

    At 20:20 he claims that, in Wisconsin, “we don’t even have a White Christmas any more”.

    @drewinwisconsin, and others in the neighborhood, ‘that true?

     

     

     

    • #4
  5. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    namlliT noD (View Comment):

    At 20:20 he claims that, in Wisconsin, “we don’t even have a White Christmas any more”.

    @ drewinwisconsin, and others in the neighborhood, ‘that true?

    LOL! No, of course not. Can I tell you about the record-shattering winter of 2019? (aka, the reason I needed shoulder surgery?)

    It’s true that last winter was a little light on snow, but coming after several years of heavy snowfall, my shoulder was happy for the break.

    But the climate change cult doesn’t really care about reality. Record high snowfalls and record low snowfalls all “prove” the same premise.

    • #5
  6. namlliT noD Member
    namlliT noD
    @DonTillman

    This discussion is a disappointment because they both missed what I think is the fundamental issue.

    Politics is chock full of cases of coming up with a vitally important cause, creating a set of government programs to address it, with lots of room for corruption and graft, and the programs end up making the problem worse.

    And this is no different.

    Arguing “climate change” doesn’t actually buy you anything.  

    Instead demand that they audit and dismantle the current programs that have been causing more harm than good.

    Like the car pool lanes that increase congestion, fuel consumption, and pollutants.

    Like the overzealous Environmental Protection Agency regulations that caused so much manufacturing to be moved off shore to places where there are no environmental regulations, releasing many times more pollutants, with a side effect of eliminating many jobs and leaving the nation less self reliant.

    • #6
  7. namlliT noD Member
    namlliT noD
    @DonTillman

    Around 16:30 he mentions rising sea levels in Louisiana.

    Louisiana’s problem is sinking due to collapsing aquifers, not rising sea levels.

     

     

    • #7
  8. Nohaaj Coolidge
    Nohaaj
    @Nohaaj

    The correct response is to not accept the premise of manmade climate change.  That is different than committing to being good stewards of the planet.  Don’t use PCB’S on the fence line to prevent weeds, check. Don’t frack, stupid. Quit nuclear,  really dumb. Subsidize windmills and solar to exclusion: asinine.

    • #8
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.