The article argues environmental protection should be reclaimed by conservatives on pragmatic grounds: target high‑impact problems with cost‑effective tools instead of litigation‑heavy, conflict‑maximizing regulation. It supports this with forgotten history—Reagan’s pro‑environment language and National Review’s early defense of the Endangered Species Act—suggesting a viable, non‑progressive environmental tradition to build on.
— Reviving a non‑progressive, cost‑conscious environmentalism could realign coalition politics and unlock stalled permitting and conservation reforms.
Robert VerBruggen
2025.12.01
87% relevant
The City Journal/Manhattan Institute essay (author Robert VerBruggen) advances a technology‑first, cost‑effectiveness approach to environmental problems—precisely the conservative/pragmatic frame in the existing idea that argues to target high‑impact problems with market‑friendly tools rather than litigation‑heavy regulation.
Richard Morrison
2025.10.08
78% relevant
The article argues the anti‑elite political turn can 'defang' radical environmentalism and explicitly points to groups like PERC, American Conservation Coalition, and Breakthrough Institute as models for a pragmatic, non‑progressive environmentalism.
Steven F. Hayward
2025.10.01
100% relevant
Steven Hayward highlights Reagan’s 1970 address, National Review’s stance on the ESA, and Newsom’s pressure to loosen CEQA as evidence for a post‑litigation environmentalism.