Return to Speeches Index

Conservation is Conservative

by Indiana REP Coordinator Dave Herrington
delivered at Notre Dame University's Earth Day event, South Bend, Indiana; April 26, 2001

Good evening and thank you for inviting me to participate in your Earth Week celebrations! My name is Dave Herrington and I am the Indiana Coordinator for Republicans for Environmental Protection.

It is with excitement, passion, and a little apprehension, that I am speaking to you tonight. Usually, when I stand up in front of a group of avowed environmentalists and mention that I am a Republican environmentalist, I have to be prepared for the incredulous looks and jokes that inevitably follow.

Let me begin by asking you a few questions: By show of hands, how many of you think that the term "Republican Environmentalist" is an oxymoron? Does anyone here tonight consider himself or herself a Republican? Anyone an environmentalist? My mission tonight is to convince you that conservation and conservatism are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, in my mind, and in the mind of many other modern Republicans, the two are completely compatible.

First of all, let me tell you what REP is not. We are not a "greenscammer" group, trying to make excuses for the Republican Party's conservation failings and protect the status quo. If any of you were coming here tonight expecting to see me try to defend the environmental policy decisions of the Bush Administration, or the Republican Party of recent history, I'm afraid you'll be disappointed.

REP America is founded on the tradition of the great Republican conservationists of the past like Teddy Roosevelt, Richard Nixon, and Barry Goldwater. REP also celebrates the excellent conservation record of today's Republican environmental leaders like Senators Jim Jeffords of Vermont and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, and Congressmen Sherwood Boehlert of New York and Christopher Shays of Connecticut (a REP member). We believe very strongly in protecting and conserving America's natural resources because those resources have inherent value in their natural state. We are proud Americans who recognize that wilderness is part of the American tradition, and believe that wild places will continue to strengthen our nation and our citizens. To quote directly from the "official" REP America philosophy:

We are Republicans. We share a deep concern for the environment. We know that a healthy environment and a sound economy are both essential to our nation's prosperity. We believe that by working together, we can preserve both our environment and our economy for current and future generations of Americans. We support and vote for Republican candidates who share these values and concerns.

But you and I both know that the Republican Party of the last 30 years has not necessarily shared these views. Indeed, Republican leadership seems to have made a conscious decision to oppose environmental protection in many cases, trying to convince the American public that being environmentally responsible is bad for business and bad for the economy. I'll say more about that in a few minutes, but first, lets talk more about conservative conservation, and explore this term "Republican Environmentalist"...

First of all, what makes someone an environmentalist? Speaking from my own personal experience, I have always been an environmentalist, although for the first 20 years of my life I didn't know there was a label for someone who loved the wild outdoors. I spent a large portion of my childhood in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Some of my earliest memories are hunting wild morels and wild strawberries in the north woods, catching snakes and toads, fishing with my Dad, and generally being a kid in the outdoors. I enjoy outdoor recreation such as backpacking, fishing, canoeing, kayaking, and skiing--all of which require open spaces, clean air, clean water and wild places.

Being outside and having fun in the woods and mountains is a part of my upbringing, and therefore a part of who I am. I brought so many wonderful outdoor experiences from my childhood into my adult life. Like many others, when I went to college I started forming my political views, engaging in debates and arguments, generally becoming politically active. (I was a founding member of the College Republicans group on my campus--a small, private school a little southeast of here, called Manchester College).

Anyway, through all my political activity, it never occurred to me that concern for the environment and wilderness protection was supposed to be incompatible with conservative ideals.

This leads me to my next question: what makes up a Republican? What are some of the "traditional" values typically aligned with the Republican Party?

To me, the Republican Party is supposed to represent fiscal conservatism, prudence, caution, family values, laissez faire economics/capitalism, freedom, rights of the individual, and a fundamental mistrust in the Federal Government's ability to run things. These are the issues that drew me to the party in the beginning, and these are the issues that keep me there today.

Let's look at some specific examples of how these principals should coexist with environmental policy:

Fiscal Conservatism

What Republican decided that subsidizing the timber industry-- an industry that destroys public forests at the expense of the American taxpayer--is fiscally conservative? The Forest Service's own figures reveal that the timber sales program on national forests operates at a net loss to taxpayers of well over $1 billion each year. Not only does the industry get a sweet deal on the trees themselves, but a substantial chunk of its overhead is paid for by the U.S. taxpayer. We pick up the tab for logging-road construction, timber-sale planning and administrative costs, replanting, and even restoration and cleanup. And for our money, we get clear-cut forests, devastated ecosystems, polluted stream, and massive, uncontrollable forest fires. What a bargain!

Free-Markets, Capitalism, Entrepreneurial Spirit:

We are being told that there is a supply problem with oil and natural gas in this country today with demand continuing to soar, leading to higher prices. According to the capitalism I understand, this should cause the market to open up, leading to the development of alternative, cheaper energy supplies (wind, solar, geothermal, etc.).

One would think that Republicans would be in favor of letting the market work itself out by creating more competition in the world of energy supply. However, in the Bush Administration's recent budget, funding to support the development of solar energy technology was seriously restricted. This would be OK if we also eliminated all favors to the oil industry. However, Bush also advocates making our public lands in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge available to the oil industry, creating billions of dollars of potential revenue for the oil industry. This is a far cry from encouraging free-market capitalism!

Furthermore, it is estimated that the recoverable oil in the Arctic Refuge would only support our nation's consumptive habits for 6 months. This would not make a dent in the price of oil in America. Our energy needs will never be met by domestic oil. We cannot drill our way to energy independence. The real solution to our energy problems obviously lies in conservation measures and renewable resource development such as wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass (a topic near and dear to the heart of our very own Senator Lugar, and Indiana farmers). Supporting oil drilling and exploration in our pristine wilderness areas shows that the Republican leadership in this country will go to any extreme to protect the status quo with the oil and automotive industries.

Freedom:

How does it support freedom to eliminate wild places--the only places left where we can truly feel free? The frontier wilderness of early America helped shape our American identity, and that identity is still with us today. Freedom is just a metaphor if you have nowhere to go to be free.

Family Values:

I am blessed with a wonderful, beautiful wife, and I am the proud father of a three-year-old son and two-year-old daughter (with one on the way). Some of the best ways to spend quality time with my family include taking a walk in the woods, playing in the snow, or sleeping out in a tent. Consider the value and success of the Sierra Club's Inner City Outings Program or any of the other outdoor leadership schools that focus on getting inner city children and high-risk teens off the streets and into the woods. We have effectively raised generations of American youth that are more comfortable on dangerous city streets or in a mall than they are in the local forest preserve.

Individual Rights:

America is founded on the rights of the individual. My rights as an individual stop when they begin to infringe on your rights--like your personal safety. It is illegal and immoral for me to harm you. I have no right.

So I ask you, what government, business, or individual has the right to pollute the air I breathe, the water I drink, or the land I live on? (Don't ask our new Interior Secretary Gale Norton this question - you might get to hear about the "Homestead right to pollute").

You can't have rights without responsibilities! We are beginning to understand that air, water, and land are resources we all share. We are all responsible to maintain these shared resources safely. We have no right to do otherwise.

Religion:

In the Christian tradition, we are commanded by God to take care of the earth. Since I am speaking at Notre Dame, I felt it may be appropriate to quote Pope John Paul II:

"It is necessary to stimulate and sustain the "ecological conversion" which over these last decades has made humanity more sensitive when facing the catastrophe toward which it was moving."

Two weeks ago, while participating in a lobbying event for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Washington D.C., I had the opportunity to speak to Bishop Mark MacDonald of the Episcopal Diocese of Alaska. Bishop MacDonald is the Bishop representing the native Gwich'in people of Alaska, and he said:

"A society that does not know how to assign value to land, except for how much money it can be exploited for, is spiritually bankrupt".

Mistrust of the Federal Government:

The Federal Government has a track record of screwing things up. Heavy-handed, bureaucratic approaches to our nation's problems will never be as effective or efficient as allowing the market to run freely, and correct itself.

However, business has proven that, if left to its own devices, it will not always act in the most environmentally sustainable way. As long as there is no cost associated with pollution, business has little incentive to prevent it. To balance this, President Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency, to wield the hammer of enforcement over the heads of businesses. This approach has still proven to be only partially effective.

But finally, in recent years, the EPA has realized that businesses respond best when you provide market based economic incentives--not just the threat of fines. They are starting to create market-based programs like air emission credit programs. Basically, if my factory spends a million dollars to install an air pollution control device, I can realize a payoff for that device by selling my excess credits on the market. This is a true "win-win", since I get the payoff, the PR, and the regulatory compliance, while the EPA meets their clean air goals. Republicans should support these types of programs.

Prudence:

When we lose a species to extinction, it is gone forever, and its role in our ecosystem will never be fully known or understood. Each species on Earth plays a vital role in the ecosystem. It now appears that we are in the 6th great extinction cycle in the history of the Earth--but this time it is due to human activity, loss of habitat. This is not prudent or conservative. And yet, conservatives continue to believe that the Endangered Species Act is a government plot to take away private property.

Good Business/Capitalism:

Environmental responsibility makes good business sense. Quite simply, no company wants their name on the front page of the local paper for dumping hazardous waste into the local river.

In my real life, I am an Environmental Manager for a multi-billion dollar, Fortune 500 company. I can assure you that it is not cost effective to pollute. Smart organizations realize that pollution is just another term for waste, and waste is just another term for inefficiency. In today's economy, you cannot operate in a wasteful and inefficient manner if you plan to survive.

Conversely, smart businesses are learning to capitalize on sound environmental policies (and even market them). Consider the EPA's WAVE program for educational institutions and office buildings. WAVE encourages commercial businesses and institutions to reduce water consumption while increasing efficiency, profitability and competitiveness. Adopting water-efficiency measures can help organizations reduce water and sewer expenses by as much as 30 percent, and reduce energy, chemical, and maintenance costs.

Political Survival:

I come from Generation X. We may be the most environmentally aware generation in history. Today's Republican Party has ceded the environmental battle to the Democrats. If the Party is to survive in the future, and resonate with my generation, it must embrace these issues, and take a leadership role.


Prudence, individual rights, caution, capitalism, smaller government intrusion in our lives--these are all the logical reasons to be a Conservative Conservationist. But we must also consider the emotional reasons. Has anyone in this room ever heard a wolf howl in the wild? I was lying out under the stars one night in Algonquin Provincial Park in Ontario when I first heard that otherworldly sound rising up out of the night, surrounding me. I can assure you that there is no sound on Earth that can equal it, and no other sound can evoke the same emotions in me.

Has anyone ever seen a grizzly bear, or even a black bear, up close and personal in the wild? Once while hiking in Glacier National Park, we were warned by a Park Ranger that there was a big grizzly in the area, and we should be careful. Those comments transformed our day hike in the mountains into an adrenaline-filled experience, wrought with anticipation and a little fear. We saw that bear that afternoon, and had to spend two hours on the trail waiting for the Rangers to clear it. The bear, not the humans, ruled the day.

Once, while in New Mexico for a weekend REP conference, I went out on an early morning hike. I hiked for about two hours to the top of the mesa, about 1500 vertical feet above the valley floor, completely lost in my thoughts. Suddenly, near the top, I noticed the footprint of a mountain lion in the middle of the sandy trail. All at once, I realized that I might not be the highest thing on the food chain in the general vicinity. This is a humbling realization for a human being, and one we don't get to feel very often. It changes the way you look at the world around you, and adds a dimension of life to your experience that you would not have otherwise had.

Now imagine how terribly diminished every wilderness experience would be if we lost the possibility to see something strange, powerful, predatory and beautiful. This, to me, is reason enough to protect wild places forever.

A couple weeks ago, I traveled to Washington D.C. to meet with the entire Indiana Congressional delegation, and ask them to oppose oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Senator Lugar has not yet stated his position on drillling in the Arctic Refuge, and he will be a key vote in the evenly divided Senate. I spoke at length with Senator Lugar's environmental aide, Jeff Burnam. Mr. Burnam told me that if I could prove to him that Republicans, business people and sportsmen were opposed to drilling in the Arctic, it would make a difference in how the Senator considered this issue. Republicans have the power and the opportunity to do the right thing right now. If you have agreed with my statements tonight, and you want to make a difference, join REP America, become involved in our Indiana group, and call Senator Lugar's office to let them know how you feel.

As I said earlier... I have been blessed with two children, with one more on the way in July. It is shameful to me that in the short time between my childhood and that of my children, wilderness could be so threatened, and wild places so diminished. I want everything for my children that I had, and more, and I am obligated to try to ensure they have every opportunity to experience nature the way it was meant to be experienced. No one can take away that right.

I'll close with the immortal words of Edward Abbey:

"A venturesome minority will always be eager to set off on their own, and no obstacles should be placed in their path; let them take risks, for Godsake, let them get lost, sunburnt, drowned, eaten by bears, buried alive under avalanches--that is the right and privilege of any free American".