January 24, 2025 • 38 mins
In the eighth and final episode of Hot Mess: How Climate Consensus Turned Into Political Chaos, we bring together a powerhouse panel of conservative leaders and thinkers to reflect on the series and chart a path forward. Former Republican Congressman Bob Inglis, Chelsea Henderson (host of EcoRight Speaks), and Katie Zakrzewski and Zach Torpie (hosts of Green Tea Party Radio) join host Peterson Toscano to explore cultural and political factors shaping the conservative climate movement. Later, Peterson speaks with Drew Eyerly, Citizens Climate Lobby’s Conservative Outreach Director, about how conservatives are creating solutions and opportunities for climate action. This episode provides insights, inspiration, and a roadmap for bipartisan collaboration on climate solutions.
Featured Guests:
-
Bob Inglis: Former Republican Congressman and Executive Director of republicEn.org. Bob is a recipient of the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award and a prominent voice in conservative climate action. He appears in the acclaimed documentary Merchants of Doubt, which examines the role of misinformation in climate skepticism.
-
Chelsea Henderson: Director of Editorial Content at republicEn.org, host of the EcoRight Speaks podcast, and author of Glacial: The Inside Story of Climate Politics. Chelsea is a seasoned advocate for bipartisan climate solutions with nearly 25 years of experience bridging divides on Capitol Hill.
-
Katie Zakrzewski: Co-host of Green Tea Party Radio, journalist, and environmental advocate. Katie highlights the economic and national security implications of climate action, emphasizing the importance of engaging young conservatives in the climate conversation.
-
Zach Torpie: Environmental engineer and co-host of Green Tea Party Radio. Zach focuses on pragmatic climate solutions and envisions an America that leads the way in addressing climate challenges while preserving natural beauty and economic stability.
-
Drew Eyerly: Conservative Outreach Director for Citizens Climate Lobby. Drew’s climate advocacy is fueled by his desire to create a sustainable future for his daughter. He champions economic and national security benefits of climate action and leads efforts to engage conservative voices in climate policy.
Compelling Quotes:
- Bob Inglis: “Very few people are still arguing with thermometers. The challenge now is showing people there are solutions that align with conservative values.”
- Chelsea Henderson: “We can’t think about climate change as just an environmental issue—it’s an economic issue, a national security issue, and a pro-life issue.”
- Drew Eyerly: “Every issue is an opportunity. Climate action can stimulate the economy, create jobs, and strengthen national security.”
Links and Resources Mentioned:
- republicEn.org – Learn more about Bob Inglis and Chelsea Henderson’s work.
- EcoRight Speaks Podcast – Hosted by Chelsea Henderson, exploring conservative climate perspectives.
- Green Tea Party Radio – A weekly podcast hosted by Katie Zakrzewski and Zach Torpie, showcasing conservative climate solutions.
- Citizens Climate Conservatives – Engage with conservative climate advocates at Citizens Climate Lobby.
- Merchants of Doubt – Documentary featuring Bob Inglis, available online and through major streaming platforms.
Episode Highlights:
- A deep dive into the cultural, political, and economic factors shaping conservative climate solutions.
- The panel discusses the role of misinformation, cultural apathy, and economic fears in delayi
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
>> Peterson Toscano (00:02):
Welcome to the eighth and final episode of
Hot Mess, How Climate Consensus Turned into
Political Chaos. I'm, um, Peterson
Toscano, host of Citizens Climate
Radio. Over the past
episodes, we've unpacked how unified
concern about global warming
unraveled into decades of political
(00:23):
stalling, misinformation, and missed
opportunities. Today, we're
wrapping things up with a roundtable discussion
featuring voices that span generations,
experiences and perspectives within the
conservative climate movement. You'll hear
from Bob Inglis, former Republican
congressman and executive director of
(00:45):
republican.org Very.
>> Bob Inglis (00:48):
Few people really are still arguing with
thermometers.
>> Peterson Toscano (00:53):
Chelsea Henderson, director of
editorial content@republican.org
and host of Ecowright Speaks.
>> Chelsea Henderson (01:01):
I think that one thing we have seen, if you look over time, is
how important it is that one side not have a
monopoly.
>> Peterson Toscano (01:08):
Katie Zirkreski, journalist and co host of
Green Tea Party Radio.
>> Katie (01:13):
This is an economic issue. This is a national
security issue. This is a pro life issue.
>> Peterson Toscano (01:19):
And Zach Torpy, environmental engineer and
fellow co host of Green Tea Party Radio.
>> Zach (01:25):
With Trump in the office, there has to be an emphasis on
tariffs. You could talk about the border adjustment being a
carbon tariff on foreign countries and foreign soldiers like
China and India.
>> Peterson Toscano (01:34):
Together, we'll reflect on key takeaways
from this series, dive into the cultural
and political factors that shape the conservative
climate movement, and explore where what lies
ahead. After the panel, I sit
down with Drew Irely, Citizens Climate
Lobby's conservative outreach director,
(01:54):
to hear how conservatives are shaping a, uh, path
forward for climate action.
Let's begin
our roundtable Guests are no strangers to the
challenges and triumphs of advancing climate
solutions in conservative spaces.
Representative Bob Inglis knows
(02:15):
firsthand what it's like to challenge the status
quo. As a former congressman, he's
championed conservative climate action,
earning recognition with the
2015 John F. Kennedy
Profile and Courage Award.
Bob also appears in the documentary
Merchants of Doubt, which exposes the
(02:37):
dark side of misinformation
campaigns. Chelsea Henderson has
spent nearly 25 years striking
bipartisan compromises on climate
policy. From her work on Capitol
Hill to her role as host of Ecorite
Speaks podcast, Chelsea continues
to bring Republicans and Democrats
(02:59):
to the table for real solutions. She's
also author of the book Glacial,
which is a, uh, deep dive into the history of
climate politics. Katie Sarkresky is a
journalist, environmental advocate, and co host of
Green Tea Party Radio, where she and
Zach Torpy highlight climate solutions that
resonate with young conservatives.
(03:22):
Zach is an environmental engineer and a strong
voice for pragmatic climate solutions.
His vision, an America that leads the
way in addressing climate change while
preserving its natural beauty.
Before we begin the roundtable, I want to give you a
heads up about a name that comes up later
(03:42):
in our discussion.
Mark Marano.
Um,
Bob will mention him as part of the climate
misinformation machine. Mark
Morano is a well known figure in climate
skepticism. He's the founder of Climate Depot
and a frequent guest on conservative media
(04:03):
outlets. In the film Merchants of
Doubt, Bob recalls how the filmmakers
captured Marano admitting to his role in
spreading, uh, industry driven climate
misinformation.
Marano's tactics, which include
amplifying disinformation and
attacking climate scientists, have played
(04:24):
a significant role in fueling doubt
about climate change. His admissions in
Merchants of Doubt reveal how deeply the
fossil fuel industry has influenced public
discourse.
M as you listen to the
roundtable, keep this context in mind when
Bob mentions Murano's contributions to
(04:47):
the climate skepticism movement.
Now we hear from Chelsea Henderson, Katie
Zarkreski, Zach Torpy, and representative
Bob Inglis.
I am thrilled to be with this
illustrious group of people. Uh, we have
some young conservatives and some folks
(05:10):
who are a little bit older who've been working on conservative
issues for a long time.
Welcome everyone.
>> Chelsea Henderson (05:17):
I was actually just going to thank you for not calling me and Bob
old,
seasoned, experienced.
>> Bob Inglis (05:28):
Yeah, that was nice.
And Peterson, just, uh, congratulations on the
series and this, uh, is the eighth and final
of your eighth of eight. So, uh, thank you for all the
work you've done in the, all those episodes.
>> Peterson Toscano (05:42):
It's been such a learning experience. And I have
to say, reading Chelsea's wonderful book,
Felicia, reading that and doing this research
and talking with, with you all has
really been sobering. In looking at the past
50 years, it's been sad, the many
missed opportunities and it's been, I don't
(06:03):
know, inspiring. The many people like you, Bob,
who have pushed against the tide and
gotten the conversation started with
conservatives.
After spending all this time, many, many hours on
this, we clearly in the United States have
had a problem with addressing climate change in any
serious way. So who
(06:24):
do you think bears the most responsibility
for 50 years of denial,
delay and doubt?
>> Chelsea Henderson (06:32):
You know, when you first were
heading in the direction of this question, I was going to say the oil
and gas industry. But I'm going to dial back on that and
say that it is the apathy
of regular citizens. And I
think part of that is it took a
long time for climate change to
(06:52):
be something that was happening to people in their
daily lives. So if you contrast
climate change with something like acid
rain or the hole in the ozone, which
posed real immediate threats to people.
At the same time, the scientists were raising
the alarms about climate change, but it
(07:12):
didn't feel like it was happening. It was all projected to be in the
future. And so while we're kind of
triaging what we have to deal with on a daily basis, our
own personal stresses, work stresses, family
stresses, there's something bigger level that we're going
to worry about and it isn't even happening yet. Yeah,
we're going to shelf it. And so maybe it is that
combined with some of the disinformation campaigns
(07:35):
that told people, well, if we do do something about it, it's going to
raise your energy prices. And it's. We're not even sure this
is really the problem we need to address. And so I think that
was maybe like a, uh, very lethal combination of things that
have led us to this point where 60 plus
years of attempts to
enact a solution have kind of fallen
(07:55):
by the wayside.
>> Bob Inglis (07:56):
Yeah, I agree that it's really, it's,
it's the human condition to,
you know, when faced with a global
problem, and I'm just one person,
I just gotta accept it the way it is.
It's like death and taxes.
In order to be successful, we have to overcome that. We have to say, no,
(08:16):
no, there really, there's things we can do, we can
overcome this, there's solutions. You know,
problem is like on healthcare, healthcare
is an impossible problem to solve.
M. There's 100% death rate,
there's a lot of suffering between here and there's. So
all you can do in healthcare is just hope to alleviate the
suffering. The difference between that and climate is you
(08:39):
can actually solve climate, you can
actually fix this.
But it's a worldwide problem and
I'm just one person. So we
gotta give, uh, people a sense that they can
have some influence on this and particularly have
leaders that are courageous enough to tell us, hey, you know what, there's
solutions.
>> Zach (09:00):
You need everyone rowing in the same direction. And it's hard to get different
political parties, different nations and different groups with different
vested interests going the same direction. So it's hard to
unite everyone to solve this issue,
Especially when people are concerned about the economics and how
we're going to fund things. A lot of it's just getting
mutual buy in from all groups.
>> Chelsea Henderson (09:20):
What Zach was saying. Oh, sorry, Katie, go ahead,
Chelsea, go ahead. I was just going to say Zach's point
about getting alignment with
different parties and constituencies and stuff. I think
that one thing we have seen, if you look over time is how
important it is that one side not have a
monopoly, either the solutions that are
enacted or the ideas that are on the table.
(09:41):
Because then you do end up in a lopsided sort
of mess, or you end up in a situation where there's no long
term certainties. You know, what one
Congress does, another Congress can undo. And if one
Congress does something in a, um, hyper partisan way, then
next Congress can undo that. Yet if we work
together, then you have
(10:02):
solutions that are more durable.
>> Katie (10:05):
I won't beat around the bush about who I think is
responsible. I
realized, and I looked for a way to word this,
but when you're in your 20s, like Zach
and I, you might not be as familiar with the origins of a lot of
this as maybe some of the folks who've been doing this work for a few
decades. And so even as I was going back and doing a deep
dive into research, I was like, man, Exxon really did
(10:27):
put a number on everybody. When you look back at
the oil and gas industry, yeah, I'm going to initially blame them,
but as a journalist, I'm, um, also going to blame the media
because it was really alarming to read
how a lot of these newspapers would write editorials and
publish op EDS that were like, oh my goodness, the fossil fuel industry is
so bad, so terrible. And then in poor economic
(10:48):
times, they're running a full page ad for Exxon on the
next page because they need the advertising money. So it was,
you know, yeah, we acknowledge this is bad, but we got no problem promoting
it when we need the cash. So I feel like a lot of
different groups and organizations really need to be
able to put their money where their mouth is in terms of, you know, if
something's wrong, even if we need the money, we're not going to accept
(11:08):
money from these individuals that, that we clearly don't
agree with, that we acknowledge have done some sort of
wrongdoing. For me as a journalist at
least, it's twofold. You've got the oil and gas industry,
but then you've also got the media that I don't think did
enough to shine the light not only
on the truth in those early decades in the 50s,
60s and 70s, but also kind of turned a blind
(11:30):
eye to it in the years and decades after that.
>> Peterson Toscano (11:33):
Well, I think this is such an important point though, about
the role of the fossil fuel industry, particularly when we
look at episode seven, which is about
how climate skepticism has been very
much a US thing compared to the rest
of the world.
And Bob, I love that you were in the film Merchants
of Doubt. I wish you had been in the book as well, because
(11:55):
the book, you know, is very discouraging.
But with you in the film, it, like, show, like, there's a
movement forward. But how did that experience of being
in. In that film Merchants of Doubt, how
did that shape your understanding of the role of
misinformation in. In this debate?
>> Bob Inglis (12:12):
Wow. If you haven't seen it, it's really worth seeing. Merchants of
Gout. It's a film by Robbie Kenner, uh, based on
the book by Naomi Oreskes. And
I asked Robbie, how did you
get Mark Morano to say all that to
you? Did you think out of a date? What did
you do? And Robbie is
(12:32):
just such a. Such a great interviewer. He says, well,
you just ask people and they'll tell you their story. He
just got Mark Morano to hang himself.
I mean, it's just really. Anyway, it's really
worth watching. And also just to celebrate,
uh, what Robbie does, you know, he doesn't pick up the
microphone and do a voiceover when he wants to transition
(12:53):
between one thing and another. He actually
puts only voices in there, the people that he
interviews. So it's an enormously difficult,
challenging way that he does a documentary.
Watch how the producer or whatever, the director just picks up a
microphone and does the voiceover to get from one to another.
That's not what Robbie does. It's really hard work.
(13:14):
So it's really well done. He told me that the main thing you want to do
is get some, um, emotion in the
film. He called me up, Peterson.
He asked me, you know, he's going on and on about, how will you get
on this film? Love me or you do this? And I'm like, robbie,
if you take a breath, I'd say yes. Because
the kids had come home with
(13:34):
Food Inc. Which is his film too. And
it sort of changed the way that they were eating. We were eating.
And so I knew that my polling numbers would go
up with my kids if I were on this. Rob, you know, did a film
with Robert Kenneth. And so I
said, ravi, yes, of course. He said that he
had seen dozens of climate films.
(13:54):
He said, I can't remember any of them. He said, what
he wants to do in this film is have
some lasting reaction. And
the reaction is, you know what? Fool
me once, shame, um, on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
Robbie has produced a film that really
(14:16):
shows. You kidding me?
The same people who doubted the causal
connection between smoking and cancer
actually moved on to other things. Where
they introduced doubt. And the great thing about
Naomi Oreskes is I told her, naomi, you
didn't do the easy thing, which is say, oh, it's just the
(14:36):
money. That's thereafter. No, she said, no, it's not that.
What happened is these people got out of
sync with the whole body of science and
the whole body of their colleagues
in the scientific world. And then they were
out there on their own and they needed to create a new, new
tribe. And so the tribe they created
was Merchants of doubt.
>> Peterson Toscano (14:58):
Yeah, it is eye opening and definitely
worth watching. I think it's one of the most important climate
films out there.
And it makes me wonder though, clearly the fossil fuel
industry, as you talked about Chelsea in your
book and on the show, poured millions and
millions of dollars into taking
advantage of our emotions and our
(15:19):
culture. And so I'm wondering,
were lawmakers and the public truly
duped by this? And that's what
delay things were, some complicit
in allowing the doubt to fester. Have we all
been gaslit for a long time by fossil fuel
industry, as.
>> Chelsea Henderson (15:38):
Bob was saying about the human condition? Right.
Everyone's going about their day and they have a bunch of things
to worry about. So if a really flashy ad is
telling you you don't have to worry about this one thing, then you're just going
to take it out of your mindset.
But we are still in a place where people still don't
believe. And I'm sure that Zach and Katie get
this, but Bob and I get the
(16:00):
republican.org social media or
responses back to the weekly newsletter that
I put out for republican.org
that sometimes if we've had a
membership push and somebody maybe doesn't understand exactly
what they've signed up for and they respond back with climate
change is fake and it's not real and it's a hoax,
there are those moments where that happens. So we
(16:23):
still wrestle today
with that doubt. Though I think on the
political level, denialism
is not as prevalent as it once was.
There is an understanding from many policymakers and as evidenced
by John Curtis's when he was in the House, his
conservative climate caucus had over 80 people. It was one of
(16:43):
the largest caucuses in the House, if not the largest. I'm not
saying that each one of those members of that caucus was like dying to go out and
introduce a bill, but they were in the caucus to try to learn and to
not be shamed about the fact that they might not know as
much as some of their peers in the House.
We do have this weird disconnect, right,
where maybe most Americans haven't been
(17:04):
engaged on a daily basis. And then you had
lawmakers that were, as Bob likes to
say, the elected officials are not the leaders,
right? They are following what
their constituents or what the
tidal wave is sort of moving
toward. But at the same time, if you
just look at polling, the polling
(17:26):
shows overwhelmingly that people support climate
action. The politics hasn't caught up with the
polling, but then the people aren't driving
the politics enough either. And it might come
down to the fact that there are just other priorities that people have.
And, and the one thing that I keep trying, a point I guess
I keep trying to make, is that we can't think about
climate change as an environmental issue, right? This isn't just a tree
(17:49):
hugging issue. It is so much an economic
issue. Right now, at the time that we're sitting and recording
this, California is on fire. So, um, in
California, probably the most
costly natural disaster in U.S.
history. While the scientists have not
yet come out to say that this
fire was caused by climate change, we know that
(18:10):
wildfires can be more intense
and can happen off season, et cetera, et cetera,
because of the conditions that are created by climate
change. And sort of going back a few months ago to
Hurricane Helene, the scientists were pretty quick
on that one to say, yes, the conditions
that have been caused by climate change caused helene
to drop 50% more water or whatever the
(18:32):
percentage was than a normal hurricane would have.
So, you know, these have real economic costs. It's loss
of business, I mean, obviously loss of life. So human,
the human loss is devastating.
And then loss of homes, and
the loss of those homes causing the insurance industry to
flee. Some of these states that are on the front lines of climate
(18:52):
change, loss of property and loss of business.
I mean, the mental health toll that's going to take
on people, the health impacts, I mean those
are real things you can put price tags on
that are going to add up. So for people that are either
voting or thinking the economy comes
first, they need to see the connection
(19:13):
between the economy and climate change or economic
prosperity and climate change.
>> Zach (19:18):
Chelsea I think as the generations have gotten younger,
we've experienced a, uh, reduction in denialism and more of
just a. We're completely overwhelmed by
how chaotic the world is. There's too many issues to focus
on and people just shut down and go on
TikTok reels and disengage from the world
and just disassociate. And now people just don't want
(19:38):
to deal with the issues that they're facing. They just want to focus on
what they can manage in their own lives. And it's becoming difficult to,
like, get people to care again.
Why should they care about the Amazon when they're
struggling day to day with their, uh, paychecks and
having to make their own living? I really do think the
best argument for climate change is arguing about the
economics of it and talking about the localized cost of energy, of
(20:00):
solar and wind versus oil and natural
gas, and talking about the impacts that we're going to
have. I would just like to live in a better society where it's
easy to walk to a supermarket and I can go out to a bar and
get a drink and see people in walking distance from where I
live. That's how I like to argue it.
>> Chelsea Henderson (20:17):
I think when you look at the six Americas, the study that
George Mason University's Climate Changed Communication
center and the Yale center for Climate Communication put
out together, and they update
periodically, the category
disengaged to me is more troubling than the
category dismissive.
Because, uh, that category of people that dismiss
(20:38):
or don't, the non believers, is so small now,
it's single digits. But what you were just saying, Zach,
about the, uh, disengagement and the role that social
media plays in that disengagement. Yeah. You're just
gonna wake up and start scrolling because you wanna see something that makes you
laugh or you wanna see something that feels worse than what you're going
through, or something you can empathize with.
(20:58):
Yeah. The disengaged portion of our
society is where we need to light that spark and to
show that what is possible. Right? What is possible with
bipartisanship, what is possible with leadership, the
economic prosperity that we could see if we
were innovating to the extent
that the US can, because we are one of the most
(21:19):
innovative countries in the world and a leader on the
global stage. We could have that life
that you are envisioning. We need
more attention. We need more engagement.
>> Peterson Toscano (21:31):
Chelsea, I'm glad you puppies and kittens are very
engaging. I wish they would talk about climate change.
>> Katie (21:37):
Yeah, more puppies, kittens, bunnies, baby
skunks. We need some more input from them.
Um, but, Chelsea, I'm really glad that you said what you did. I think Zach
hears me say at least twice a week, every week when we
record for Green Tea Party Radio, that I'm an optimistic
pessimist. So I always try to look for some
sort of silver lining to give me hope. I've been hearing
a lot of conservatives talk about, okay, well, you know, the
(22:00):
economy is going to be our primary issue. That's why the election went
the way that it did. We only care about the economy. Everything else takes a
backseat to the economy. But for me, what that means
is we are in a prime position over the
next four years to sell
conservatives on. This is an economic issue. This
is a national security issue. This is a pro
life issue. This is an issue that conservatives
(22:23):
have touted the values of for
decades. And it's time that we sit
at the table and address it for the issue that it is. If we don't
like what our counterparts on the left are saying,
okay, then let's play ball. What do we propose?
This is our opportunity to show, you know, if we don't like the economy the
way that it is, okay, let's make more manufacturing jobs here in
the US let's create more of those jobs that don't need four year
(22:45):
degrees. Let's um, open that up for low income and blue
collar and working class families. Let's keep it
here. Let's start working on things that won't completely flood
our naval bases. The next four
years are going to be the key for really making
this environmental issue a conservative one.
>> Peterson Toscano (23:02):
Perfect segue because we're coming to the end.
So what are the next steps? I mean economically, a C ban is
going to come into place with the European Union in
2026. And this podcast has been focusing
on, um, conservatives and conservative voices. And now we
have a very conservative government in the United
States. For those doing climate work, for you
doing climate work, what's next?
>> Bob Inglis (23:25):
I think the most likely path forward is the
um, uh, Senator Cassidy's Foreign Pollution
FIA act, which gets the conversation going
about how do you, how do you get the world in
on this? Because you know Peterson, back when I was
getting tossed out of Congress in 2010, it was very
much aggressive disbelief. You know,
it's basically people saying, I don't believe in climate change. You shouldn't
(23:48):
either. That's all changed now.
Uh, as Chelsea was just pointing out, very few
people really are still arguing with
thermometers. That
dismissive group has just gone down.
What it is now is. Yeah, but
how do you get the world in on this? Well,
(24:08):
it might be that people like um, Senator
Cassidy has a solution which is,
um, let's attach those
costs to products when they're sent
to us from China and then let's see what it
looks like, um, compared to the cleaner American
stuff. And so it creates incentives
that really work. So I think that may be a
(24:31):
step toward a full blown carbon
border adjustment mechanism and
hopefully, ah, later, a domestic price on carbon
dioxide, which when paired with either
a dividend back to the people to, uh,
taxpayers or with a reduction in payroll
taxes, results in no growth of government.
And pretty exciting for conservatives to solve a
(24:53):
problem without growing government.
>> Peterson Toscano (24:57):
What do you have to say? What's next for you all in
your next year of broadcasting and what issues you're going
to focus on?
>> Katie (25:05):
Honestly, I think for us, I think it'll be, it's convincing more
young people that people like us exist, that you're not
alone if you feel this way and that the onus is on you
as a young person to contact your member of Congress and
let them know that you exist, that as somebody who's getting ready to
hopefully buy a house, start a family, work a job,
travel to work, these are your concerns about whether or not you
(25:26):
can do it in a way that's affordable and environmentally friendly.
And Zach, I cut you off. What were you going to say? I'm so sorry.
>> Zach (25:32):
I'll say I totally agree with Bob and I also think it's
a lot of how you market what you're
proposing. With Trump in office. There
has to be an emphasis on tariffs. You could talk about
the border adjustment being a carbon tariff on foreign countries
and foreign polluters like China and India. The
climate community needs to focus on marketing and
how we can better sell our ideas and convince other
(25:55):
groups that this is a path forward economically to benefit
our country. It'll also be interesting to see
if the benefits of the Inflation Reduction act
in conservative areas are
bought into by the local representatives and if they're interested
in keeping those manufacturing jobs and the money they're getting from the federal
government to invest in their communities, if that will be
protected by them, or if they're going to want to tear it up and restart
(26:17):
with something else.
>> Chelsea Henderson (26:20):
I was just going to say to what Zach was just saying
too, that our. I, uh, just keep tag
teaming on everything Zach said today.
Our friend also in the conservative carbon
pricing world, Alex Flint, who is the
executive director at alliance for Market Solutions, made a point
recently that if you give the
ira, the Inflation Reduction Act a
(26:42):
few more years to, uh, do what
it's supposed to do, given how much investment is
being made in Republican districts
from that bill, that then the Republicans
that lead those districts can take the credit for all of
the great economic prosperity that their Congressional
district is reaping.
(27:02):
Was it Reagan that said, or somebody in the
old, old timey days, I'll say. Said it doesn't
matter who takes the credit as long as the
work gets done. Yeah, let's let
people take credit and feel good about
clean energy and innovation and
economic prosperity that comes from those.
(27:26):
Yes, we have to get over that hump of that was a
partisan process that passed that bill, so we should
repeal it now. Again, points to the need for
bipartisan cooperation.
>> Zach (27:37):
Total agree and great minds think alike.
Chelsea.
>> Peterson Toscano (27:54):
That was Chelsea Henderson and Representative Bob
Inglis from
republican.org. you also
heard Katie Zirkreski and Zach Torpy, the
hosts of Green Tea Party Radio.
After our panel discussion, I sat down with
Drew Irely. He's CCL's
(28:14):
conservative outreach director.
Drew's journey into climate advocacy
began with a personal realization. Uh, he
wanted to create a better future for his daughter.
Since then, Drew has worked tirelessly to
bring conservative voices into climate
conversations emphasizing the economic
(28:35):
and national security benefits of
action. We'll hear his perspective on
how conservatives can lead the way in addressing climate
change, the importance of m bipartisan
cooperation, and what
opportunities exist for right of center advocates
and organizations like Citizens Climate
Lobby.
>> Drew Ireley (29:05):
I'm Drew Irely, CCL's Conservative
Outreach Director. My job is to
lend a conservative face and perspective
to CCL's mission in showing that
Republicans and those right of center do care
about climate change and want to be involved
in the discussions around climate policy. You know, it's like
(29:25):
Chelsea said in the very first episode of this
podcast, policies are more successful when they're
bipartisan. So if we want this to be successful,
we have to have a seat at that table, having the
discussion with everybody else to make sure that our values and morals are
represented on this issue. Why climate? For
me, I won't lie. You know, it wasn't too long ago
that I was on the opposite side of this debate
(29:47):
discussion. It took a
lot of life changing things for me, one being my
daughter being born, for me to realize that this is
an issue that's going to affect either my
lifetime or my daughter's lifetime.
I want to make sure that I'm involved in the discussion,
in finding solutions for this issue for
her.
>> Peterson Toscano (30:08):
And how long have you been doing this and what are some
changes that you've seen as a result of it?
>> Drew Ireley (30:14):
I really got invested in climate
in 2016. The changes that I've
seen, it is a much more palatable
discussion with those that are right of center.
The science around climate change isn't
really so controversial anymore. At least not, uh, in my
own peer social circles and networks. What
(30:35):
really comes down to more is trusting the government
to enact policies that are going to do more good
than harm. To which I say, well, that's why you
should be involved in the discussion. Make sure the policies that you want get
put in place.
>> Peterson Toscano (30:48):
Yeah, absolutely. And we have a whole
new world politically happening. We
have a very conservative Republican
government. So for those
conservatives that you know of and that you're going to
get to know over the next year, what's your message for
them? As we begin the, the new year, the new
administration, what, uh, message do you
(31:10):
have?
>> Drew Ireley (31:11):
Keep grinding. Hold the line. Let your
elected officials know that this is an issue that you want
to see addressed in a manner that represents your
values. Every issue is also an
opportunity. We have an opportunity here to stimulate the economy,
creating new jobs, decrease unnecessary
spending, increase our, uh, national
(31:31):
security. Like there's tons of opportunity that can come out
of this issue. Keep raising those flags.
>> Peterson Toscano (31:37):
And for someone interested in ccl, uh,
conservatives, what will they experience there and
what are the opportunities that exist in a year
of being in ccl? Conservatives.
>> Drew Ireley (31:48):
So we have the whole new set of action teams coming
out. There is an opportunity to come and
work on this issue from a space that
piques your interest, be it business, economy,
armed forces, you name it, or just right of center.
Tons of opportunity to get involved in a manner that
suits you, not so much that you have to fit a
(32:09):
particular mold. When you join ccl, there's
ways to do it that'll perfectly align with your interests.
You're going to be a hero. Every CCL
event I walk into being a Republican who is going
against the stereotypical
societal norm of Republicans don't
care about this. You walk in the room and people are real
(32:30):
glad to see you.
>> Peterson Toscano (32:31):
And I know in years past there's been conference and
lobby day in D.C. is this something that people can look forward
to as well?
>> Drew Ireley (32:38):
Absolutely. March 4th. This is our right of
center only conference. So once a year we all meet
up in Washington D.C. it is strictly for right
of center individuals do a day of conference
and trainings and then the following day we go on the
Hill as nothing but right of center
individuals meet with nothing but right of center
(32:59):
offices and have right of center
discussions on the issue of climate change and climate
policy.
>> Peterson Toscano (33:05):
I've been twice to cover it for Citizens Climate
Radio and I was amazed both times
at how incredibly
warmly these conservative
volunteers were received in
Republican lawmakers, uh,
offices. It was such a totally different
experience that I saw when it was progressives
(33:27):
talking about climate change. They talked about it differently, and
they also were listened to and received
differently.
>> Drew Ireley (33:34):
It's a completely different discussion from our
normal lobby days when everybody's in D.C. if
I'm going to speak blunt, that's the difference between meeting
with somebody who wants to have discussion on what they can do versus
meeting with somebody who wants to have a discussion
around yelling at you for what you're not doing. So when we show
up and meet with these offices, we just want to talk about. All right, how do
(33:54):
we move forward?
>> Peterson Toscano (33:55):
I'm thrilled to hear that you've heard Hot Mess.
You mentioned the first episode. I never get to talk
often with listeners, so I'm just so
curious. What has the experience been like for you? Is there
any. Anything new and fresh that you heard in
it?
>> Drew Ireley (34:11):
There was all kinds of information in there, or just things
that remind you of discussion points, like, you know, going back to that first
episode with talking about Ford and how he was
directly responsible for emissions reductions, things
like that. Things that you learned so many years ago,
but you tend to, you know, really forget about.
It was definitely a nice walk down, um, kind of. I don't want to say memory
(34:31):
lane, but a good history lesson to remind you that at
one point, conservatives were right there
leading the charge on how to fix this issue. And if
we were there, we can get back there.
>> Peterson Toscano (34:42):
Yeah, absolutely. And every major
legislation that is passed about clean air and
clean water and all that has always been under
a Republican president. There's been virtually nothing
passed with Democrats. We recently had the Inflation
Reduction act, of course, which, uh, is benefiting lots
of red states. But that wasn't a bipartisan
legislation and it may be challenged, but
(35:04):
Republicans seem to get the work done.
>> Drew Ireley (35:06):
The climate provisions of the IRA are great. I'll,
uh, be empathetic in saying that. I can understand some of the
points of contention in other parts of the ira, but the
climate provisions and what they've done for local
economies and even individuals such as
myself who want to look into cleaner, more
affordable renewable technologies. The IRA is
great. It's absolutely outstanding.
>> Peterson Toscano (35:28):
Anything else you want to add about CCL
conservatives, about how people can get involved?
>> Drew Ireley (35:34):
Go to CCL website, uh, sign up, join our
info session, learn about the organization. If you think
it's a great fit for you, we'd be more than happy to
have you come and join one of our action
teams and go out there and advocate and
pull those levers of political will.
>> Peterson Toscano (35:54):
That was Drew Ireley, Citizens
Climate Lobbies, Conservative Activities Outreach
Director.
Thank you for listening to this episode of
Hot Mess How Climate Consensus Turned into
Political Chaos this episode and
this series comes to you from Citizens
(36:15):
Climate Radio, which is a project of Citizens
Climate Education. You can find
our full catalog of over
100
episodes@cclusa.org
radio or look for Citizens
Climate Radio wherever you get
podcasts. We produce a
(36:36):
show every two weeks and this season you will hear
from voices on the right and the
left. These include poets,
pastors, politicians and public health
experts.
Many thanks to our roundtable guests Bob
Inglis, Chelsea Henderson, Katie
(36:56):
Zakreski and Zach Torpy, and to Drew
Irely. Learn more about Bob
and Chelsea by visiting
republician.org Chelsea
hosts the Egoright Speaks podcast and
she is the author of the excellent book
the Inside Story of Climate Politics.
It is published by Turner Publishing and available
(37:18):
wherever you get books. You can hear
Zach and Katie every week on Green
Tea Party Radio, which is available wherever
you get podcasts. To connect with Drew Irely
and his fellow conservatives at Citizens climate
lobby, visit
cclusa.org
conservatives every March
(37:41):
they hold a conference and Lobby Day in
Washington, dc.
>> Katie (37:52):
Hot Mess is made possible through Citizens Climate Education.
The show has been researched by Horace Moe, Lily Rushin and
Peterson Toscano. Editorial assistants from Flannery
Winchester, Elie Silvestri and Brett Cease
production by Peterson Toscano with assistance from Elie
Silvestri. Music for this episode comes from Epidemic Sound
and Elise Silvestri.
>> Peterson Toscano (38:11):
The views expressed by our guests do not
necessarily reflect those of Citizens Climate
Education. Special thanks to
you, our listeners, for joining us on this
journey. I'm um, Peterson Toscano and
this has been Hot Mess How
Climate Consensus Turned into
Political Chaos.
(38:32):
Mhm.
>> Chelsea Henderson (38:36):
It.
Welcome to the eighth and final episode of
Hot Mess, How Climate Consensus Turned into
Political Chaos. I'm, um, Peterson
Toscano, host of Citizens Climate
Radio. Over the past
episodes, we've unpacked how unified
concern about global warming
unraveled into decades of political
(00:23):
stalling, misinformation, and missed
opportunities. Today, we're
wrapping things up with a roundtable discussion
featuring voices that span generations,
experiences and perspectives within the
conservative climate movement. You'll hear
from Bob Inglis, former Republican
congressman and executive director of
(00:45):
republican.org Very.
>> Bob Inglis (00:48):
Few people really are still arguing with
thermometers.
>> Peterson Toscano (00:53):
Chelsea Henderson, director of
editorial content@republican.org
and host of Ecowright Speaks.
>> Chelsea Henderson (01:01):
I think that one thing we have seen, if you look over time, is
how important it is that one side not have a
monopoly.
>> Peterson Toscano (01:08):
Katie Zirkreski, journalist and co host of
Green Tea Party Radio.
>> Katie (01:13):
This is an economic issue. This is a national
security issue. This is a pro life issue.
>> Peterson Toscano (01:19):
And Zach Torpy, environmental engineer and
fellow co host of Green Tea Party Radio.
>> Zach (01:25):
With Trump in the office, there has to be an emphasis on
tariffs. You could talk about the border adjustment being a
carbon tariff on foreign countries and foreign soldiers like
China and India.
>> Peterson Toscano (01:34):
Together, we'll reflect on key takeaways
from this series, dive into the cultural
and political factors that shape the conservative
climate movement, and explore where what lies
ahead. After the panel, I sit
down with Drew Irely, Citizens Climate
Lobby's conservative outreach director,
(01:54):
to hear how conservatives are shaping a, uh, path
forward for climate action.
Let's begin
our roundtable Guests are no strangers to the
challenges and triumphs of advancing climate
solutions in conservative spaces.
Representative Bob Inglis knows
(02:15):
firsthand what it's like to challenge the status
quo. As a former congressman, he's
championed conservative climate action,
earning recognition with the
2015 John F. Kennedy
Profile and Courage Award.
Bob also appears in the documentary
Merchants of Doubt, which exposes the
(02:37):
dark side of misinformation
campaigns. Chelsea Henderson has
spent nearly 25 years striking
bipartisan compromises on climate
policy. From her work on Capitol
Hill to her role as host of Ecorite
Speaks podcast, Chelsea continues
to bring Republicans and Democrats
(02:59):
to the table for real solutions. She's
also author of the book Glacial,
which is a, uh, deep dive into the history of
climate politics. Katie Sarkresky is a
journalist, environmental advocate, and co host of
Green Tea Party Radio, where she and
Zach Torpy highlight climate solutions that
resonate with young conservatives.
(03:22):
Zach is an environmental engineer and a strong
voice for pragmatic climate solutions.
His vision, an America that leads the
way in addressing climate change while
preserving its natural beauty.
Before we begin the roundtable, I want to give you a
heads up about a name that comes up later
(03:42):
in our discussion.
Mark Marano.
Um,
Bob will mention him as part of the climate
misinformation machine. Mark
Morano is a well known figure in climate
skepticism. He's the founder of Climate Depot
and a frequent guest on conservative media
(04:03):
outlets. In the film Merchants of
Doubt, Bob recalls how the filmmakers
captured Marano admitting to his role in
spreading, uh, industry driven climate
misinformation.
Marano's tactics, which include
amplifying disinformation and
attacking climate scientists, have played
(04:24):
a significant role in fueling doubt
about climate change. His admissions in
Merchants of Doubt reveal how deeply the
fossil fuel industry has influenced public
discourse.
M as you listen to the
roundtable, keep this context in mind when
Bob mentions Murano's contributions to
(04:47):
the climate skepticism movement.
Now we hear from Chelsea Henderson, Katie
Zarkreski, Zach Torpy, and representative
Bob Inglis.
I am thrilled to be with this
illustrious group of people. Uh, we have
some young conservatives and some folks
(05:10):
who are a little bit older who've been working on conservative
issues for a long time.
Welcome everyone.
>> Chelsea Henderson (05:17):
I was actually just going to thank you for not calling me and Bob
old,
seasoned, experienced.
>> Bob Inglis (05:28):
Yeah, that was nice.
And Peterson, just, uh, congratulations on the
series and this, uh, is the eighth and final
of your eighth of eight. So, uh, thank you for all the
work you've done in the, all those episodes.
>> Peterson Toscano (05:42):
It's been such a learning experience. And I have
to say, reading Chelsea's wonderful book,
Felicia, reading that and doing this research
and talking with, with you all has
really been sobering. In looking at the past
50 years, it's been sad, the many
missed opportunities and it's been, I don't
(06:03):
know, inspiring. The many people like you, Bob,
who have pushed against the tide and
gotten the conversation started with
conservatives.
After spending all this time, many, many hours on
this, we clearly in the United States have
had a problem with addressing climate change in any
serious way. So who
(06:24):
do you think bears the most responsibility
for 50 years of denial,
delay and doubt?
>> Chelsea Henderson (06:32):
You know, when you first were
heading in the direction of this question, I was going to say the oil
and gas industry. But I'm going to dial back on that and
say that it is the apathy
of regular citizens. And I
think part of that is it took a
long time for climate change to
(06:52):
be something that was happening to people in their
daily lives. So if you contrast
climate change with something like acid
rain or the hole in the ozone, which
posed real immediate threats to people.
At the same time, the scientists were raising
the alarms about climate change, but it
(07:12):
didn't feel like it was happening. It was all projected to be in the
future. And so while we're kind of
triaging what we have to deal with on a daily basis, our
own personal stresses, work stresses, family
stresses, there's something bigger level that we're going
to worry about and it isn't even happening yet. Yeah,
we're going to shelf it. And so maybe it is that
combined with some of the disinformation campaigns
(07:35):
that told people, well, if we do do something about it, it's going to
raise your energy prices. And it's. We're not even sure this
is really the problem we need to address. And so I think that
was maybe like a, uh, very lethal combination of things that
have led us to this point where 60 plus
years of attempts to
enact a solution have kind of fallen
(07:55):
by the wayside.
>> Bob Inglis (07:56):
Yeah, I agree that it's really, it's,
it's the human condition to,
you know, when faced with a global
problem, and I'm just one person,
I just gotta accept it the way it is.
It's like death and taxes.
In order to be successful, we have to overcome that. We have to say, no,
(08:16):
no, there really, there's things we can do, we can
overcome this, there's solutions. You know,
problem is like on healthcare, healthcare
is an impossible problem to solve.
M. There's 100% death rate,
there's a lot of suffering between here and there's. So
all you can do in healthcare is just hope to alleviate the
suffering. The difference between that and climate is you
(08:39):
can actually solve climate, you can
actually fix this.
But it's a worldwide problem and
I'm just one person. So we
gotta give, uh, people a sense that they can
have some influence on this and particularly have
leaders that are courageous enough to tell us, hey, you know what, there's
solutions.
>> Zach (09:00):
You need everyone rowing in the same direction. And it's hard to get different
political parties, different nations and different groups with different
vested interests going the same direction. So it's hard to
unite everyone to solve this issue,
Especially when people are concerned about the economics and how
we're going to fund things. A lot of it's just getting
mutual buy in from all groups.
>> Chelsea Henderson (09:20):
What Zach was saying. Oh, sorry, Katie, go ahead,
Chelsea, go ahead. I was just going to say Zach's point
about getting alignment with
different parties and constituencies and stuff. I think
that one thing we have seen, if you look over time is how
important it is that one side not have a
monopoly, either the solutions that are
enacted or the ideas that are on the table.
(09:41):
Because then you do end up in a lopsided sort
of mess, or you end up in a situation where there's no long
term certainties. You know, what one
Congress does, another Congress can undo. And if one
Congress does something in a, um, hyper partisan way, then
next Congress can undo that. Yet if we work
together, then you have
(10:02):
solutions that are more durable.
>> Katie (10:05):
I won't beat around the bush about who I think is
responsible. I
realized, and I looked for a way to word this,
but when you're in your 20s, like Zach
and I, you might not be as familiar with the origins of a lot of
this as maybe some of the folks who've been doing this work for a few
decades. And so even as I was going back and doing a deep
dive into research, I was like, man, Exxon really did
(10:27):
put a number on everybody. When you look back at
the oil and gas industry, yeah, I'm going to initially blame them,
but as a journalist, I'm, um, also going to blame the media
because it was really alarming to read
how a lot of these newspapers would write editorials and
publish op EDS that were like, oh my goodness, the fossil fuel industry is
so bad, so terrible. And then in poor economic
(10:48):
times, they're running a full page ad for Exxon on the
next page because they need the advertising money. So it was,
you know, yeah, we acknowledge this is bad, but we got no problem promoting
it when we need the cash. So I feel like a lot of
different groups and organizations really need to be
able to put their money where their mouth is in terms of, you know, if
something's wrong, even if we need the money, we're not going to accept
(11:08):
money from these individuals that, that we clearly don't
agree with, that we acknowledge have done some sort of
wrongdoing. For me as a journalist at
least, it's twofold. You've got the oil and gas industry,
but then you've also got the media that I don't think did
enough to shine the light not only
on the truth in those early decades in the 50s,
60s and 70s, but also kind of turned a blind
(11:30):
eye to it in the years and decades after that.
>> Peterson Toscano (11:33):
Well, I think this is such an important point though, about
the role of the fossil fuel industry, particularly when we
look at episode seven, which is about
how climate skepticism has been very
much a US thing compared to the rest
of the world.
And Bob, I love that you were in the film Merchants
of Doubt. I wish you had been in the book as well, because
(11:55):
the book, you know, is very discouraging.
But with you in the film, it, like, show, like, there's a
movement forward. But how did that experience of being
in. In that film Merchants of Doubt, how
did that shape your understanding of the role of
misinformation in. In this debate?
>> Bob Inglis (12:12):
Wow. If you haven't seen it, it's really worth seeing. Merchants of
Gout. It's a film by Robbie Kenner, uh, based on
the book by Naomi Oreskes. And
I asked Robbie, how did you
get Mark Morano to say all that to
you? Did you think out of a date? What did
you do? And Robbie is
(12:32):
just such a. Such a great interviewer. He says, well,
you just ask people and they'll tell you their story. He
just got Mark Morano to hang himself.
I mean, it's just really. Anyway, it's really
worth watching. And also just to celebrate,
uh, what Robbie does, you know, he doesn't pick up the
microphone and do a voiceover when he wants to transition
(12:53):
between one thing and another. He actually
puts only voices in there, the people that he
interviews. So it's an enormously difficult,
challenging way that he does a documentary.
Watch how the producer or whatever, the director just picks up a
microphone and does the voiceover to get from one to another.
That's not what Robbie does. It's really hard work.
(13:14):
So it's really well done. He told me that the main thing you want to do
is get some, um, emotion in the
film. He called me up, Peterson.
He asked me, you know, he's going on and on about, how will you get
on this film? Love me or you do this? And I'm like, robbie,
if you take a breath, I'd say yes. Because
the kids had come home with
(13:34):
Food Inc. Which is his film too. And
it sort of changed the way that they were eating. We were eating.
And so I knew that my polling numbers would go
up with my kids if I were on this. Rob, you know, did a film
with Robert Kenneth. And so I
said, ravi, yes, of course. He said that he
had seen dozens of climate films.
(13:54):
He said, I can't remember any of them. He said, what
he wants to do in this film is have
some lasting reaction. And
the reaction is, you know what? Fool
me once, shame, um, on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
Robbie has produced a film that really
(14:16):
shows. You kidding me?
The same people who doubted the causal
connection between smoking and cancer
actually moved on to other things. Where
they introduced doubt. And the great thing about
Naomi Oreskes is I told her, naomi, you
didn't do the easy thing, which is say, oh, it's just the
(14:36):
money. That's thereafter. No, she said, no, it's not that.
What happened is these people got out of
sync with the whole body of science and
the whole body of their colleagues
in the scientific world. And then they were
out there on their own and they needed to create a new, new
tribe. And so the tribe they created
was Merchants of doubt.
>> Peterson Toscano (14:58):
Yeah, it is eye opening and definitely
worth watching. I think it's one of the most important climate
films out there.
And it makes me wonder though, clearly the fossil fuel
industry, as you talked about Chelsea in your
book and on the show, poured millions and
millions of dollars into taking
advantage of our emotions and our
(15:19):
culture. And so I'm wondering,
were lawmakers and the public truly
duped by this? And that's what
delay things were, some complicit
in allowing the doubt to fester. Have we all
been gaslit for a long time by fossil fuel
industry, as.
>> Chelsea Henderson (15:38):
Bob was saying about the human condition? Right.
Everyone's going about their day and they have a bunch of things
to worry about. So if a really flashy ad is
telling you you don't have to worry about this one thing, then you're just going
to take it out of your mindset.
But we are still in a place where people still don't
believe. And I'm sure that Zach and Katie get
this, but Bob and I get the
(16:00):
republican.org social media or
responses back to the weekly newsletter that
I put out for republican.org
that sometimes if we've had a
membership push and somebody maybe doesn't understand exactly
what they've signed up for and they respond back with climate
change is fake and it's not real and it's a hoax,
there are those moments where that happens. So we
(16:23):
still wrestle today
with that doubt. Though I think on the
political level, denialism
is not as prevalent as it once was.
There is an understanding from many policymakers and as evidenced
by John Curtis's when he was in the House, his
conservative climate caucus had over 80 people. It was one of
(16:43):
the largest caucuses in the House, if not the largest. I'm not
saying that each one of those members of that caucus was like dying to go out and
introduce a bill, but they were in the caucus to try to learn and to
not be shamed about the fact that they might not know as
much as some of their peers in the House.
We do have this weird disconnect, right,
where maybe most Americans haven't been
(17:04):
engaged on a daily basis. And then you had
lawmakers that were, as Bob likes to
say, the elected officials are not the leaders,
right? They are following what
their constituents or what the
tidal wave is sort of moving
toward. But at the same time, if you
just look at polling, the polling
(17:26):
shows overwhelmingly that people support climate
action. The politics hasn't caught up with the
polling, but then the people aren't driving
the politics enough either. And it might come
down to the fact that there are just other priorities that people have.
And, and the one thing that I keep trying, a point I guess
I keep trying to make, is that we can't think about
climate change as an environmental issue, right? This isn't just a tree
(17:49):
hugging issue. It is so much an economic
issue. Right now, at the time that we're sitting and recording
this, California is on fire. So, um, in
California, probably the most
costly natural disaster in U.S.
history. While the scientists have not
yet come out to say that this
fire was caused by climate change, we know that
(18:10):
wildfires can be more intense
and can happen off season, et cetera, et cetera,
because of the conditions that are created by climate
change. And sort of going back a few months ago to
Hurricane Helene, the scientists were pretty quick
on that one to say, yes, the conditions
that have been caused by climate change caused helene
to drop 50% more water or whatever the
(18:32):
percentage was than a normal hurricane would have.
So, you know, these have real economic costs. It's loss
of business, I mean, obviously loss of life. So human,
the human loss is devastating.
And then loss of homes, and
the loss of those homes causing the insurance industry to
flee. Some of these states that are on the front lines of climate
(18:52):
change, loss of property and loss of business.
I mean, the mental health toll that's going to take
on people, the health impacts, I mean those
are real things you can put price tags on
that are going to add up. So for people that are either
voting or thinking the economy comes
first, they need to see the connection
(19:13):
between the economy and climate change or economic
prosperity and climate change.
>> Zach (19:18):
Chelsea I think as the generations have gotten younger,
we've experienced a, uh, reduction in denialism and more of
just a. We're completely overwhelmed by
how chaotic the world is. There's too many issues to focus
on and people just shut down and go on
TikTok reels and disengage from the world
and just disassociate. And now people just don't want
(19:38):
to deal with the issues that they're facing. They just want to focus on
what they can manage in their own lives. And it's becoming difficult to,
like, get people to care again.
Why should they care about the Amazon when they're
struggling day to day with their, uh, paychecks and
having to make their own living? I really do think the
best argument for climate change is arguing about the
economics of it and talking about the localized cost of energy, of
(20:00):
solar and wind versus oil and natural
gas, and talking about the impacts that we're going to
have. I would just like to live in a better society where it's
easy to walk to a supermarket and I can go out to a bar and
get a drink and see people in walking distance from where I
live. That's how I like to argue it.
>> Chelsea Henderson (20:17):
I think when you look at the six Americas, the study that
George Mason University's Climate Changed Communication
center and the Yale center for Climate Communication put
out together, and they update
periodically, the category
disengaged to me is more troubling than the
category dismissive.
Because, uh, that category of people that dismiss
(20:38):
or don't, the non believers, is so small now,
it's single digits. But what you were just saying, Zach,
about the, uh, disengagement and the role that social
media plays in that disengagement. Yeah. You're just
gonna wake up and start scrolling because you wanna see something that makes you
laugh or you wanna see something that feels worse than what you're going
through, or something you can empathize with.
(20:58):
Yeah. The disengaged portion of our
society is where we need to light that spark and to
show that what is possible. Right? What is possible with
bipartisanship, what is possible with leadership, the
economic prosperity that we could see if we
were innovating to the extent
that the US can, because we are one of the most
(21:19):
innovative countries in the world and a leader on the
global stage. We could have that life
that you are envisioning. We need
more attention. We need more engagement.
>> Peterson Toscano (21:31):
Chelsea, I'm glad you puppies and kittens are very
engaging. I wish they would talk about climate change.
>> Katie (21:37):
Yeah, more puppies, kittens, bunnies, baby
skunks. We need some more input from them.
Um, but, Chelsea, I'm really glad that you said what you did. I think Zach
hears me say at least twice a week, every week when we
record for Green Tea Party Radio, that I'm an optimistic
pessimist. So I always try to look for some
sort of silver lining to give me hope. I've been hearing
a lot of conservatives talk about, okay, well, you know, the
(22:00):
economy is going to be our primary issue. That's why the election went
the way that it did. We only care about the economy. Everything else takes a
backseat to the economy. But for me, what that means
is we are in a prime position over the
next four years to sell
conservatives on. This is an economic issue. This
is a national security issue. This is a pro
life issue. This is an issue that conservatives
(22:23):
have touted the values of for
decades. And it's time that we sit
at the table and address it for the issue that it is. If we don't
like what our counterparts on the left are saying,
okay, then let's play ball. What do we propose?
This is our opportunity to show, you know, if we don't like the economy the
way that it is, okay, let's make more manufacturing jobs here in
the US let's create more of those jobs that don't need four year
(22:45):
degrees. Let's um, open that up for low income and blue
collar and working class families. Let's keep it
here. Let's start working on things that won't completely flood
our naval bases. The next four
years are going to be the key for really making
this environmental issue a conservative one.
>> Peterson Toscano (23:02):
Perfect segue because we're coming to the end.
So what are the next steps? I mean economically, a C ban is
going to come into place with the European Union in
2026. And this podcast has been focusing
on, um, conservatives and conservative voices. And now we
have a very conservative government in the United
States. For those doing climate work, for you
doing climate work, what's next?
>> Bob Inglis (23:25):
I think the most likely path forward is the
um, uh, Senator Cassidy's Foreign Pollution
FIA act, which gets the conversation going
about how do you, how do you get the world in
on this? Because you know Peterson, back when I was
getting tossed out of Congress in 2010, it was very
much aggressive disbelief. You know,
it's basically people saying, I don't believe in climate change. You shouldn't
(23:48):
either. That's all changed now.
Uh, as Chelsea was just pointing out, very few
people really are still arguing with
thermometers. That
dismissive group has just gone down.
What it is now is. Yeah, but
how do you get the world in on this? Well,
(24:08):
it might be that people like um, Senator
Cassidy has a solution which is,
um, let's attach those
costs to products when they're sent
to us from China and then let's see what it
looks like, um, compared to the cleaner American
stuff. And so it creates incentives
that really work. So I think that may be a
(24:31):
step toward a full blown carbon
border adjustment mechanism and
hopefully, ah, later, a domestic price on carbon
dioxide, which when paired with either
a dividend back to the people to, uh,
taxpayers or with a reduction in payroll
taxes, results in no growth of government.
And pretty exciting for conservatives to solve a
(24:53):
problem without growing government.
>> Peterson Toscano (24:57):
What do you have to say? What's next for you all in
your next year of broadcasting and what issues you're going
to focus on?
>> Katie (25:05):
Honestly, I think for us, I think it'll be, it's convincing more
young people that people like us exist, that you're not
alone if you feel this way and that the onus is on you
as a young person to contact your member of Congress and
let them know that you exist, that as somebody who's getting ready to
hopefully buy a house, start a family, work a job,
travel to work, these are your concerns about whether or not you
(25:26):
can do it in a way that's affordable and environmentally friendly.
And Zach, I cut you off. What were you going to say? I'm so sorry.
>> Zach (25:32):
I'll say I totally agree with Bob and I also think it's
a lot of how you market what you're
proposing. With Trump in office. There
has to be an emphasis on tariffs. You could talk about
the border adjustment being a carbon tariff on foreign countries
and foreign polluters like China and India. The
climate community needs to focus on marketing and
how we can better sell our ideas and convince other
(25:55):
groups that this is a path forward economically to benefit
our country. It'll also be interesting to see
if the benefits of the Inflation Reduction act
in conservative areas are
bought into by the local representatives and if they're interested
in keeping those manufacturing jobs and the money they're getting from the federal
government to invest in their communities, if that will be
protected by them, or if they're going to want to tear it up and restart
(26:17):
with something else.
>> Chelsea Henderson (26:20):
I was just going to say to what Zach was just saying
too, that our. I, uh, just keep tag
teaming on everything Zach said today.
Our friend also in the conservative carbon
pricing world, Alex Flint, who is the
executive director at alliance for Market Solutions, made a point
recently that if you give the
ira, the Inflation Reduction Act a
(26:42):
few more years to, uh, do what
it's supposed to do, given how much investment is
being made in Republican districts
from that bill, that then the Republicans
that lead those districts can take the credit for all of
the great economic prosperity that their Congressional
district is reaping.
(27:02):
Was it Reagan that said, or somebody in the
old, old timey days, I'll say. Said it doesn't
matter who takes the credit as long as the
work gets done. Yeah, let's let
people take credit and feel good about
clean energy and innovation and
economic prosperity that comes from those.
(27:26):
Yes, we have to get over that hump of that was a
partisan process that passed that bill, so we should
repeal it now. Again, points to the need for
bipartisan cooperation.
>> Zach (27:37):
Total agree and great minds think alike.
Chelsea.
>> Peterson Toscano (27:54):
That was Chelsea Henderson and Representative Bob
Inglis from
republican.org. you also
heard Katie Zirkreski and Zach Torpy, the
hosts of Green Tea Party Radio.
After our panel discussion, I sat down with
Drew Irely. He's CCL's
(28:14):
conservative outreach director.
Drew's journey into climate advocacy
began with a personal realization. Uh, he
wanted to create a better future for his daughter.
Since then, Drew has worked tirelessly to
bring conservative voices into climate
conversations emphasizing the economic
(28:35):
and national security benefits of
action. We'll hear his perspective on
how conservatives can lead the way in addressing climate
change, the importance of m bipartisan
cooperation, and what
opportunities exist for right of center advocates
and organizations like Citizens Climate
Lobby.
>> Drew Ireley (29:05):
I'm Drew Irely, CCL's Conservative
Outreach Director. My job is to
lend a conservative face and perspective
to CCL's mission in showing that
Republicans and those right of center do care
about climate change and want to be involved
in the discussions around climate policy. You know, it's like
(29:25):
Chelsea said in the very first episode of this
podcast, policies are more successful when they're
bipartisan. So if we want this to be successful,
we have to have a seat at that table, having the
discussion with everybody else to make sure that our values and morals are
represented on this issue. Why climate? For
me, I won't lie. You know, it wasn't too long ago
that I was on the opposite side of this debate
(29:47):
discussion. It took a
lot of life changing things for me, one being my
daughter being born, for me to realize that this is
an issue that's going to affect either my
lifetime or my daughter's lifetime.
I want to make sure that I'm involved in the discussion,
in finding solutions for this issue for
her.
>> Peterson Toscano (30:08):
And how long have you been doing this and what are some
changes that you've seen as a result of it?
>> Drew Ireley (30:14):
I really got invested in climate
in 2016. The changes that I've
seen, it is a much more palatable
discussion with those that are right of center.
The science around climate change isn't
really so controversial anymore. At least not, uh, in my
own peer social circles and networks. What
(30:35):
really comes down to more is trusting the government
to enact policies that are going to do more good
than harm. To which I say, well, that's why you
should be involved in the discussion. Make sure the policies that you want get
put in place.
>> Peterson Toscano (30:48):
Yeah, absolutely. And we have a whole
new world politically happening. We
have a very conservative Republican
government. So for those
conservatives that you know of and that you're going to
get to know over the next year, what's your message for
them? As we begin the, the new year, the new
administration, what, uh, message do you
(31:10):
have?
>> Drew Ireley (31:11):
Keep grinding. Hold the line. Let your
elected officials know that this is an issue that you want
to see addressed in a manner that represents your
values. Every issue is also an
opportunity. We have an opportunity here to stimulate the economy,
creating new jobs, decrease unnecessary
spending, increase our, uh, national
(31:31):
security. Like there's tons of opportunity that can come out
of this issue. Keep raising those flags.
>> Peterson Toscano (31:37):
And for someone interested in ccl, uh,
conservatives, what will they experience there and
what are the opportunities that exist in a year
of being in ccl? Conservatives.
>> Drew Ireley (31:48):
So we have the whole new set of action teams coming
out. There is an opportunity to come and
work on this issue from a space that
piques your interest, be it business, economy,
armed forces, you name it, or just right of center.
Tons of opportunity to get involved in a manner that
suits you, not so much that you have to fit a
(32:09):
particular mold. When you join ccl, there's
ways to do it that'll perfectly align with your interests.
You're going to be a hero. Every CCL
event I walk into being a Republican who is going
against the stereotypical
societal norm of Republicans don't
care about this. You walk in the room and people are real
(32:30):
glad to see you.
>> Peterson Toscano (32:31):
And I know in years past there's been conference and
lobby day in D.C. is this something that people can look forward
to as well?
>> Drew Ireley (32:38):
Absolutely. March 4th. This is our right of
center only conference. So once a year we all meet
up in Washington D.C. it is strictly for right
of center individuals do a day of conference
and trainings and then the following day we go on the
Hill as nothing but right of center
individuals meet with nothing but right of center
(32:59):
offices and have right of center
discussions on the issue of climate change and climate
policy.
>> Peterson Toscano (33:05):
I've been twice to cover it for Citizens Climate
Radio and I was amazed both times
at how incredibly
warmly these conservative
volunteers were received in
Republican lawmakers, uh,
offices. It was such a totally different
experience that I saw when it was progressives
(33:27):
talking about climate change. They talked about it differently, and
they also were listened to and received
differently.
>> Drew Ireley (33:34):
It's a completely different discussion from our
normal lobby days when everybody's in D.C. if
I'm going to speak blunt, that's the difference between meeting
with somebody who wants to have discussion on what they can do versus
meeting with somebody who wants to have a discussion
around yelling at you for what you're not doing. So when we show
up and meet with these offices, we just want to talk about. All right, how do
(33:54):
we move forward?
>> Peterson Toscano (33:55):
I'm thrilled to hear that you've heard Hot Mess.
You mentioned the first episode. I never get to talk
often with listeners, so I'm just so
curious. What has the experience been like for you? Is there
any. Anything new and fresh that you heard in
it?
>> Drew Ireley (34:11):
There was all kinds of information in there, or just things
that remind you of discussion points, like, you know, going back to that first
episode with talking about Ford and how he was
directly responsible for emissions reductions, things
like that. Things that you learned so many years ago,
but you tend to, you know, really forget about.
It was definitely a nice walk down, um, kind of. I don't want to say memory
(34:31):
lane, but a good history lesson to remind you that at
one point, conservatives were right there
leading the charge on how to fix this issue. And if
we were there, we can get back there.
>> Peterson Toscano (34:42):
Yeah, absolutely. And every major
legislation that is passed about clean air and
clean water and all that has always been under
a Republican president. There's been virtually nothing
passed with Democrats. We recently had the Inflation
Reduction act, of course, which, uh, is benefiting lots
of red states. But that wasn't a bipartisan
legislation and it may be challenged, but
(35:04):
Republicans seem to get the work done.
>> Drew Ireley (35:06):
The climate provisions of the IRA are great. I'll,
uh, be empathetic in saying that. I can understand some of the
points of contention in other parts of the ira, but the
climate provisions and what they've done for local
economies and even individuals such as
myself who want to look into cleaner, more
affordable renewable technologies. The IRA is
great. It's absolutely outstanding.
>> Peterson Toscano (35:28):
Anything else you want to add about CCL
conservatives, about how people can get involved?
>> Drew Ireley (35:34):
Go to CCL website, uh, sign up, join our
info session, learn about the organization. If you think
it's a great fit for you, we'd be more than happy to
have you come and join one of our action
teams and go out there and advocate and
pull those levers of political will.
>> Peterson Toscano (35:54):
That was Drew Ireley, Citizens
Climate Lobbies, Conservative Activities Outreach
Director.
Thank you for listening to this episode of
Hot Mess How Climate Consensus Turned into
Political Chaos this episode and
this series comes to you from Citizens
(36:15):
Climate Radio, which is a project of Citizens
Climate Education. You can find
our full catalog of over
100
episodes@cclusa.org
radio or look for Citizens
Climate Radio wherever you get
podcasts. We produce a
(36:36):
show every two weeks and this season you will hear
from voices on the right and the
left. These include poets,
pastors, politicians and public health
experts.
Many thanks to our roundtable guests Bob
Inglis, Chelsea Henderson, Katie
(36:56):
Zakreski and Zach Torpy, and to Drew
Irely. Learn more about Bob
and Chelsea by visiting
republician.org Chelsea
hosts the Egoright Speaks podcast and
she is the author of the excellent book
the Inside Story of Climate Politics.
It is published by Turner Publishing and available
(37:18):
wherever you get books. You can hear
Zach and Katie every week on Green
Tea Party Radio, which is available wherever
you get podcasts. To connect with Drew Irely
and his fellow conservatives at Citizens climate
lobby, visit
cclusa.org
conservatives every March
(37:41):
they hold a conference and Lobby Day in
Washington, dc.
>> Katie (37:52):
Hot Mess is made possible through Citizens Climate Education.
The show has been researched by Horace Moe, Lily Rushin and
Peterson Toscano. Editorial assistants from Flannery
Winchester, Elie Silvestri and Brett Cease
production by Peterson Toscano with assistance from Elie
Silvestri. Music for this episode comes from Epidemic Sound
and Elise Silvestri.
>> Peterson Toscano (38:11):
The views expressed by our guests do not
necessarily reflect those of Citizens Climate
Education. Special thanks to
you, our listeners, for joining us on this
journey. I'm um, Peterson Toscano and
this has been Hot Mess How
Climate Consensus Turned into
Political Chaos.
(38:32):
Mhm.
>> Chelsea Henderson (38:36):
It.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.