Conservatives must claim high ground as rising sea levels, regulations threaten

Mark Sanford
Sun, Feb. 25, 2007

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/editorial/16770769.htm

When George W. Bush, the Washington Post and the insurance giant Lloyd's of London
agree on something, it's obvious a new wind is blowing. The climate change debate is
here to stay, and as America warms to the idea of environmental conservation on a
grander scale, it's vital that conservatives change the debate before government
regulation expands yet again and personal freedom is pushed closer toward extinction.

The fact is, I'm a conservative and a conservationist - and that's OK.

For the past 20 years, I have seen the ever-so-gradual effects of rising sea levels
at our farm on the South Carolina coast. I've had to watch once-thriving pine trees
die in that fragile zone between uplands and salt marshes. I know the climate change
debate isn't over, but I believe human activity is having a measurable effect on the
environment.

The real "inconvenient truth" about climate change is that some people are losing
their rights and freedoms because of the actions of others - in either the quality of
the air they breathe, the geography they hold dear, the insurance costs they bear or
the future environment of the children they love.

But like a polar bear searching for solid ice, many people seem ready to dig into the
first solution offered to slow or reverse climate change. Cue former vice president
Al Gore, the politician turned screen star who could take home an Academy Award this
weekend and a Nobel Peace Prize later this year, whose call for greater government
intervention is resonating with administrations in this country and across the globe:
California may soon ban incandescent light bulbs; France wants to force the
Kyoto-less United States to pay carbon taxes on exports; and the European Union is
pushing automobile emission standards that would cost carmakers such as Volvo roughly
$3,200 more per vehicle.

Make no mistake, the issue of environmental conservationsits 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.

I believe conservatives have a window of opportunity, but that window is closing
fast.

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 cut costs and protect 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.

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.

I am a conservative conservationist who worries that sea levels and government
intervention may end up rising together. My earnest hope going forward is that we can
find conservative solutions to the climate change problem, ecologically responsible
solutions based on free-market principles that both improve our quality of life and
safeguard our freedoms.

For if conservatives cannot reframe, reclaim and respond to climate change with our
principles intact, government will undoubtedly provide a solution, no matter how
taxing it may be.

Mark Sanford, a Republican, is governor of South Carolina. He wrote this piece for
the Washington Post.