Climate and Insurance.org | takefive with Jim DiPeso

Jim DiPeso is the policy director of Republicans for Environmental Protection (REP), a national grassroots organization. Before joining REP's staff in 2001, he served on REP America's board of directors for five years, beginning in 1996. DiPeso serves as REP’s chief resource on energy, climate, and public lands issues.

Prior to joining REP’s staff, DiPeso worked four years for the Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center, where he carried out research and publication projects on climate change, transportation, energy and water efficiency, sustainable building, and product stewardship.

DiPeso has a bachelor's degree in communications from California State Polytechnic University. He worked 14 years as a daily newspaper reporter, including four years as an environmental reporter, before joining the non-profit sector.

DiPeso lives with his family in the Seattle area.

Takefive:
Mr. DiPeso, can you briefly describe the history, mission and philosophy of Republicans for Environmental Protection?

Jim DiPeso:
Republicans for Environmental Protection is a national, non-profit citizens’ organization that was founded to restore the GOP’s tradition of conservation leadership. We are working to move our party’s leaders back towards the mainstream on environmental issues, and encourage them to offer practical solutions to environmental concerns that are consistent with traditional conservative values.

REP was founded in 1995 by a group of ordinary Republican voters who were concerned about the negative direction that the GOP had taken on environmental issues. Today, we have members in 49 states (still waiting for that elusive first member from North Dakota!), active chapters in 10 states, and a professional staff.

We believe that good stewardship of our country’s natural endowment should transcend partisanship. Clean air, clean water, open space, and a stable atmosphere are public goods that benefit everyone. There are no Republican rivers or Democratic forests.

An important aspect of our work is showing that environmental stewardship is a core component of traditional conservative values. Conservatism is a centuries-old intellectual tradition that couples freedom with responsibility, cautions against unbridled materialism, and--perhaps of greatest interest to insurers--calls for prudent action to minimize unnecessary risks. Edmund Burke, the British statesman and philosopher widely regarded as the founder of modern conservatism, wrote that society is an intergenerational contract, which imposes on present generations a duty to look after the needs of unborn generations.

One of President Ronald Reagan's favorite conservative authors was Russell Kirk, whose books and articles eloquently describe how conservation is consistent with true conservative values. As Kirk wrote in his book, The Conservative Mind, "The resources of nature, like those of spirit, are running out, and all that a conscientious man can aspire to be is a literal conservative, hoarding what remains of culture and of natural wealth against the fierce appetites of modern life."

In short, contemporary attitudes that frame environmental stewardship as a "liberal" cause do not square with the insights of the thinkers who laid the philosophical groundwork of the conservative movement.

Takefive:
How does REP respond to those who say that no “real Republican” wants to protect the environment or believes in conservation?

Jim DiPeso:
A close reading of history shows that such criticism is off base. The founders and early leaders of the American conservation movement were conservatives fighting to protect America’s natural heritage from thoughtless abuse. They insisted that the country’s natural riches should be carefully husbanded for the benefit of future generations. Many of America’s national parks, forests, wildlife refuges, and wilderness preserves are the legacy of Republican leaders.

Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican and America’s greatest conservationist president, put it best: "Conservation is a great moral issue, for it involves the patriotic duty of ensuring the safety and continuance of the nation." Roosevelt's great insight was that natural resources are the basis of American strength and prosperity, and managing them wisely is essential for ensuring that America's economy delivers lasting prosperity.

Roosevelt was the most prominent, but by no means the only Republican leader who understood the importance of good environmental stewardship. Herbert Hoover expanded our national park system and considered outdoor recreation a necessary antidote to the moral perils of unrestrained materialism. Richard Nixon promoted passage of legislation that today forms the framework of national environmental policy. Ronald Reagan signed numerous bills to expand our national system of wilderness preserves, and his administration secured passage of a treaty to protect the protective ozone layer in the upper atmosphere.

At the congressional and state levels, numerous Republican lawmakers and governors over the years have compiled strong environmental records. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is probably the most famous contemporary example. Since taking office in 2003, Schwarzenegger has expanded protection of forests and coastal waters, adopted a policy to expand development of solar energy, and last year, negotiated and signed sweeping legislation establishing a statewide cap-and-trade system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Beyond moral obligations, there is a practical economic case for good environmental stewardship. Nature provides, for free, essential services that underpin modern civilization, including a stable climate, water purification, waste recycling, and crop pollination. For businesses, using resource inputs efficiently not only is good for the environment but good for a healthy bottom line. The 3M Company, for example, has saved more than $1 billion over the past 30 years, as a result of efficiencies and process improvements fostered by the corporate "Pollution Prevention Pays" program.

Today, more Republican leaders are rediscovering the conservative heritage of conservation. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, for example, has called for a "green conservatism" based on science, technology, entrepreneurship, and market incentives.

Takefive:
In 2006, REP released its first Congressional Scorecard, rating Republican members of Congress for their votes and leadership on critical energy, public lands, air and water legislation during 2005. Can you explain why REP chose to create the Scorecard and what are your plans for it in the future?

Jim DiPeso:
The REP Scorecard is unique. It is the only congressional scorecard that rates Republicans only, providing an apples-to-apples comparison of Republican lawmakers with their GOP peers. The REP Scorecard sets clear benchmarks for assessing the performance of Republicans on the vital environmental protection and conservation issues facing America.

There are other scorecards that rate all members of Congress on environmental issues. Republicans often have complained that comparing them to Democrats is not fair because Republicans answer to different constituencies and because environmental organizations are reluctant to give Republicans credit for their environmental accomplishments. Those are fair criticisms, and REP saw an opening to develop a congressional scorecard that provides tough but fair ratings for Republican congressmen and senators. We see the scorecard as a tool for achieving our mission to help Republican leaders rediscover and embrace the party's conservation heritage.

Our first scorecard rated floor votes and leadership actions for 2005, the first session of the 109th Congress. Our next scorecard, rating 2006 actions, will be released later this month. Unlike other scorecards, which were rushed to print during last year's election campaign, REP's scorecard covers Congress' work for the entire year.

Takefive:
A week after last fall’s election, you gave a speech in which you predicted that federal climate legislation might occur possibly in 2007, but was more likely in 2008. You suggested that the legislation would be somewhat cautious in scope, with model carbon caps and a price limit on tradable carbon emissions allowances. In the intervening five months has anything occurred to cause you to change your prediction?

Jim DiPeso:
After the 110th Congress convened this year, a number of bills to cap and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as well as promote development of energy efficiency and cleaner energy technologies, were introduced in both houses. However, it is not likely that action will be taken until later this year or next. By design and tradition, Congress moves slowly, especially on matters of great import, such as climate change. Congressional committees have been holding hearings to gather information from scientists, business leaders, environmental organizations, and other interested parties. The hearings will set the table for the horse-trading that will take place over the critically important details for designing a national cap-and-trade system, the policy approach that Congress is most likely to take.

The negotiations over legislation are likely to be very complex, both technically and politically. In essence, climate policy is energy policy, and the politics of energy have numerous partisan, geographic, and industry sector crosscurrents. Crafting energy legislation is a bit like a science experiment. To make it work successfully, the right ingredients have to be assembled in the right quantities and in the right sequence. This will take time and that may be no bad thing. In adopting a climate policy, Congress will be setting a course that will influence the economy's behavior for decades to come. It's important to get it right.

Takefive:
Finally, Mr. DiPeso, what role, if any, should the insurance industry be playing in the climate change issue?

Jim DiPeso:
The insurance industry has a critical role to play in the national debate over climate policy. Few industries have as much at stake as the projected impacts of global warming play out, including rising sea levels and more extreme weather. Few industries have a deeper understanding of risk management issues. And no other industry has the kind of leverage that the insurance industry has over capital allocation decisions, through its underwriting and investment practices.

These issues are the focus of rising interest among industry leaders and regulatory agencies. The publication of a revised hurricane catastrophe model by Risk Management Solutions last year was a sobering wake-up call on the risks facing heavily populated, low-lying coastal areas over the next five to 10 years. A task force formed by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners is studying the ramifications of climate change for the costs and availability of insurance.

As Congress debates climate policy and thrashes out legislative details, the insurance industry can play a critically important role in helping lawmakers understand the consequences for the economy if climate-related risks result in rising insurance costs and reduced coverage availability. Insurance companies don't have to wait for government, however. As AIG showed recently, the industry can use its investment and underwriting practices to leverage adoption of energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other climate-friendly technologies. The industry also can use its financial heft to expand use of financial products that will be necessary for smooth functioning of emissions allowances trading markets.

In short, the world's second largest industry has an indispensable role to play in helping human society reduce climate-related risks and assure continuing economic prosperity through the 21st century and beyond.

"For Spacious Skies: A Conservative Citizen’s Guide to Clean Air," publication released in 2005.
(Hard copy available only by calling (505) 889-4576 or e-mailing.)