How Republicans Can Save the Environment

[Geee]

National Review:

A plan for saving the world’s elephants and gorillas and giraffes.

When environmentalists talk about the plight of endangered species, Republicans tend to roll their eyes (the way they roll their eyes when someone orders something organic or wants to talk about ozone). But if you can overlook a little festering arrogance, you’ll find that conservationists make some good points.

Of course, traditionally, conservation belongs among conservatives, who like to conserve things. In fact, the first twelve national parks were all dedicated by Republicans, starting in 1872 with Ulysses Grant and Yellowstone. (Democrats didn’t get into the game until 1915.) Happily, no one is threatening our parks. But our animals are another story.

 

By “our animals,” of course, I mean mankind’s animals — the fish of the sea, the fowl of the air, each living thing that moveth on the earth. When a species of louse or a rare dung beetle goes extinct, no one cares. Understandably. But if elephants or tigers or macaws go extinct, everyone’s going to care, and with good reason. Not all animals are created equal — to hell with mosquitoes — but losing our orangutans would be like losing every copy of The Marriage of Figaro. It would be like someone spraying acid on every Rembrandt in the world, or blowing up Palmyra. Higher animals are the irreplaceable gems of the natural world; letting them die by indifference is unconscionable.

[Geee]

This is the kind of 'environmental' program that I like. With a target. Not throwing money at some vague problem that nobody knows where it goes or what it does. Remember back when we had targeted rivers or lakes or superfund sites? That actually did some good and it was tangible. There are many many problems like that still left and I'll bet the cost would be a lot less than all these jerks pocketing the money for their pet projects.