Though this election brought us many uncertainties, one thing that we know for sure is that the electorate is turning greener. From political ads featuring state-of-the-art wind farms to more and more talk of hybrid and fully electric cars, green is on the move and there is nothing we can do to slow it down, even if we wanted to. So once and for all let us end this age-old, crotchety debate over whether global warming is happening, isn’t happening, or something else. Whether the threat is real or not is unimportant. The American people seem highly mobilized on this issue, and in politics perception is reality. It is time for us to get on board.
While Democrats seem to hold a monopoly over solving this actual or perceived problem, let us for a moment visit the reality of it. First, let’s remember that the green movement is an industry, just like any other. Contrary to popular myth, the green movement is no longer about a protestation of authority and reliving your nostalgic 1960’s free love childhood. Green lobbyists are just like any others. They are typical yuppie Washington insider, suit-and-tie-wearing, white collar trust fund kids. They cut deals, manipulate legislators, and at the end of the day drive their gas-guzzling SUV’s back to their upscale D.C. apartments. The truth is, there is money to be made here, and the PACs behind theses causes are no less self-interested than any of their counterparts in the faction business.
The Democratic Party has simply been effective in maintaining exclusive access to these “clean”, “uncorrupted” green dollars for more than a decade, and as well in molding public opinion to preserve the notion that this cause remains entirely symbiotic and free of the usual Washington tricks and dirt.
That being said, as Republicans we cannot change what the public perceives, true or not. What I believe we can do, however, is match the Democrats’ effort with our own, keeping with the traditions of fiscal responsibility, limited government, and fostering a free market economy.
Consider a different alternative to a larger, bulkier governmental bureaucracy. Accomplishing environmental goals through governmental regulation alone makes about as much sense as imposing rules upon consumers patronizing your business; they will simply go elsewhere. I think we have utilized the “stick” method for far too long in this country with far too few results. If you haven’t visited Title 42 of the U.S. Code lately, the environmental regulation sections are unmanageable, to say the least. It is no wonder that companies are fleeing the U.S. In a global economy, excessive regulation sends business overseas. Period. What we need are more aggressive tax incentives for businesses who desire to innovate and make their process cleaner and more efficient, instead of more regulations and more government. Who better to head this initiative than the Party who prides itself on creating a pro-business environment to inspire investment and create jobs?
I think we had better strike this while the iron is still hot, and capitalize on the momentum this movement has already gained with the Left. This would be a great rally cry—especially to America’s youth—and it would take at least some of the wind out of the unassailable Democrats on this issue.
3 comments:
Libertarians like me see very little difference between Democrats and Republicans anyway. Both major parties continue to increase the size of the government by selling regulatory favors to lobbyists and campaign contributors. Republicans chasing green dollars is inevitable. I'm thinking the Democrats and Republicans should just merge into one big party since they both have the same goals.
John,
Thank you for your comment. I truly admire your steadfastness to your libertarian beliefs. However, what I don't understand about your Party is a total lack of pragmatism. Certainly from your point of view, you see little difference between Democrats and Republicans (and I can't say that I blame you in recent years). But it is unimaginable to me that libertarians fail to understand that as long as the rules are winner-take-all (and therefore a two-party system) you will have little or no leverage to accomplish your agenda unless you use your influence in a productive way, i.e. influencing the platforms of the two major parties. And, although you fail to see the nuances between the major parties, Republicans are much more friendly to your ideas than the Democrat-Socialists, even with the confusion brought about by the neo-cons in the past decade or so. From a pragmatic point of view (only), I would commend Ron Paul for his understanding of the American political system. He understood exactly how to be enough of a pain in the ass that the RNC was forced to listen to his message. Over several election cycles, (unfortunately) I see Ron Paul having a significant influence in the way we do business in shaping our platform. This does however require compromise and "stomaching" the Republican brand, neither of which most Libertarians are willing to do. If this is the case, you will have to wait around at least a few decades until our two party system bucks one of the major parties, or until the rules change. When and if this happens, your party will also be forced to seek dollars in order to win, and this will likely have a significant impact in the way YOU do business as one of America's major parties, part of which includes compromise. (James Madison predicted this perfectly more than two hundred years ago.) It is really easy when you are the third party who shares none of the responsibility or accountability for making policy to simply criticize whatever ideas are offered. Being the "Nay Guy" is a fun position in that regard, but it accomplishes little. Sure, John, our ideas differ greatly, but no matter what the differences were, I would want to be as pragmatic as possible in accomplishing mine by whatever civil means are necessary within the rules. I assume you, and Libertarians in general, would want the same...?
When I hear people argue how impractical the Libertarian Party is, I get this mental image of an Iraqi in 1995 saying “unless you join the Ba'ath Party, you’ll never be successful”.
The truth is… things have reached the point where I would be embarrassed to be associated with either major party. The latest example in my mind is the total abdication of our representative democracy in allowing a bunch of nebulous “policy makers” to decide how to spend $850 billion of our money on the bailout. Paulsen has already said he’s going to ignore the guidelines that were given to him in the bill that authorized the bailout. What do our major-party representatives do about it? Nothing! Why? Because they know you will vote for them anyway.
I refuse to go along on that ride.
Post a Comment