Young people on BOTH sides of the aisle want to see action on climate change. And Quillan Robinson believes that the will for action is a more powerful force than the disagreements we may have over policy. So, how does a conservative approach like the American Climate Contract differ from the progressive Green New Deal? And how do the principles of conservatism inform right-of-center climate solutions?
Quill is the Vice President of Government Affairs with the American Conservation Coalition, a nonprofit dedicated to empowering young conservatives to reengage in environmental conversations. Today, Quill joins Ross to explain how his involvement in the I-732 campaign in Washington shaped his thinking and shifted his politics. He introduces us to the conservative thinkers who inspire him, walking us through the best principles of the conservative intellectual tradition and how they apply to climate policy.
Quill goes on to discuss why oikophilia (love of place) is not exclusive to rural contexts and offer his take on Hamiltonian versus Jeffersonian economic models. Listen in for Quill’s insight on the three main approaches to climate policy at work in DC and learn what differentiates ACC’s American Climate Contract from the other federal climate policy solutions.
Podcast listeners can purchase Nori Carbon Removal Tonnes here! Thanks so much for your support.
Green Philosophy: How to Think Seriously About the Planet by Roger Scruton
Conservatism: An Invitation to the Great Tradition by Roger Scruton
Citizens’ Climate Lobby’s Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act & Congressional cosponsors of the bill
The Conservative Heart: How to Build a Fairer, Happier, and More Prosperous America by Arthur C. Brooks
More from the show
Ad-free episodes and other benefits come with a paid subscription.
Carbon Removal Newsroom, the news show that ran alongside this one, is over. Its episodes are still up, on the feed Climate Workers Anonymous now uses.
Carbon Removal Memes is still going.
The books that come up on this show are collected on my Bookshop shelf.
🎧 Apple Podcasts · Spotify · YouTube
Paid subscribers get this episode ad-free. The ads in the free feed are inserted by Spotify when you press play. They are not in the file I make.
Full Transcript
Ross Kenyon: Hey, thanks for listening to Reversing Climate Change. If you’re listening, you’re probably hip to what we’re doing at Noreen, building a marketplace for carbon removal. Right now, we have a limited supply of Noreen carbon removal tonnes available for purchase, each representing one metric ton of carbon dioxide pulled into Reversing Climate Change podcast alumnus Trey Hills Farm in Maryland. Since you’re listening here, I want to give you a chance to be one of the few able to participate. Go to nori. com slash reverse, R-E-V-E-R-S-E, and buy now to support regenerative agriculture, Nori’s carbon removal marketplace, and these podcasts.
Nori Nori carbon removal tonnes are $15 plus a 15% fee for Nori, bringing the total to $17. 25 per Nori carbon removal ton. Thank you so much for your support. Nori. com slash reverse right now. And the link is in the show notes too if you need it there. Hey, everyone. Welcome to Season 2 of Reversing Climate Change. We are doing that podcast thing now and launching a Patreon. You can find it at patreon. com slash noripodcasts. There are various tiers with different types of goodies available. Do you want to receive a special newsletter digest of what Norinauts are reading that week?
Be a part of a Nori book club? Get special access to Nori events? Go take a look at patreon. com slash noripodcasts for what we’re offering. And in that spirit of being lean in that startup kind of way that, you know, we like to do, this list of goodies is subject to change and we’d very much like your feedback. Is there something that you’d really like to see but it isn’t listed here? Honest feedback does a lot to help us shape what we offer to you. You can send an email to podcast.
nori. com or fill out our podcast survey anonymously in our newsletter which you can find at nori. com slash subscribe. And thank you so much for listening to another season of Reversing Climate Change. Hello and welcome to the Reversing Climate Change podcast. I’m Ross Kenyon. Today I have with me Quill Robinson, Vice President of Government Affairs at the American Conservation Coalition. Thanks for being here, Quill.
Quillan Robinson: Hi, Ross. Thanks for having me.
Ross Kenyon: Indeed, it was about time since we had Benji Backer on some time ago and new things are afoot at American Conservation Coalition. Always curious what’s happening with right of center organizations around climate change. You don’t get nearly as much attention as your political rivals. So I like to check in and see what’s happening. So thank you for indulging me.
Quillan Robinson: Yeah, absolutely. Happy to talk a little bit about what we’re doing and talk about we can move the climate conversation forward.
Ross Kenyon: Great. And we’re going to get into all of that and lots of details. And this outline is looking rich indeed. So happy to do so. But for listeners who maybe do not know who did not listen to that Benji Backer episode, but you can look in the show notes and get the link to that if you’d like to catch up. What is the American Conservation Coalition? And what is your story quill of becoming involved with them?
Quillan Robinson: Yeah, so ACC is a pretty young organization. We were founded about three years ago now, this summer, and essentially the idea that sparked the American Conservation Coalition was that, well, it was two parts. First, it was that conservatives... Folks on the right of center had sort of lost touch with their tradition of being environmentalists and conservationists. And so Benji, my friend, also a graduate of the University of Washington, like myself, had this idea to give young conservatives a voice on the environment. And so that was that was one part of it.
And then I’d say the other part of it is we all noticed that there is really an echo chamber in the environmental conversation. And I think this is best represented in climate change. You know, the left Democrats are the party of climate action, the party of science. The story of ACC is giving young conservatives a voice on the environment, but also introducing a different perspective into environmental conversations and hopefully through good dialogues and conversation and having that competition of ideas, seeing better policy outcomes in terms of These environmental challenges that we’ve faced.
And so about three years later now, we’re on over 200 campuses across the country. We put on events for students. We fly students to D. C. In my role as vice president of government affairs, I do all of our Hill relationships. And so, yeah, in three short years, we’ve grown very quickly and are really hoping to sort of change up the narrative on climate change, about who cares about climate change. And then also talk about what are some more pragmatic, effective policy solutions that Democrats and Republicans can come together on And I understand that you had worked with Carbon Wah, Carbon Washington, as the non-cool insiders say.
Ross Kenyon: We’ve had Greg Rock and Kyle Murphy on before. We’ve had a number of episodes about the carbon tax saga of Washington. And I know you had a part in that too, right?
Quillan Robinson: Yeah, absolutely. That was my entree into climate politics. So back in 2016, I was a sophomore at the University of Washington, and I’d grown up in the Pacific Northwest, total crunchy granola, awesome parents, you know, spent a lot of time hiking in the Cascades and going to farmers markets and all that. And so the environment was always something that was important to me. And when I was in college, when I was a sophomore at UW, I saw that in 2016, there was this opportunity for Washington State, my home state, to really lead the country on this issue that I care a lot about, climate change.
And so I got involved with the I-73. And so I got involved in the spring of 2016. Man, a good eight months knocking on doors and talking to people about why a revenue neutral carbon tax was the right way to go on this issue of climate change and I think I went into it with One with a particular political orientation. I definitely would have considered myself a Democrat. I grew up in a progressive family and I emerged on the other end really with all of that in question. And that was because I saw that the biggest challenge and the reason that initiative lost, it wasn’t because of the big bad oil companies or Republicans or big business.
It was because there was I mean, the best way to put it is that the left cannibalized itself. And so a lot of these very prominent figures and politicians who have made their careers out of claiming to be leaders on climate change actually kind of kneecapped the campaign and decided that because it wasn’t their solution to climate change, that it wasn’t going that it wasn’t. And so that was a disappointing experience. It was a frustrating experience, but it also caused me to completely reassess who are the real agents for change when it comes to this issue of climate and what are the policies that are going to be most effective in terms of addressing it.
And so that’s, you know, that experience really shaped my vision of climate politics. And it also ultimately led me to get involved with the American Conservation Coalition that had a different approach to this issue of climate.
Ross Kenyon: What book or what thinker brought you into conservative thought?
Quillan Robinson: The first person who really inspired me was this guy named Arthur Brooks, who was the former head of the American Enterprise Institute. He writes a lot about compassionate conservatism and the power of free markets and entrepreneurship and that sort of thing. That I was the first thinker who really appealed to me as I was feeling a bit ideologically homeless post-2016. But then in terms of environmentalism and conservation, there’s this philosopher named Roger Scruton, who actually recently passed away, who’s written a lot of books, but one in particular called Green Philosophy.
And he talks about how conservatism, And conservation actually share this common root. And that a lot of these conservative values and conservative outlook on what effective policies are actually most conducive to success in terms of protecting the environment. And so that was something that really inspired me because I saw something with that 2016 campaign about how It seems like for some people on the left that climate change wasn’t about climate change. It was about advancing a progressive agenda. And that was frustrating to see because, you know, I’m someone I think a lot of people were involved in the climate action movement.
Want to see action on climate change. Right. And they may agree or disagree on other policy issues, but they understand that climate action means climate action and that we should be pursuing policies that do that. And so Roger Scruton is someone who’s really inspired me and is someone who I think has offered a new vision for a conservative movement that can be grounded in environmentally friendly principles.
Ross Kenyon: We had a pre-recording call last week, and you had mentioned Roger Scruton. And I’d heard of him before, but I hadn’t read anything. So over the last week, I listened to conservatism, an invitation to the great tradition, and then also this green philosophy. I think we’ve all seen this. What do you think is the best of the conservative intellectual tradition? What should we be pointing to?
Quillan Robinson: Yeah, definitely. I mean, I would say, first of all, and I think folks on both sides of the aisle feel this right now, but the Democratic Party and the Republican Party of today are very different from what they were 10 years ago, even five years ago. And I think for a lot of folks who would have traditionally called themselves liberals or conservatives, they kind of feel like the rug’s been pulled out from underneath them. So I’d preface it with that. We’re in a populist moment right now. So The strongest movement, the strongest voices on the left and right are not necessarily representative of the traditions that their parties typically are associated with.
And so in terms of conservatism, what conservatism means to me, I mean, there’s a couple of core concepts. I think that one of them is that The folks in the past had some good ideas and that rather than scrapping everything and marching towards a better society with reckless abandon and whatever is determined by who’s in power and just pushing, pushing, pushing and erasing the past and not thinking about what we have done well in the past, that’s one of the things that I think is core to the conservative movement. A respect for heritage, where we come from, and actually understanding that our ancestors probably had some good ideas.
Another thing is I think that markets, the idea that markets are an effective way to structure an economic system and actually lead to more prosperity, more happiness, and more opportunity for individuals and ultimately lead to a That’s supposed to be ironic, though, right? I mean, the hands are painted red. I heard it was put up as sort of like a Cold War anti-communist thing. Maybe that’s not even true. Is it actually sincere? I mean, I don’t know. I mean, my experience going back to Seattle these days, thinking about some of the folks on city council and the rhetoric there, sometimes it doesn’t seem as ironic as maybe as it was intended initially.
But I guess, you know, this goes to say that what has made Seattle a booming place was not... Lenin, it was Microsoft and Amazon and Boeing and the innovative ideas and this creative spirit that is best expressed and most easily expressed through a capitalist free market system. And so that’s something that’s also core to this conservative idea to me, too, is that human flourishing comes through opportunity and competition and free markets. I think that being grounded and understanding that we should learn from the past and incrementally improve rather than just proceed with reckless abandon is a really important thing.
I think the idea of markets and competition is a really important thing. Then another thing I’d say is subsidiarity. For example, I think that people in Seattle know what Seattle needs better than somebody in Washington, D. C. , And you see this in all sorts of different cases, just like, you know, if you’re talking about climate change, the power needs, the energy needs of Washington state are very different from Texas. And so being able to decentralize government power and decision making is advantageous. It allows states to operate as laboratories of democracy.
And I think that’s another thing that’s really core to conservatism and what an effective governance structure is.
Ross Kenyon: Great. I think that’s a pretty good start. One thing I might add on to it too, and that Roger Scruton makes a very strong point to single out, is that there are values that are also beyond marketplace values and putting prices on things. And I think where this really breaks down is a sort of issue of scale. So conservatism and progressivism, as I’ve experienced them during my lifetime, have both been big. They’ve been focused on large national institutions. So when I think of conservatism, I think of post 9-11, I think of neoconservativism, nation building, stuff that if you read Roger Scruton, who’s very much a small scale thinker, like there’s a lot he has in common with someone like Wednesday.
I could see a much smaller society in that we’ve gone too big. Maybe this is what you’re talking about with subsidiarity. It’s an issue of scale, but it isn’t just about putting everything into the market. That isn’t the conservative vision. He talks about beauty and his background is in aesthetics too. So I guess where should we put prices on things? Where should they enter the market? And where do you think we should have things that are left outside of that, that we should have reverence for, for their own sake, which as a part of the conservative tradition, I’m not sure we see much of that besides stuff that is often bemoaned by those who don’t share those beliefs, which is stuff about Well, yeah, I mean, that’s a really good point and something that I agree with Scruton generally on.
Quillan Robinson: I think that sort of in the early 2000s moments, conservatism took on this zombie capitalism where the market and business was sort of considered an end unto itself. The market is a tool. It’s the best way to organize an economy. It’s not an end to itself. And so I think that’s, you know, just like, and I think this is something Scruton touches on is that, you know, there are certain things, there are certain things that we would not want to be commoditized. And there are certain things that we don’t want to just leave up to market forces.
I mean, like strip mining the Grand Canyon, that is appalling, you know, and that should be something that’s appalling, you know, just like And we don’t want to see mining on Mount Rainier. Like that’s something that is wrong. Some things are sacred, they’re precious, and we want to conserve them. And so it’s delineating between, you know, what is in the economic sphere and what is something that can be You know, organized through a market economic system, but also understanding that there are some things that are sacred. And that’s I mean, that’s another thing is you’ll see that.
I mean, if you go back and you look at the Soviet Union and you look at communist societies, there is this really sort of disturbing materialism where nothing was sacred. There was nothing sacred. It was all it was all under the state. And reaching quotas in terms of economic production was was the goal. There was not the sense of protecting the sacred, whether that was in the form of the society or resources or places. And I think that’s something that’s really important to the conservative tradition, too, is that there are limits to the market and not everything that should be commoditized.
One thing I will say, though, is that, you know, and there’s been a lot of. And this kind of goes into a different environmental direction, but there’s different ways to conserve things. And if we’re looking at public lands, for instance, there are some cases where having a private landowner will actually lead to better environmental outcomes and better conservation. I think that it’s actually, you know, sometimes the best way to do it. Another thing that Scruton talks about is that private property rights are vital. My little plot of land, I have a much stronger case to take care of that than something that’s in the public commons.
That’s one of the things that I think is interesting in terms of climate change is this idea of the tragedy of the commons. Who is responsible for this pollution, for these greenhouse gases that are contributing to climate change? Looking at this through a market perspective is an important way to frame it and to understand it.
Ross Kenyon: I’m sure for some people listening, that might sound like an idea that you would just let a rapacious, greedy person own a piece of land. Why wouldn’t they just try to get as much out of it and destroy everything that they weren’t able to put into their pocket immediately?
Quillan Robinson: Well, I’ll give you an example. For pieces of land all over the United States. And I think they’re very successful models and often having that more adaptable system and with more of a direct feedback loop and is actually very much advantageous. And so there’s lots of examples of that where trusts and organizations who have a base of knowledge in terms of conservation and have a direct interest to conserve that land in a healthy way actually do a very good job of doing that. And I think that’s, you know, it’s kind of a So there’s a bit of a misunderstanding around that when it comes to public land, because some public land is national parks, is Mount Rainier National Park, is North Cascades National Park.
But if you look at a lot of Western states, for example, Nevada, you have close to 90 percent of all of the land controlled by the federal government, often held by the Bureau of Land Management. Obviously, in some cases, like a national park, you would like to have direct oversight of that and have it taken care of in that way. But do you really think that folks in Washington, D. C. can responsibly manage close to 90 percent of Nevada? Perhaps not. And are there other ways that you can structure that and have people take care of that would actually be more responsive to the needs of local folks and actually implement better conservation practices?
I would say yes.
Ross Kenyon: All right. I’m almost done unpacking. By the way, I’ve said conservatism. That’s how I’ve always known that word. Should I be saying conservatism?
Quillan Robinson: I’d say conservatism. I don’t know. Conservatism. No, I’m going to go with conservatism.
Ross Kenyon: Conservatism is too many syllables.
Quillan Robinson: I don’t know about that.
Ross Kenyon: That’s how I’ve always known it. And maybe I am revealing what a novice I am. Okay. One question I have, because subsidiarity and the issue of scale and being human scale and about not having everything done at this top level, far from actually where it will be put into practice, policy levers to pull instead relying on people who I think that’s a good thing that we should lean into.
That seems to be such a huge focus of Scrutins. Thank you so much. What do you do when everyone around the world is just living in cities? Is it even possible to go back and capture some of these original insights from conservatism?
Quillan Robinson: Yeah, I mean, as much as I’d love to live in a sort of Jeffersonian shire, I mean, that would be wonderful. Of course, that’s not going to be the situation. A majority of people, more and more people are living in the cities. But I think this, you know, what’s going on with COVID right now is actually getting a lot of people to sort of reconsider that and urbanization and that sort of thing. But I think that Scruton’s point around and what he calls oikophilia, love of place, love of home, is it does not only apply to folks who have ranches out in eastern Washington or, you know, live in the Shire.
I grew up in the city. I grew up in northeast Seattle. I have a strong emotional attachment to the Pacific Northwest, you know, going to Mount Rainier, fishing in the Cascades, backpacking in North Cascades National Park with my dad. I mean, I grew up in the city and I think that even for folks who grow up in an urban, who come from an urban context, there’s still a sense of place. And that’s what oikophilia and love of place is. It’s not exclusive to folks in a rural or agrarian context. And why that’s important is that we as humans have, you know, it’s where our family is, it’s where our community is, it’s where our friends are, and we have a strong incentive and desire to protect that, to conserve that.
I think that’s why it’s so relevant when it comes to environmentalism is we want to protect what’s close to us and we have a strong interest in doing that. I think that’s where the strong American tradition of little platoons, of what de Tocqueville described in terms of the civic tradition in America of people coming together around common interests. I think that’s why it’s so powerful in the environmental context, whether you’re in an agrarian community or an urban community. Think about urban vegetable gardens in Seattle or community parks and that sort of thing.
I think that, I’m not claiming that those sort of interest groups are going to fix an issue like climate change, but I think developing that ethic and also helping people understand that’s where environmentalism starts Is really important because I think that one of the dynamics that sort of dominated and characterized the climate change conversation is that you have to get a president Bernie Sanders in order to solve climate change or to you need to get a certain person in office to address a particular environmental issue. I think it starts at the local level.
I think there’s all sorts of tertiary benefits of people actually understanding environmentalism in a personal way and sustainability in a personal way. And it stems from there. And the ethic and the sense of responsibility that comes from that is what will lead to a more sustainable society, not a five-year plan developed by some folks in a think tank. It’s going to come from a stronger ethic of sustainability in our society starting on a local level.
Ross Kenyon: All right, Quill. Well, I’m going to fire one across your bow. Are you ready for this?
Quillan Robinson: I’m ready.
Ross Kenyon: I’m pretty sure I got this originally from The Unsettling of America by Wendell Berry, but you can see it written out in the Port William novels and all over the place. But there’s this idea that the talented of rural environments or of these specific places, they basically all leave home. They go to the big cities and they start over. And for as much oikophilia as you are professing to hold yourself, you left your home. Why aren’t you doing this from northeast Seattle? Why go to D. C. and try to do this?
How much homesickness do you feel when it’s posed in such a way?
Quillan Robinson: Yeah, you caught me. I ran away from Seattle and I’m here in D. C. And my interest in the environment and my desire to make a difference on climate change comes from my experience of growing up in Seattle and really seeing that 2016 election play out around the carbon tax. And so I see a really incredible opportunity here to make sure that doesn’t become the defining narrative of climate change. Climate Change nationally and internationally. And so, you know, I have an opportunity to make a difference here. But my, you know, my interest in the environment and my love of the environment comes from, you know, growing up between Puget Sound and the Cascades.
And so that’s something that I definitely bring with me. I also think that in terms of what’s going on with this terrible health crisis that we’re going through right now, I think some people will reconsider that too. And I mean, you just look at the difficulties that some urban places are experiencing right now, and I’m not prophesying that everybody is this trend of moving from You know, rural areas of the city is going to stop, but perhaps people will reconsider that, but also think about what a more sustainable lifestyle looks like and what are the different opportunities, you know, in terms of living sustainably and what, particularly with remote working too.
Oh, my gosh. I mean, I think that there are so many opportunities there as well, and people are going to be much less constrained to living in downtown Manhattan. And so perhaps we will see a change on that. Perhaps not. But nevertheless, I think that this sense of place is important and ownership and love of place, whether I’m in Seattle or I’m in D. C. , and that being the case for lots of young people, is going to continue to be important.
Ross Kenyon: And one thing I like talking to conservatives about too is because they’re the only people that I can dig into this with in serious scholarly regard. Just about like the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalists and talking about Hamilton being thinking that manufacturing was the future of the country. And that we’re all going to urbanize. And then Jefferson saying, actually, for Republican society to maintain its virtue, we need to get it from the soil. We need to be farmers. We need to be yeomen out on the land working at self-owners. And this conflict goes right to the heart of the country.
And basically, only conservatives talk like that. Do you ever hear anyone else who wants to do that with you?
Quillan Robinson: I think for me, though, and I definitely probably tend more on the Hamiltonian side of things, but I think at the same time, the most important takeaway from that is that we’re not the sort of arc of history narrative that’s so ingrained in many progressive talking points. Well, I reject that. I don’t think that there’s a certain path towards justice that we need to forge on towards that will lead to a utopianism. I think that having a diverse society with people who have different interests and different ways to live is a strength and that through a democratic society politically and that through a capitalist society economically and with strong legal protections for all Americans, we can have a pluralistic society that is good to live in for many different types of people, whether they’re a Jeffersonian or a Hamiltonian.
Ross Kenyon: Yeah, this question pops up everywhere. I think about the 14th Amendment and equal protection. And clearly you want subsidiarity. You want people to have laboratories of democracy trying out new and different ways of living together. You have the art of association from de Tocqueville that you want to have. If you’re American and you don’t see it, it’s because you swim in it every day and you don’t realize just how unusual some of our institutions are, particularly our affinity for creating intermediate institutions, as another great conservative Robert Nisbet liked to call them, between the state and the family.
There are so many... Go drive down any street and you’ll see Elks Lodges and the Eagles and Odd Fellows. And there’s so many things like that are very uniquely American and that I think are really important and overlooked. And I don’t know. I don’t know if I’m just rambling at this point, Quill, but I like stuff like that. Sorry, it’s kind of stupid insight, but yeah.
Quillan Robinson: No, I hear you. And I think that’s actually one of the important things to... To emphasize and to remember is that, you know, we’re not we don’t want to live in a society where every problem is going to be solved by the federal government and that those and even at us even beyond the government itself, those intermediary institutions are vital in. I think that’s such a cool thing that’s going on. And this voluntary association that has a certain vision for responding to climate change has made a massive impact in terms of politics.
And so I think that’s a sign of a healthy society. Obviously, at ACC, we’re trying to do something similar in terms of rallying people around climate action, around responsible, pragmatic environmental policy. But I think that’s I mean, that’s the sign of a healthy society is to have robust civil institutions like that. I think one of the things that I hear a lot is that, you know, why aren’t politicians, you know, just responding to this immediately? Why aren’t they just fixing the problem? This sort of This fractious churn that happens in politics, that happens outside the political context that then shapes politics, is very much part of the system and why we have this resilient constitutional system and body politic in the United States.
And so I think that as much as I hear people my age saying the system’s screwed, I think it’s working.
Ross Kenyon: It feels tenuous to me too. It seems like a very difficult country to govern, in some ways too big, tries to do too much. I don’t know. I think we could probably do for increased subsidiarity or more decentralization, but maybe I’m too close to it. Maybe it’s better than it appears from where I’m sitting. Quill, we got to talk about the main reason you’re here. I obviously like to talk about this stuff and we could all day long. In fact, the whole episode could just be about conservative philosophy. But apparently you’re actually working on something and have a new initiative that we should dig into.
Why don’t you tell us about it?
Quillan Robinson: Yeah. I mean, I suppose we could go all afternoon about the philosophy, but we can talk about how we’re applying it to. Yeah. So the American climate contract. So I’ll give you a little bit of background on it and then tell you what we’re doing with it now. So as I As I said, the American Conservation Coalition came out of this idea that young folks on the right of center didn’t really have a voice in the environmental conversation and that the echo chamber within the environmental conversation was not necessarily producing good policy outcomes because there wasn’t that competition of ideas.
And in no place is that more apparent than climate change. I think whether you’re a democratic socialist or a conservative or whoever you are, if you’re someone who cares about climate change, not enough is being done. So last summer, a number of members of Congress approached us and also hearing from our own membership and talking to different policy organizations and our students on all different campuses, sort of in the wake of the Green New Deal. We had people on both sides of the political aisle coming to us and saying, wow, we really need a pragmatic approach to climate change because this is not going to do it.
Over the last about nine months, we’ve been drafting this plan that we want to be the platform for anyone who wants to address climate change in a pragmatic, effective way that will bring people together rather than driving them apart. And that’s really what we’re trying to do with the American Climate Contract. And so essentially what it is, is a two page document that says climate change is happening. We need to do something about it. Environmental sustainability and economic prosperity are inextricably linked. And we need to enact policies that will benefit both for the good of Americans and for the good of the environment, the good of the world.
And then we identify four key pillars that are sort of policy areas that we think that if we address, we’ll see major progress on this issue of climate change. And so those four pillars are energy innovation, 21st century infrastructure, natural solutions and global engagement. And just a couple of things that we saw as not being addressed by the Green New Deal and a lot of other plans that were out there. I mean, the first one is that, and a lot of people don’t know this, and I bring it up on college campuses, is that the U.
S. represents less than 15 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. A lot of people think that we are the biggest and the baddest, and it’s completely on us to solve climate change. Now, even if you want to make the moral case for that, it’s not practical. And as folks who are grounded in the science and want to focus on addressing climate change, we understand that As 15% of global greenhouse gas emissions, if we want to actually address this issue of global climate change, we’re going to have to figure out some ways to lower greenhouse gas emissions globally.
And of course, there is the precedent of the Paris Accord, but essentially the plan there was get China and India Be it a sign on the dotted line and hope for the best. But as we’re witnessing right now, many of these countries are not necessarily good actors, and particularly in countries that are not free societies, the government’s interest is to stay in power, and they’re not going to do things that are going to endanger that. And so what we talk about in the American Climate Contract is really about unleashing the power of American innovation.
And what does that mean? That means better solar panels. That means better wind turbines. That means the hydropower dams in eastern Washington. That means modular nuclear reactors and battery storage to unlock the power of renewable energy. And that we can sell those technologies around the world so that it will be in the interest of these other countries to buy that technology. And so it’ll be in their interest to lower greenhouse gas emissions. And then we also talk about how modernizing our infrastructure is going to be a very important part of this too.
And there’s all sorts of ways that we can make it so people can choose renewable energy or green energy and opt in if they want to, sort of like buying a more sustainable product because you have the choice to do it. That’s something that we could do in our energy grid and it’s something that we should do. And then on natural solutions, maybe some people have heard of carbon capture, this really cool technology where we can Suck carbon out of the atmosphere. And that’s awesome. But one of the best tools that we have in order to lower atmospheric carbon are plants.
Trees are the original carbon capture machines. And so it’s not just about reducing emissions. It’s also about expanding ecosystems. Like forests and wetland ecosystems and blue carbon sort of coastal ecosystems to be able to absorb more of that carbon that’s in the atmosphere. And obviously that has many benefits in terms of making a more beautiful and healthy environment as well. So that’s another thing that we really push for. And then the final the final piece of that is global engagement. And rather than coming at this from a perspective of, you know, climate change is a problem, hold hands and sing Kumbaya.
Let’s focus on what will be in developing and mid-level developed countries interests that will also I think we’re seeing with this COVID crisis that the world is not all rainbows and unicorns and that countries will, in times of crisis, facing crises, will recede to their own self-interest. And that’s something that we need to understand. And if we are to address climate change for the global problem that it is, we’re going to need to do things that recognize that and work within that context. So that’s kind of the overview of the American climate contract.
And it’s as I said, it’s this two page document. And we have everybody from the National Wildlife Federation. To the Young Republican National Federation, to think tanks like the Bipartisan Policy Center and the R Street Institute here in D. C. , and dozens of college Republican chairs across the United States on board with this. And so what’s really unique about it is that, I mean, it’s bringing conservatives to the table on climate change in a way that they’ve never been before, but it’s also connecting this grassroots activism with policy expertise.
Because that’s something that did not happen with the Green New Deal. It was all grassroots activism and energy. And that was awesome. But it was not grounded in policies that would work. And so that’s that’s what we’re trying to do with the American climate contract. And we built a really unique coalition around it. And it’s something that we’re going to continue to build up this coalition and then take it to Congress. And in the next couple of months, we’re going to be asking members of Congress to sign on to this.
We want climate change, the story of climate change being a red team, blue team issue to be in the past. And we want to move it to the place where who has the better ideas to lower greenhouse gas emissions and build a more sustainable economy.
Ross Kenyon: Great. That is good to know. Thank you for all that, Quill. I want to zoom out a tiny bit just to give people a sense of what’s happening in D. C. because I know there’s a fee and dividend approach that Citizens Climate Lobby has been trying to make a pass on the Hill. And then you also have the Green New Deal. And then now you have the American Climate Contract. So are these broadly the three approaches that are passing through? Are there other things people should be keeping their eyes on too?
Quillan Robinson: You know, I think that those are probably the three most visible approaches to climate change that are being talked about right now. But I want to emphasize the difference between the American climate contract and the carbon fee and dividend and the Green New Deal. The Green New Deal is something that has very strong progressive support and a lot of grassroots activism behind it. But in terms of Something that would catalyze legislation being passed, it’s a non-starter. Whether you think it’s the right policy or not, it’s a non-starter because it is a very far left progressive approach to climate change.
You’re not going to bring people from across the aisle together to support it. The carbon fee and dividend, as we talked about before, my first campaign was a carbon tax. But one of the things I learned from that is you got to have people to support a policy. It doesn’t matter how good your policy is. You have to have people to support it. And the reality is, is that there’s a handful of members of Congress who support the carbon fee and dividend. And the other thing is, as a policy, it would only address the United States greenhouse gas emissions.
What’s different about the American climate contract is we’re calling for all sorts of different policies that already exist, like expanding battery storage, creating advanced nuclear, streamlining regulations so that solar and wind plants can be deployed quicker. Those are things that And that’s the difference between the American climate contract and those other two proposals.
Ross Kenyon: There is a focus on passing this stuff at the federal level. Do you feel that conservatives are forced to pass policy at this top level? In your dream scenario, would this be every state had its own climate approach? Or do you think this is a case with the climate that is so big that we need approaches that are coming from the federal government and maybe even above that at the UN or somewhere else?
Quillan Robinson: Yeah, I mean, I would say that, I mean, climate change is unique in its global scale, right? There’s a lot of other problems that are more easily addressed on a local level. And so climate change is inherently a global issue. And there are some elements of climate change and the policies that we use to respond to it, you know, like trade, like international trade agreements that are naturally going to come from the federal government. But that doesn’t mean that it’s the only place for the response to come from. And I think that, you know, even Looking at what some states have done well in terms of the response to climate change could be replicated on the federal level.
And I think that this idea of laboratories of democracy is something that’s an incredibly valuable tool in our tool belt to address this issue. And the best example that comes to mind is that Texas has a deregulated energy market. It has a very pro-business regulatory scheme. And you’ve seen clean energy just grow exponentially in that state. And then on the other hand, in Washington State, you have people calling for the dams to be torn down. That’s a whole other case. And then you have Governor Inslee setting these targets and then not hitting them in terms of renewable energy.
But if you look at Texas’s scheme and how they go about electricity and how they have set up their business environment, I think it’s a great model to emulate.
Ross Kenyon: Okay. Quill, I ask this question sometimes. I didn’t prime you on it. I sometimes like it to be a surprise. Who’s the smartest person who disagrees with you?
Quillan Robinson: You know, one person, someone who I just respect a lot in this movement, who’s in the youth climate movement, is Greta Thunberg. And I wouldn’t even say that We disagree, but I got to meet Greta this fall when my boss, Benji Backer, testified with her in front of Congress and with two other young climate activists. And this is something that’s really, really important to me. Jamie Margolin was one of the other. Jamie Margolin and Vic Barrett were the two other activists, and they were all under the age of 22. These four young people testifying in front of Congress.
And I think... Jamie would consider herself pretty far left. I think Vic as well. And then obviously Greta comes from a European context and all of that. But you had four young people right there who were saying, accept the science and take action on climate change. And I find that so inspiring. And I have a lot of respect for Vic and Jamie and Greta. And I’m sure there are many different policies that we would disagree on. And that’s something that is very much present in the youth climate movement. But I think that the key message is that young people in particular want to see action on climate change.
And that’s something that’s incredibly inspiring to me. And I think that’s a more powerful force than the disagreements we have over something like the Green New Deal and the American climate contract is that will for action.
Ross Kenyon: Yeah, that’s a lovely answer. And I think that’s a good way to think of it, too. It’s refreshing. I think we’re so used to everyone yelling at each other online. I just... The number of caveats you had in there, pretty minor. It was refreshing. So I’m happy to hear that quill.
Quillan Robinson: Yeah. I mean, just the other thing I’d say there is like I mentioned Arthur Brooks at the beginning, and he’s another conservative who grew up in Seattle. And one of the things that he always says is it’s pretty hard to hate Democrats when your parents are Democrats. And you can obviously flip that around. And I think that’s a really important thing is that these are policy disagreements. And then even with more social issues and that sort of thing, There’s a lot more common ground than I think a lot of people see.
And so I just hope that, you know, on this issue of climate change, we can do a better job of coming together and sort of establishing why we care about this issue and then understanding that having a healthy, productive debate in good faith over what the best policies to address it, that’s going to be the focus rather than seeing ourselves as diametrically opposed and as enemies.
Ross Kenyon: Very nice sentiment. Quill, would you recommend a particular book? I always am trying to get people to read books and thinkers within the conservative tradition, mostly because I feel its influence is less and less visible. And I think there’s a lot of interesting stuff in there. And I generally think everyone should read everything and at least have a cursory familiarity with different schools of thought. What do you think is the best way in if someone’s never read a serious work of conservative thought to get into it?
Quillan Robinson: Well, I think if you’re interested in the environmental sphere, obviously Roger Scruton’s Green Philosophy is fantastic. Another one I’d recommend is The Conservative Heart by Arthur Brooks. And, you know, that’s written in a much more modern sense. And he talks about meeting with the Dalai It’s not so much that they just, you know, it’s not Mars and Venus. It’s that people look at things differently and they have different things that are important to them. And so I think that’s also a really important book to understand why that may be and help you sort of disarm and scale back your vitriol a little bit and understand where other people are coming from.
Ross Kenyon: Yeah, it’s almost certainly the most referenced book on the podcast. So I think listeners, if you haven’t already, what is stopping you? You should definitely check that one out.
Quillan Robinson: For the 16th time, read it.
Ross Kenyon: Yeah, that and I’ve read some Arthur Brooks too, but it has been a while. I should revisit. I know he does a lot of happiness research these days. Thank you, Quill. And if someone wanted to keep up with ACC and the American Climate Contract, what’s the best way for them to do so? And you personally.
Quillan Robinson: ACC. ECO. We’re online. We have a great website. We’re also on social media and Twitter, Instagram, all of that. And so if you just look up the American Conservation Coalition, you’ll find all of that. I’m on Twitter at Quill Robinson. I don’t know if I’d recommend that, but you’re welcome to follow me if you’d like.
Ross Kenyon: Oh, no. Does it get ugly over there or what?
Quillan Robinson: Quirky, not ugly.
Ross Kenyon: Quirky. I guess I’ll have to look in there and confirm for myself. But thanks for being here, Quill.
Quillan Robinson: Thanks, Ross. Appreciate it.
Ross Kenyon: Yeah, it was my pleasure. That was a lot of fun. If you like the show, please rate and review us on iTunes, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher. Tell your friends. Join us on Patreon. We’re Nori Podcasts on Patreon. Come hang out with us. We have a book club. And thank you so much for listening. Well, thank you so much for listening. If you like the show, please rate and review it in Apple Podcasts and or Stitcher. It really helps us a lot to get this content to a wider audience. If you think what we’re doing is useful, interesting, fun, hopefully all three, we’d certainly appreciate your rating and review.
You can keep up We are also now on Patreon at patreon. com slash noripodcasts if you’d like more content, engagement, and community. And thank you so much for your support.
