Latest news with #AmericanConservationCoalition
Yahoo
26-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The Problem With Mike Lee's Public Lands Proposal Is That It Doesn't Sell Off Enough Land
Sen. Mike Lee's (R–Utah) proposal to require the sale of a de minimis amount of Western public lands was dealt a potentially fatal blow yesterday when the Senate parliamentarian ruled that the provision could not be included in the reconciliation bill moving through Congress. The ruling follows a relentless opposition campaign to Lee's proposal from Democrats, conservation groups, and even some conservatives who've painted doomsday scenarios about Americans' "birthright" being sold off for luxury condo developments. Lee said yesterday that he's in talks with the parliamentarian to include a scaled-back version of his initial proposal in the budget bill. Whether that will be enough to win over the parliamentarian remains to be seen. It will almost certainly not be enough to mollify opponents, who've leveled a relentless stream of often inaccurate, contradictory criticisms of the idea that any federal lands might ever be privatized. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D–N.M.) told the Associated Press that Lee's bill would produce not enough development and too much development at the same time. "I don't think it's clear that we would even get substantial housing as a result of this. What I know would happen is people would lose access to places they know and care about and that drive our Western economies," he said. The American Conservation Coalition has taken to posting pictures of national parks (which could not be sold off under Lee's bill) to criticize the sale of far less beautiful Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands. In fact, Lee's proposal is an exceptionally modest version of a generally good idea: that the federal government's vast, unused land holdings could be sold to ease the Western United States' severe housing shortage. In an essay at his Construction Physics Substack, Brian Potter notes that housing costs in the rural Western United States are exceptionally high compared to rural areas elsewhere in the country. A new heat map of America's estimated housing shortage produced by the American Enterprise Institute's Housing Center likewise shows Western states as having the largest housing deficits. Only select coastal metros and, particularly, coastal California, are worse off. Potter attributes the rural West's high housing costs to a mix of more attractive natural amenities, higher housing demand, modestly higher construction costs, and (once California is excluded) modestly tighter housing regulation. The federal government's vast holdings of undeveloped land on the edge of existing communities are certainly a significant contributing factor. The BLM owns close to 70 percent of the land in Nevada, over 40 percent of the land in Utah, and roughly a quarter of the land in Idaho, Oregon, Alaska, and Wyoming. Some of this is in the middle of nowhere and unlikely to be developed. A lot of it rings existing communities or is even interspersed among already developed, privately owned parcels. A report produced by the Joint Economic Committee Republicans in 2022 estimated that a prior, more ambitious Lee proposal to sell off Western BLM land for housing development could lead to the construction of 2.7 million more homes and completely end the housing shortage in states such as Arizona, Nevada, and Wyoming. For all the criticism, Lee's current proposal is rather unambitious. Per The Hill's reporting on the latest draft, it would require the sale of between 0.25 percent and 0.5 percent of BLM land. The land could only be used for housing, and it would have to be within five miles of an existing community. National parks, conservation areas, national monuments, historic sites, battlefields, and every other type of public land that people actually like are explicitly protected from being sold off in Lee's bill. If anything, the problem with Lee's bill is that it puts far too many restrictions on the sale of federal lands and thus won't meaningfully alleviate the West's housing affordability problems. Still, any new (privately developed) housing is good housing. If Lee's bill gets a few more units built, all the better. The post The Problem With Mike Lee's Public Lands Proposal Is That It Doesn't Sell Off Enough Land appeared first on
Yahoo
20-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Q&A: Meet the conservative working to make environmentalism nonpartisan
Nature is Nonpartisan founder Benji Backer, center, with Director of Communications Amelia Joy, left, and Chief Policy Officer Ben Cassidy, right, pose for a photo on March 18, 2025, in Belle Fourche. (Courtesy of Nature is Nonpartisan) A national nonprofit working to promote a middle ground on environmentalism launched with an event Thursday in the South Dakota city of Belle Fourche, which advertises itself as the geographic center of the United States. Benji Backer, 27, of Seattle, is the founder of Nature is Nonpartisan. The self-described conservative environmentalist founded the American Conservation Coalition in 2017 while in college. That conservative group promotes policies like free-market approaches to climate change and environmental policy. In 2024, Backer wrote a book, 'The Conservative Environmentalist,' outlining his vision for right-of-center environmentalism. With his new group, Backer is bringing people together from across the political spectrum. Nature Is Nonpartisan's board ranges from people like David Bernhardt, who was secretary of the Department of Interior during the first Trump administration, to Michael Brune, former executive director of the Sierra Club. Partners include the National Wildlife Federation, American Forests, Ducks Unlimited and more. South Dakota Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden attended the Belle Fourche event and signed an executive proclamation establishing 'Nature Is Nonpartisan Week' in the state. Backer said he is critical of Green New Deal-style environmentalism, referring to a swath of proposals to help address climate change and income inequality introduced by progressive lawmakers. He said the movement has become an ineffective political football. The new nonprofit focuses on bipartisan policies like funding wildlife migration corridors, wetland and forest conservation, and farm practices that pull more heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions out of the atmosphere. Backer took questions from South Dakota Searchlight ahead of Thursday's event. The following conversation has been edited for length and clarity. I grew up in the Midwest — I grew up in Wisconsin — and grew up loving the outdoors just like almost every person in this country. I also grew up a conservative, and I felt very frustrated with the fact that there wasn't really a home for dialogue on the environment that was being done in a nonpartisan way. It was either you subscribe to the Green New Deal-type ideology or you just didn't have a home at all. And the majority of Americans care a lot about the environment, but they don't want radical solutions. So, our mission is to rebuild the environmental movement, to a movement that represents all Americans, of all political backgrounds — not just the left side of the aisle — and also forges solutions that benefit and work for every American, not just Americans on one side of the aisle. We want to recreate the legacy that Americans have around the environment. This used to be seen as a nonpartisan issue in America. There used to be many environmental organizations that resembled the breadth of political beliefs in America. That does not exist anymore. So, we're here in Belle Fourche — because it is the center of the country — to launch from the heart of America an environmental movement that speaks for the heart of America. Yeah, look, it has been a partisan issue, but that doesn't mean it has to be. If you look back at history, previous iterations of the environmental movement resembled both sides of the aisle. It had hunters and anglers, it had conservatives, and it also had liberals. It had both sorts of populations represented, and so the solutions represented those communities, too. My philosophy is that when you're not at the table, you're on the table. When you're not at the table, you're automatically losing. And the majority of Americans are losing with the current environmental movement as we see it. Hunters and anglers, conservatives, used to self-identify as environmentalists. Polling back in 1990 shows nearly 80% of Americans self-identified as environmentalists. We're here in Belle Fourche — because it is the center of the country — to launch from the heart of America an environmental movement that speaks for the heart of America. – Benji Backer, founder of Nature is Nonpartisan And so, it is currently partisan, but it doesn't need to be. The reality is that the political left owning this issue only allows half of the country to be represented. So, when the other half of the country, conservatives, are running the show, whether that be in the South Dakota Legislature or in D.C., all they're doing is focusing on opposing what the left has proposed because a lot of the times it's out of touch with conservative communities. It's this political back and forth of, like, either the Green New Deal, or trying to oppose everything about the Green New Deal philosophy. What if there was an approach, that we used to have, where you put landowners, ranchers, farmers, hunters, anglers at the same table with those who care about the environment for other reasons, and created a solution that works for all the people there. That has not happened for decades, but it can happen, and it will happen again. What we're trying to create is a grassroots movement of Americans from both sides of the aisle who believe the environment is more important, and conserving the environment is more important, than partisan politics. Now, how we get there is up for debate. But that's a debate we're not even having right now. 'Wild places are worth fighting for': Concern grows for receding South Dakota wetlands Some people might be more in favor of protecting the environment through private property rights because private property owners tend to take really good care of their environment. Some people might prefer a more public land approach. Then let's have a debate, issue by issue, so we can actually get to solutions. Right now, our forests are burning at record levels. Right now, biodiversity is decreasing here and around the world. Right now, extreme storms are damaging our country's economy and our communities. And the list goes on and on. I understand why immigration, guns or some of these other issues get caught up in culture wars and partisan politics: A lot of people have inherently different end goals on those issues. But on the environment, there's not really anybody in this country that doesn't want clean air, clean water, nature to be protected and biodiversity to be protected — as long as it's not at the expense of humanity and people's communities. Politicians aren't hearing that message from an environmental organization. They're only hearing a message of doom and gloom, alarmism, kind of extremism, or an opposition to that. So, we're trying to create a movement that incentivizes politicians to get to the table and find solutions to the environmental problems that are happening, that are real, that are impacting us, and that no one's trying to find solutions to because it's become such a culture warfare issue. I would say to conservatives, over the next few years, we will prove that we're a movement for all Americans. I think there's an automatic distrust of the environmental movement that is totally fair and totally to be expected based on how this has progressed as an issue in recent years. But, we have two options. We can sit on the sidelines and complain about how bad the left's ideas are, or we can sit at the table. We're either on the sidelines complaining and losing or at the table conversing and winning. I understand the skepticism, but if you look at our board, if you look at our staff, we have some of the most hardcore conservative bona fide leaders on our team and board that you could ever imagine, that validate the fact that conservatives need to have a voice at this discussion, that validate the fact that we are going to represent both sides, not just one — not just greenwashing for the left, but also representing both sides and the priorities they have. There's nothing more pro-conservative than caring about your local community, about your country and its amazing beauty, and the legacy of conservation that our country has. There's nothing more pro-conservative than engaging in conservation conversations. I've been building this organization for the last year. I don't even take a salary right now. We already have diverse funders from across the political spectrum. We have hundreds of donors already and we haven't even launched yet. We have conservative donors, liberal donors. There's not one donor or two donors or three donors that I can point to as people who are, you know, 'buying us out.' Climate change is one of the most polarizing issues in America right now, and one of the most partisan. I think Americans can and should stand united in our desire to reduce pollution in our atmosphere. I think we should be focusing on efficiency, and Americans appreciate opportunities to save money and be more efficient, to have more abundant energy choices, to have lower energy prices, which helps scale all different energy sources. People just don't want to be told what to do. As an organization, we're going to be dedicated to reducing pollution, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but not in a way that hurts people, and in a way that actually benefits communities. We are going to show politicians what Americans want to be for, rather than what they're against. So, on the topic of climate change, people are for efficient, abundant energy; people are for resilient ecosystems to create adaptation measures in extreme storms; they are for more efficient transportation methods and more fuel-efficient vehicles, as long as it's not more expensive and comes at the cost of their livelihoods. And so that's the sort of approach we're going to take. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
