Q&A: Meet the conservative working to make environmentalism nonpartisan

Nature is Nonpartisan founder Benji Backer, center, with Director of Communications Amelia Joy, left, and Chief Policy Officer Ben Cassidy, right, pose for a photo on March 18, 2025, in Belle Fourche. (Courtesy of Nature is Nonpartisan)
A national nonprofit working to promote a middle ground on environmentalism launched with an event Thursday in the South Dakota city of Belle Fourche, which advertises itself as the geographic center of the United States.
Benji Backer, 27, of Seattle, is the founder of Nature is Nonpartisan. The self-described conservative environmentalist founded the American Conservation Coalition in 2017 while in college. That conservative group promotes policies like free-market approaches to climate change and environmental policy. In 2024, Backer wrote a book, 'The Conservative Environmentalist,' outlining his vision for right-of-center environmentalism.
With his new group, Backer is bringing people together from across the political spectrum.
Nature Is Nonpartisan's board ranges from people like David Bernhardt, who was secretary of the Department of Interior during the first Trump administration, to Michael Brune, former executive director of the Sierra Club. Partners include the National Wildlife Federation, American Forests, Ducks Unlimited and more.
South Dakota Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden attended the Belle Fourche event and signed an executive proclamation establishing 'Nature Is Nonpartisan Week' in the state.
Backer said he is critical of Green New Deal-style environmentalism, referring to a swath of proposals to help address climate change and income inequality introduced by progressive lawmakers. He said the movement has become an ineffective political football.
The new nonprofit focuses on bipartisan policies like funding wildlife migration corridors, wetland and forest conservation, and farm practices that pull more heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions out of the atmosphere.
Backer took questions from South Dakota Searchlight ahead of Thursday's event. The following conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
I grew up in the Midwest — I grew up in Wisconsin — and grew up loving the outdoors just like almost every person in this country.
I also grew up a conservative, and I felt very frustrated with the fact that there wasn't really a home for dialogue on the environment that was being done in a nonpartisan way. It was either you subscribe to the Green New Deal-type ideology or you just didn't have a home at all. And the majority of Americans care a lot about the environment, but they don't want radical solutions.
So, our mission is to rebuild the environmental movement, to a movement that represents all Americans, of all political backgrounds — not just the left side of the aisle — and also forges solutions that benefit and work for every American, not just Americans on one side of the aisle.
We want to recreate the legacy that Americans have around the environment. This used to be seen as a nonpartisan issue in America. There used to be many environmental organizations that resembled the breadth of political beliefs in America. That does not exist anymore.
So, we're here in Belle Fourche — because it is the center of the country — to launch from the heart of America an environmental movement that speaks for the heart of America.
Yeah, look, it has been a partisan issue, but that doesn't mean it has to be.
If you look back at history, previous iterations of the environmental movement resembled both sides of the aisle. It had hunters and anglers, it had conservatives, and it also had liberals. It had both sorts of populations represented, and so the solutions represented those communities, too.
My philosophy is that when you're not at the table, you're on the table. When you're not at the table, you're automatically losing. And the majority of Americans are losing with the current environmental movement as we see it. Hunters and anglers, conservatives, used to self-identify as environmentalists. Polling back in 1990 shows nearly 80% of Americans self-identified as environmentalists.
We're here in Belle Fourche — because it is the center of the country — to launch from the heart of America an environmental movement that speaks for the heart of America.
– Benji Backer, founder of Nature is Nonpartisan
And so, it is currently partisan, but it doesn't need to be.
The reality is that the political left owning this issue only allows half of the country to be represented. So, when the other half of the country, conservatives, are running the show, whether that be in the South Dakota Legislature or in D.C., all they're doing is focusing on opposing what the left has proposed because a lot of the times it's out of touch with conservative communities.
It's this political back and forth of, like, either the Green New Deal, or trying to oppose everything about the Green New Deal philosophy. What if there was an approach, that we used to have, where you put landowners, ranchers, farmers, hunters, anglers at the same table with those who care about the environment for other reasons, and created a solution that works for all the people there. That has not happened for decades, but it can happen, and it will happen again.
What we're trying to create is a grassroots movement of Americans from both sides of the aisle who believe the environment is more important, and conserving the environment is more important, than partisan politics.
Now, how we get there is up for debate. But that's a debate we're not even having right now.
'Wild places are worth fighting for': Concern grows for receding South Dakota wetlands
Some people might be more in favor of protecting the environment through private property rights because private property owners tend to take really good care of their environment. Some people might prefer a more public land approach. Then let's have a debate, issue by issue, so we can actually get to solutions.
Right now, our forests are burning at record levels. Right now, biodiversity is decreasing here and around the world. Right now, extreme storms are damaging our country's economy and our communities. And the list goes on and on.
I understand why immigration, guns or some of these other issues get caught up in culture wars and partisan politics: A lot of people have inherently different end goals on those issues.
But on the environment, there's not really anybody in this country that doesn't want clean air, clean water, nature to be protected and biodiversity to be protected — as long as it's not at the expense of humanity and people's communities.
Politicians aren't hearing that message from an environmental organization. They're only hearing a message of doom and gloom, alarmism, kind of extremism, or an opposition to that.
So, we're trying to create a movement that incentivizes politicians to get to the table and find solutions to the environmental problems that are happening, that are real, that are impacting us, and that no one's trying to find solutions to because it's become such a culture warfare issue.
I would say to conservatives, over the next few years, we will prove that we're a movement for all Americans.
I think there's an automatic distrust of the environmental movement that is totally fair and totally to be expected based on how this has progressed as an issue in recent years.
But, we have two options. We can sit on the sidelines and complain about how bad the left's ideas are, or we can sit at the table. We're either on the sidelines complaining and losing or at the table conversing and winning.
I understand the skepticism, but if you look at our board, if you look at our staff, we have some of the most hardcore conservative bona fide leaders on our team and board that you could ever imagine, that validate the fact that conservatives need to have a voice at this discussion, that validate the fact that we are going to represent both sides, not just one — not just greenwashing for the left, but also representing both sides and the priorities they have.
There's nothing more pro-conservative than caring about your local community, about your country and its amazing beauty, and the legacy of conservation that our country has. There's nothing more pro-conservative than engaging in conservation conversations.
I've been building this organization for the last year. I don't even take a salary right now.
We already have diverse funders from across the political spectrum. We have hundreds of donors already and we haven't even launched yet. We have conservative donors, liberal donors. There's not one donor or two donors or three donors that I can point to as people who are, you know, 'buying us out.'
Climate change is one of the most polarizing issues in America right now, and one of the most partisan. I think Americans can and should stand united in our desire to reduce pollution in our atmosphere.
I think we should be focusing on efficiency, and Americans appreciate opportunities to save money and be more efficient, to have more abundant energy choices, to have lower energy prices, which helps scale all different energy sources. People just don't want to be told what to do.
As an organization, we're going to be dedicated to reducing pollution, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but not in a way that hurts people, and in a way that actually benefits communities.
We are going to show politicians what Americans want to be for, rather than what they're against. So, on the topic of climate change, people are for efficient, abundant energy; people are for resilient ecosystems to create adaptation measures in extreme storms; they are for more efficient transportation methods and more fuel-efficient vehicles, as long as it's not more expensive and comes at the cost of their livelihoods. And so that's the sort of approach we're going to take.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Miami Herald

26 minutes ago

• Miami Herald

Will skipping ‘Made in China' beat tariff price hikes?

For most shoppers, "Made in China" has been a way of life for consumers. The mark is on seemingly everything. That has consumers concerned about how tariffs and trade battles between the United States and China might hit home, literally. If tariffs ultimately act as a tax on consumers – most economists say they do – how can Americans avoid paying higher prices? Stop buying things that were made in China. That's easier said than Trump recently took to Truth Social to say that the United States and China have a deal that's done, pending final approval of leaders from both countries. He said that U.S. tariffs would be set at 55% on Chinese goods, while China's tariffs remain at 10%. Officially, tariff plans with China and other countries are on hold until July 9, but U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has said several times that the 55% tariff "definitely" will not change. Related: Major housing expert predicts huge change to mortgage rates in 2026 While many of the harshest tariff hikes face legal challenges, current U.S. tariff rates are at their highest levels in nearly a century; estimates from the Yale Budget Lab say that's costing the average U.S. consumer an extra $2,500 a year. A recent study by covering consumer sentiment about tariffs shows that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe tariffs will have a negative impact on their personal finances. Just over 40% of respondents said tariffs would "greatly worsen" their personal finances. But even if consumers decide to tackle the China tariff problem by eliminating spending on goods from the country, it doesn't mean they will save money. They also will find the task daunting, if not impossible. That's according to journalist Sara Bongiorni, who tried to live without goods from China for a year back in the early 2000s; the trials and tribulations of her effort became the basis for her book, "A Year Without Made in China." Bongiorni, now an adjunct professor at Louisiana State University, woke up on Christmas morning in 2005 to a house full of stuff, and as she rummaged through it, she realized almost everything was made in China. "I said to my husband, 'Do you think it would be possible to live for a while without things made in China? You want to try that?' He was not very enthusiastic about that idea, but we gave it a whirl." Related: Forget tariffs, Fed interest rate cuts may hinge on another problem Bongiorni didn't set out to make a political statement or to write a book. She was simply hoping "to understand at a personal level, as best we could, how much we relied on things from China in our everyday, ordinary consumer life." In a recent interview on "Money Life with Chuck Jaffe," Bongiorni recounted how her rule was to avoid the words "Made in China," which are only seen on the end consumer product sold to shoppers. That's a low bar, given that countless products are assembled in the United States or in other countries using parts from China. Those goods-like the ones with the Made in China label-will incur increased costs due to tariffs. Bongiorni noted that in certain product categories – notably toys, household gadgets, many types of electronics, coffeemakers, sneakers and footwear, and children's clothing – it was nearly impossible to find items that weren't made in China. Even when she did find rare exceptions, Bongiorni noted that the options often pushed her to higher-end goods, which meant paying more for the purchase, in some cases, more than she would expect to pay now on goods from China with tariffs attached. "I think there were so many things we didn't buy that year because you couldn't find a viable option that wasn't made in China," Bongiorni said. She also noted that, ironically, it's nearly impossible to celebrate a wholly American holiday like July 4th without goods from China, as the small flags, fireworks, parade toys, festive paper goods, and more were made there. Truly trying to avoid all goods from China – including component parts – would be nearly impossible, Bongiorni said, noting that consumers would find themselves with no easy alternatives. "The share of things, ordinary consumer items from China, account for at least 65% of things you find in a typical household," Bongiorni said. "If you push up [prices with tariffs up to 55%], that is a huge impact, especially when we've got inflation and other things going on in the economy. It's a huge thing for most families to have to shoulder that burden." More Tariffs: Aldi plans huge price cut despite tariffs driving costs higherCar buyers should shop these brands for the best tariff dealGeneral Motors makes $4 billion tariff move Bongiorni does think the United States can bring some manufacturing back onshore, but that will have a limited impact because of the breadth and volume of goods coming from China, and the convenience of having those items and getting them cheaply. "I have a hard time thinking that we can lure ourselves off of our connection to China as consumers as a long-term affair," she said, "but also I can see a huge public outcry because this is going to affect people's bottom line every month." While Bongiorni recalls her efforts fondly nearly two decades later, she says she would not want to permanently do without Made in China, even if tariffs raise costs. Avoiding goods from China and finding alternatives was "incredibly time-consuming." And when there were no viable product options, she was willing to go without certain items for a year, but would not want to sacrifice them for a lifetime. "I do think it's interesting to have an awareness of where things come from, and to get a sense to the extent you can to which you are connected to the international economy on that consumer level," said Bongiorni. "I found that enjoyable and interesting, but the idea of weaning ourselves from Chinese goods, after doing this, just seems very unrealistic.…I can't imagine living like that long-term." Related: Fed official sends shocking message on interest rate cuts The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.

San Francisco Chronicle​

26 minutes ago

• San Francisco Chronicle​

Israeli-backed group seeks at least $30 million from US for aid distribution in Gaza

WASHINGTON (AP) — A U.S.-led group has asked the Trump administration to step in with an initial $30 million so it can continue its much scrutinized and Israeli-backed aid distribution in Gaza, according to three U.S. officials and the organization's application for the money. That application, obtained by The Associated Press, also offers some of the first financial details about the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation and its work in the territory. The foundation says it has provided millions of meals in southern Gaza since late May to Palestinians as Israel's blockade and military campaign have driven the Gaza to the brink of famine. But the effort has seen near-daily fatal shootings of Palestinians trying to reach the distribution sites. Major humanitarian groups also accuse the foundation of cooperating with Israel's objectives in the 20-month-old war against Hamas in a way that violates humanitarian principles. The group's funding application was submitted to the U.S. Agency for International Development, according to the U.S. officials, who were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. The application was being processed this week as potentially one of the agency's last acts before the Republican administration absorbs USAID into the State Department as part of deep cuts in foreign assistance. Two of the officials said they were told the administration has decided to award the money. They said the processing was moving forward with little of the review and auditing normally required before Washington makes foreign assistance grants to an organization. In a letter submitted Thursday as part of the application, Gaza Humanitarian Foundation secretary Loik Henderson said his organization 'was grateful for the opportunity to partner with you to sustain and scale life-saving operations in Gaza.' Neither the State Department nor Henderson immediately responded to requests for comment Saturday. Israel says the foundation is the linchpin of a new aid system to wrest control from the United Nations, which Israel alleges has been infiltrated by Hamas, and other humanitarian groups. The foundation's use of fixed sites in southern Gaza is in line with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's plan to use aid to concentrate the territory's more than 2 million people in the south, freeing Israel to fight Hamas elsewhere. Aid workers fear it's a step toward another of Netanyahu's public goals, removing Palestinians from Gaza in 'voluntary' migrations that aid groups and human rights organizations say would amount to coerced departures. The U.N. and many leading nonprofit groups accuse the foundation of stepping into aid distribution with little transparency or humanitarian experience, and, crucially, without a commitment to the principles of neutrality and operational independence in war zones. Since the organization started operations, several hundred Palestinians have been killed and hundreds more wounded in near-daily shootings as they tried to reach aid sites, according to Gaza's Health Ministry. Witnesses say Israeli troops regularly fire heavy barrages toward the crowds in an attempt to control them. The Israeli military has denied firing on civilians. It says it fired warning shots in several instance, and fired directly at a few 'suspects' who ignored warnings and approached its forces. It's unclear who is funding the new operation in Gaza. No donor has come forward. The State Department said this past week that the United States is not funding it. In documents supporting its application, the group said it received nearly $119 million for May operations from 'other government donors,' but gives no details. It expects $38 million from those unspecific government donors for June, in addition to the hoped-for $30 million from the United States.

Hamilton Spectator

an hour ago

• Hamilton Spectator

Ex-Texas US Rep. Blake Farenthold, who left office amid harassment allegations, dies at 63

Former Texas Republican U.S. Rep. Blake Farenthold, who left Congress amid sexual harassment allegations, has died. He was 63. He died in a Corpus Christi hospital and suffered heart and liver problems in recent years, Steve Ray, his former longtime political consultant, said. Farenthold's wife, Debbie Farenthold, confirmed that he died Friday. Blake Farenthold was elected in 2010, upsetting long-serving Democratic U.S. Rep. Solomon Ortiz. Seven years later, Farenthold announced that he wouldn't seek reelection. In a video he posted on his campaign's Facebook page at the time, he denied a former aide's three-year-old accusations, which included that he'd subjected her to sexually suggestive comments and behavior and then fired her after she complained. He apologized for an office atmosphere he said included 'destructive gossip, offhand comments, off-color jokes and behavior that in general was less than professional.' He said in the video that if he stayed in Congress, he would have spent months trying to vindicate himself. 'We all make mistakes,' Ray said Saturday. 'He made some mistakes.' Ray described him as a 'techie' who was interested in the internet and technology before getting involved in politics. 'He did a tremendous job as congressman for this area,' Ray said, noting that Farenthold cared about fighting crime and promoting transparency. 'His heart was really always in the right place.' Before becoming a congressman, Farenthold was a sidekick for a conservative radio talk show host, Ray said. 'When he decided to run, nobody in the world thought he was going to win,' Ray said. When he left office, he started his own radio show until he died. In addition to his wife, Farenthold is survived by two adult daughters, Morgan Baucum and Amanda Lawrence, Ray said. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .