0:00

Today's episode is sponsored by BP. The

0:05

head of the Conservative Climate Caucus says

0:07

Republicans can lead on climate change.

0:11

I think progress on climate, the

0:13

environment and energy can be made

0:15

in an administration under President Trump.

0:20

But under a second term, President Trump,

0:22

that's not so sure. There's

0:24

a lot for a

0:26

business savvy conservative politician

0:28

to potentially liken this

0:30

issue. But Donald Trump

0:32

looms large over how

0:34

Republicans are allowed to talk on this

0:36

issue. A GOP leader on

0:38

how climate policy gets done within her

0:40

party. I'm Nylah Budu for Maxios.

0:43

This is One Big Thing. Flashback

0:49

to almost 10 years ago

0:51

when Senator James Inhofe, Republican

0:53

of Oklahoma, tried to disprove

0:55

climate change from the Senate

0:58

floor like this. In

1:01

case we have forgotten, because we

1:03

keep hearing that 2014

1:05

has been the warmest year

1:07

on record, I asked the chair, you

1:10

know what this is? It's a

1:12

snowball and that's just

1:14

from outside here. So it's

1:16

very, very cold out, very unseasonal.

1:18

So Mr. President, catch this. Well,

1:24

Republican leadership has come a ways on

1:26

climate since then. Today, there's

1:29

a conservative climate caucus in the U.S.

1:31

House made up of more than 80

1:33

members who agree that climate change is

1:36

real and needs U.S. government action. Today's

1:39

One Big Thing comes from our exclusive

1:41

interview with Representative Marionette Miller-Meeks of Iowa,

1:43

who's the new leader of this caucus.

1:46

But first, a little more context. We've

1:49

gotten past the denialism for the most part. Heather

1:52

Reems is the chair of the conservative

1:54

climate foundation, which works with House Republicans

1:56

on climate issues and says it aims

1:59

to reduce Emissions with policies

2:01

based on conservative principles, like

2:03

keeping economic considerations top

2:05

of mind. Here's how she

2:08

describes the purpose of the conservative climate

2:10

caucus. The caucus is

2:12

a space for Republicans to

2:15

be able to talk about ideas,

2:17

legislation, hear

2:19

from experts, external experts, about

2:22

what's happening, hear from businesses about

2:24

how they're coming up with innovative

2:26

solutions. And that hasn't

2:28

been done before. Republicans,

2:30

who want to talk about this issue,

2:33

can come together in a place

2:35

that's not covered by

2:37

reporters or it's not

2:40

on C-SPAN, right? It's something that they

2:42

can have behind closed doors to

2:44

really figure out where is the North

2:46

Star for them, rather than saying, you know what, let's go

2:48

back to where it was. Republicans aren't at the table, and

2:51

Democrats are doing all the heavy lifting on climate.

2:53

It's not really sustainable if we're really going to

2:55

address a climate issue. But

2:58

as the GOP works to figure out its

3:00

North Star on this issue, the leader of

3:03

their party, Donald Trump, continues to not just

3:05

downplay the issue of climate change, but

3:07

even to outright deny it. A

3:09

900-page memo by hundreds of

3:11

conservatives outlining Trump's agenda if he

3:14

wins, called Project 2025, includes

3:17

plans to roll back Biden's climate

3:19

policies and recommendations to

3:22

dismantle carbon-capture tax credits and

3:24

cash assistance for nuclear reactors.

3:27

So how does a caucus focused on

3:29

climate make any kind of impact without

3:31

the support of the leader of the GOP? Congresswoman

3:34

Marionette Miller Meeks, who took over

3:36

the role as head of the

3:38

caucus from Republican Congressman John Curtis

3:40

of Utah just last month, says

3:42

there's power in their ranks. She

3:45

represents Iowa's first district, where this year

3:47

she's in a tough re-election campaign. She

3:50

spoke to me from her Washington office. Representative

3:53

Miller Meeks, welcome to One Big Thing. Thank you so

3:55

much. It's a pleasure to be with you. In

3:58

Dubai last year at the UN Climate talks

4:00

you attended with a delegation led

4:02

by the House Energy and Commerce

4:04

Committee, which for the first time

4:06

had more Republicans than Democrats attending.

4:08

What does this say to you

4:11

about where the Conservative Climate Caucus

4:13

is now? Well, I

4:15

would like to think that the

4:17

Conservative Climate Caucus is flexing some

4:19

of its membership into

4:22

presenting what we think of

4:24

as conservative, pragmatic, reasonable

4:26

solutions to both the

4:29

increased energy demand and reducing admissions

4:31

that will lead to a cleaner,

4:33

healthier planet. So give me

4:35

a sense of what some of those

4:37

conservative yet pragmatic solutions are. So

4:39

we know that here in the United

4:41

States that the natural gas revolution,

4:43

the fracking revolution has

4:45

led to affordable, abundant

4:48

energy, but it's also led

4:50

to the U.S. having the lowest or

4:52

the greatest reduction of admissions of any

4:54

country, including those in the Paris Climate

4:57

Accords. So I think that's

4:59

one of the things that we talk about is

5:01

that we need to have affordable, abundant, reliable energy.

5:03

Everybody, including every cop I've attended,

5:05

agrees that energy demand is going

5:08

up. It is not going down.

5:10

And if you really want to lower

5:12

emissions worldwide because the environment, the

5:15

air is worldwide. It's global. It

5:17

is not just over the United States

5:19

that exporting American

5:22

LNG will help reduce emissions

5:25

globally worldwide just as it

5:27

has in the United States, especially as

5:29

compared to Russia, Iran or

5:31

Venezuela. So you're, as

5:33

I'm sure, well aware, the Biden

5:36

administration has a temporary pause on

5:38

LNGs. It's liquefied natural gas exports.

5:41

I presume that's something you don't support? No,

5:44

I think it's short-sighted. The argument from the

5:46

other side of the aisle is that this

5:48

is not immediate. But if you

5:50

know this space or if you have

5:53

interactions with businesses, and I've owned a

5:55

small business, there's a lot of capital

5:57

investment up front for future

6:00

growth and business doesn't think that there's

6:02

a market for its product i.e. it

6:04

will be banned by the or prohibited

6:06

by the federal government, then they're not

6:08

going to invest 100 million dollars a

6:10

day in order to drill

6:12

a well, find out if a well

6:15

is productive or not, or how long

6:17

it'll be productive. So I think

6:19

it stifles capital

6:21

investment into these areas. Meanwhile,

6:24

we know that there's capital investment

6:26

off of Guyana, and Guyana

6:29

is going to proceed with its capital

6:31

investment because it carbon

6:33

offsets in other ways with its natural

6:35

resources and its parks. But I

6:38

think this is one of those

6:40

areas where we have a disagreement.

6:42

You actually are increasing admissions by

6:45

having China produce and put coal-fired

6:47

plants in African countries,

6:49

in other countries, whereas

6:51

countries want American liquified natural gas,

6:54

but we're not going to be

6:56

exporting it. So it's counterintuitive. You're

6:58

actually increasing admissions. So your argument

7:01

is that the U.S. is producing these

7:03

emissions at a cleaner rate, which is

7:05

actually something Senator Joe Manchin said a

7:08

few weeks ago when he was a

7:10

guest on the podcast. He said he

7:12

was frustrated that Democrats and President Biden

7:15

aren't talking enough about energy security. How

7:17

do you think the Biden administration has

7:19

actually done on American energy security and

7:21

the amount of energy production that

7:23

the U.S. has been able to produce? I

7:26

would give him a mediocre rating. But I think

7:28

one of the things that's important to realize is

7:31

that having affordable energy

7:33

is critical. And our low-income

7:35

vulnerable communities, and this includes

7:37

poor countries around the world,

7:39

are the most susceptible to

7:41

these extremes in temperature if you

7:44

can't heat or cool a house

7:46

or a residence. Furthermore, when you

7:48

look at the environmental impact, and

7:50

we have wind and solar in

7:52

Iowa, 50 percent of our

7:54

energy in Iowa is from renewables, and that

7:57

includes wind and solar, ethanol,

7:59

biodiesel, biomass, manure, compressed

8:01

renewable natural gas. We

8:04

have 60% of our electricity is

8:06

from wind, we are net exporter. So

8:08

when you look at from inception on to

8:10

disposal, how clean and how

8:13

green, we're not mining in the United States,

8:15

which we would do better than what

8:17

China does in the Democratic Republic of

8:19

Congo, when they're mining for cobalt, lithium,

8:22

rare earth elements, and the other metals

8:24

that are required to make solar panels.

8:26

So I would say the Biden administration

8:28

has made a point that mining and

8:31

energy should be energy components should be

8:33

produced in the United States. But yet

8:35

we're not permitting mine, the

8:37

environmental impact of what China is doing

8:39

in the Democratic Republic of Congo, not

8:42

to mention the child labor, to me

8:45

seems like you're outsourcing the

8:47

bad practices in the

8:49

United States, instead of having that done here in the

8:51

United States, where you have a better environmental

8:54

footprint, a better labor footprint. So I think

8:56

that too is something that the Biden administration

8:58

has to acknowledge and has not done so.

9:03

In a moment more with Marionette Miller-Meeks, and

9:05

we step back for a reality check and

9:08

the big picture. Stick around, this is one

9:10

big thing from Axios. BP

9:15

added more than $130 billion to

9:18

the US economy over the past

9:20

two years. Investments like acquiring America's

9:22

largest biogas producer, archaea energy, and

9:24

starting up new infrastructure in the

9:26

Gulf of Mexico. It's and not

9:28

or. See what doing

9:31

both means for energy nationwide

9:33

at bp.com/investing in America. Welcome

9:39

back to One Big Thing from Axios.

9:41

I'm Nyla Budu. I've been bringing you

9:43

my recent conversation with the new head

9:45

of the conservative climate caucus, who says

9:47

the caucus can make change on climate,

9:49

even in the face of a Trump

9:51

presidency round two. Representative

9:54

Marionette Miller-Meeks represents Iowa's first

9:56

district, which covers most of

9:58

southeast Iowa. how

10:00

she squares her work with the industries

10:19

like hog production that's producing an

10:21

enormous amount of methane emissions. What

10:23

are your efforts to, what is

10:25

your priority there to reduce that?

10:28

There is a great amount of research

10:30

going into the type of feed reducing

10:32

methane production and also manure that's produced

10:34

is put into digester to use as

10:36

an energy source. We have a farm

10:39

operation, several of them, they have

10:41

both solar panels, they have digesters,

10:43

they create energy, they sell electricity

10:45

back to the grid, they use

10:47

denature treated manure on fields for

10:49

fertilizer. So they already have a

10:51

closed-loop operation if you will by

10:54

utilizing all of these products to

10:56

both create energy and create

10:58

fertilizer rather than using another

11:00

source for fertilizer creation. So

11:02

that can be done, it has been done and

11:05

we will continue to work on that. So when

11:07

you talk about those closed-loop systems, do you have

11:09

a goal for how many you would like to

11:11

see that happen across Iowa? I

11:14

don't have a goal across Iowa, this is something that

11:16

we have a lot of our young farmers that are

11:18

working on. Also in Iowa,

11:21

we're looking at and researching and

11:24

several of our farmers have published

11:26

on biochar. Biochar is an organic

11:28

material that comes from any organic

11:31

source. At high heat

11:33

through a pyrolyzer is made into

11:35

a charcoal like material that's called

11:37

biochar. Biochar is carbon

11:39

sequestration, it is permanent, can

11:42

be put into the ground or on

11:44

top of soil, it improves water quality,

11:46

improves microbiomes and improves soil quality and

11:48

this is something that can be done

11:50

with any organic material. So I've got

11:53

a bill that is to

11:55

establish a research Institute for biochar and it's

11:57

one of those things that we can use

11:59

with any organic material can

12:01

be done where people cut trees

12:03

and make timber and make

12:05

sawdust, can be used with

12:07

corn stock, soybean stock, but any organic material.

12:10

Congresswoman, you've talked a lot about

12:12

research and science. I want to

12:14

ask how all of these goals

12:17

square with the presumptive GOP presidential

12:19

nominee and leader of your party,

12:21

Donald Trump, who's repeatedly denied the

12:23

science behind human clause climate change.

12:26

I can't speak for Donald Trump. I've not had

12:29

this conversation with him, but I do know what

12:32

myself and members of Congress and the things

12:34

that we will talk about and put forward

12:36

into policy and conversations as we go into

12:39

the next Congress and as we can continue

12:41

to go into this Congress. So already

12:43

we're bringing together a group of people

12:45

in the conservative climate caucus that will

12:47

go to the next cop in Azerbaijan.

12:50

And most importantly, I'm going to get back

12:52

to this theme because I think it's critically

12:54

important that Biden's policies

12:56

will increase the cost of energy

12:59

and our most vulnerable are the ones that

13:01

suffer. Our businesses in order to compete globally

13:03

are the ones that suffer. So

13:05

we're talking about reducing admission while

13:08

at the same time allowing the United

13:10

States to compete globally around the world.

13:12

And most importantly for people

13:14

of any income level, but especially

13:16

those most vulnerable, especially

13:18

our working families to have access

13:20

to affordable energy. So do

13:23

you think progress on

13:25

climate, real progress on climate,

13:27

realistically could be made under

13:29

another Trump administration? I

13:32

think progress on climate, the environment

13:34

and energy can be made in an

13:37

administration under President Trump. And I think

13:40

that when you have 80 members of

13:42

the conservative climate caucus, all of those

13:44

members are going to be having conversations

13:46

with President Trump. Your

13:48

predecessor, John Curtis, has said that if you're going to

13:50

be a Republican who talks about climate, you have to

13:52

have a thick skin. What is

13:55

your message to Republicans who are still

13:57

not on board with climate change or

14:00

are not a part of your caucus. Whether they're

14:02

part of the caucus or not, my overall

14:04

principle is the same. We can

14:06

leave a cleaner, healthier planet for our

14:08

children and grandchildren while competing economically around

14:10

the world. The two are not mutually

14:13

exclusive. And so as I look at policies, that's

14:15

what I'm looking for. What does it do to

14:17

the cost? Are we going to have

14:19

brownouts? And when you look at what's happened to UK

14:22

and Europe, given their policies with a

14:24

focus only on solar and wind,

14:26

they have brownouts. The energy prices

14:28

in Germany are $0.43 a kilowatt

14:30

hour, much higher than they are

14:33

in the United States. And you

14:35

have business and manufacturing that is

14:37

leaving Germany. So I think for us

14:39

to be able to have affordable, reliable energy,

14:41

we have to look at what's the energy

14:43

source. Does it reduce emissions? Does it provide

14:46

those goals within the principles I laid out

14:48

for you? And that's how I approach this

14:50

issue. One of the things you have

14:52

to agree to be part of the conservative climate

14:54

caucus is that climate change is a real and

14:56

caused by humans. Do you think that actually, when

14:58

you're talking about members of your party who may

15:01

not believe that, do you actually think that matters

15:03

for progress? I

15:05

think what matters most is solutions. And

15:08

so are we putting forward solutions that will

15:10

address this issue? Are we putting forward solutions

15:12

that will lead to a cleaner, healthier planet?

15:14

There are a lot of people on the

15:16

left who talk about climate change but don't

15:18

agree with nuclear. I

15:20

would say if you look at the transportation

15:23

sector alone and trying to, so looking at

15:25

the EPA's tailpipe admission rule, the

15:27

EPA didn't even know how many vehicles were

15:29

on the road today. So the federal government

15:31

classifies passenger vehicles as

15:34

passenger sedans like trucks

15:36

and motorcycles. They didn't know how many vehicles were on

15:38

the road today. In 2020, it was 286 million. I'm

15:41

going to say it's around figure it's around 300 million today.

15:44

They also didn't know how much energy

15:46

it takes to get a single 100

15:48

mile charge for a passenger vehicle.

15:50

Again, government statistics is 30 kilowatt

15:52

hours. So please do the math

15:54

for me. 300

15:57

million vehicles times 30 kilowatt hours. It would take

15:59

9. trillion kilowatt hours to

16:01

give a single hundred mile charge,

16:03

where does that energy come from?

16:06

And I think that's the broader context

16:08

of what we have to look at.

16:10

Right, so you're essentially arguing that in

16:12

the push for EVs we need to

16:14

consider the reality of where all that

16:16

energy will actually come from to power

16:19

them. Well, Congresswoman Marionette

16:21

Miller Meeks, new chair of the

16:23

Conservative Climate Caucus and representative for

16:25

Iowa's first congressional district, thank you

16:28

so much for your time. Thank

16:30

you so much. Okay,

16:35

so before we go, we asked Axios

16:38

climate and energy reporter Jael Holzman about

16:40

all of this and how much is

16:42

really possible for the Conservative Climate Caucus

16:44

to accomplish. Jael says

16:47

the GOP does overlap with Democrats

16:49

in some areas on climate right

16:51

now. The key is to read

16:53

between the lines. Case in

16:55

point, a summit last year around

16:57

conservative innovations on climate. When

16:59

we went to this summit, which by the

17:02

way was in the middle of the smoke

17:04

incident that was a washing Washington DC, it

17:07

was striking to speak with

17:09

local legislators about the president's

17:11

recent climate law, the Inflation

17:14

Reduction Act, and essentially

17:16

hear them say in no uncertain

17:18

terms that the policies Democrats

17:21

supported, which are largely just

17:23

tax benefits to renewable

17:25

energy developers to battery companies and

17:27

like that those are the kinds

17:29

of things they like. I mean,

17:31

in truth, the modern mainstream Democratic

17:34

position on climate, a lot like

17:36

how Obamacare was borrowing from a

17:38

moderate Republican playbook. The modern Democratic

17:40

approach to climate is this very

17:43

industry focused industrial policy effort that

17:45

doesn't have any sticks and really

17:47

is just carrots for big businesses

17:49

that want to cut carbon emissions.

17:52

That should in theory give room for

17:54

this to be a bipartisan issue. So

17:58

then the big question remains why isn't

18:00

there more movement? Is this really all

18:02

about Trump? I asked Mitt

18:05

Romney recently, why do you think Republicans by

18:07

and large still don't move on this issue?

18:09

And he said two words. He said Donald Trump.

18:12

Like, in truth, in conversation,

18:14

it's really difficult for folks to

18:16

move away from what the standard

18:18

bearer of your party says, even

18:20

if it's not something in

18:22

line with what the business community

18:25

wants anymore. Yes,

18:28

but the Conservative Climate Caucus itself still

18:30

matters, JL tells me, for a couple

18:32

of reasons. First of all,

18:35

it does provide for lawmakers to get

18:37

to engage on the global stage on

18:39

climate. Members of the caucus go to

18:41

cooperate. But what it also does is

18:44

give people the flexibility to find

18:46

their own version of a conservative

18:49

climate solution. Now, some of those

18:51

solutions might not be what scientists

18:53

recommend, right? Some of those solutions

18:56

might be, let's drill

18:58

baby drill, because American oil

19:01

and gas could be cleaner, as

19:03

they argue, than other countries. But

19:06

it also gives people a bit

19:09

of wiggle room to discover

19:12

themselves. And it allows

19:14

for there to be a clearinghouse

19:17

for the conservative activists that

19:19

care about climate to find the

19:21

allies that they'd need to get

19:23

inroads in the party. JL

19:27

Holzman covers climate and energy for Axios.

19:30

And that's it for this week's edition of One Big

19:32

Thing. Send us a voice memo with your feedback or

19:34

story ideas. The number is 202-918-4893. The

19:38

One Big Thing team includes supervising producer

19:41

Alexandra Boty and sound engineer Jay Cowett,

19:43

who also composed and produced our music

19:45

along with Alex Sugiar. Sarah

19:48

Kailani-Gu is the executive editor of Axios

19:50

Live and New Platforms, and Asia Whitaker

19:52

Moore is Axios' editor and chief. I'm

19:55

Nylah Budu. Thanks for listening. Stay Safe, and

19:57

we'll see you back here next! Thursday. Maybe

20:10

he. Added more than one hundred and

20:12

thirty billion dollars to the economy

20:14

over the past. His investments like

20:16

acquiring America's largest bio gas producer

20:18

or T Energy and starting up

20:20

new infrastructure in the Gulf of

20:22

Mexico is in not or see

20:25

we're doing both mean for anything

20:27

nation at B P.com/investing in America.