A Kinder, Gentler Conservative Conservationist

Mark Sanford:

Make no mistake, the issue of environmental conservation sits squarely on the battle line between government and liberty. From light bulbs to automobiles, government will gladly expand its regulatory reach even if the result is a hamstrung economy and curtailed individual freedoms. Yet conservatives have remained largely absent from this debate, and by pulling back from the environmental battle they have conceded the high ground to those on the far left.

Seriously, where's he been these last 10 - 15 years? If it wasn't the Republican-led Congress it was the Administration blocking meaningful legislation. And as for the "debate" well, we've heard quite enough from the "conservative" side in our media over that timeperiod as well, thank you very much.

First, conservatives must reframe the environmental discussion by replacing the political left's scare tactics with conservative principles such as responsibility and stewardship. Stewardship -- the idea that we need to take care of what we've been given -- simply makes sense. It makes dollars as well, for the simple reason that our economy is founded on natural resources, from tourism and manufacturing to real estate and agriculture. Here in South Carolina, conservation easements are springing up across the state as landowners see the dual benefit of preserving the environment and protecting their pocketbooks.

Second, conservatives must reclaim lost ground from far-left interest groups by showing how environmental conservation is as much about expanding economic opportunity as it is about saving whales or replanting rain forests. When corporations such as BP and Shell America pursue alternative energy sources, they not only cut carbon emissions but help cut our petroleum dependency on OPEC nations. When South Carolina restaurants recycle their oyster shells, they not only restore shellfish habitat but take a job off local governments' plates and ensure continuing revenue streams for local fishermen.

Third, conservatives must respond to climate change with innovation, not regulation. This means encouraging private research and implementation of more eco-friendly construction, more energy-efficient workplaces and more sustainable ways of going about life -- all of which cuts costs and protects God's creation. It means looking past the question of whether your car's exhaust melts polar ice caps and instead treating our environment as an investment our future depends on.

While changing their tune on the "economic opportunity" of conservation would be a much welcome shift, there's really nothing new here. Encouraging private research and implementation without some sort of meaningful legislation that supports those who do the right thing, no real progress can be made. It's just more of the same do-nothing and hope that someone will come up with the non-polluting flying car someday.

South Carolina is creating an advisory group that will study the effects of climate change on commerce and vice versa, with an eye toward crafting a plan that balances the needs of the business and environmental communities.

Let's take a look at this "advisory group":

One environmentalist was appointed by Gov. Mark Sanford to a panel that will study the effects of climate change in South Carolina.

The rest of the nine-member panel, which is expected to grow, includes two utility executives, two industrialists, a doctor and an insurance executive. Two lawmakers also were appointed to the panel, which will be headed by State Sen. John Courson, R-Columbia.

"We think it's important that neither extreme of the political spectrum dominate the discussion on climate change," said Courson, who previously served on wetlands and nuclear waste advisory panels.

With one environmentalist, two utility executives and two industrialists on the panel, I'm confident the governor will receive plenty of "balanced" advice. While we're on the topic of appointments, this one went over well too:

Conservation groups that have supported Gov. Mark Sanford are aghast that he is considering a Rock Hill developer to lead the state Department of Health and Environmental Control board.

If former congressional candidate Ralph Norman becomes the agency’s chairman, it could mark a substantial shift in the direction of the state’s environmental policy. He would replace Elizabeth Hagood, a conservationist who pushed for tighter control over coastal development.

Norman, a former Republican state representative, has said the threat of global warming is overstated and the country needs new oil refineries.

"Conservative Conservationism" at its finest. (via NVB)

Apparently what governor Sanford really wants is to figure out a way to act as though he cares, but continue to keep the "dirty hippies" out. Repackage the same old crap as ice cream.