Environmentalism: A Gold Mine for Rent Seekers

by | Mar 10, 2020 |

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

It is a safe bet that most readers have read or heard the term ‘rent seeking.’ It is an even a safer bet that few readers fully understand what it means, unless, of course, your college economics course is not too far back in your rear-view mirror. So let’s first clear up any confusion and describe what this is all about.
It’s actually a fairly simple concept. When resources are diverted from production of a product or service into political action to avoid further improvement of a product or service, economists call it rent seeking. 
On the bigger stage, it is how lobbyists twist the arms of legislators and politicians of all kinds, to do their bidding, where an exchange of power and money can be placed on the gaming table for distribution. And, it certainly is a game, one that the public always loses.
We do not mean to place all lobbyists in a bad light. Their actual purpose, as perhaps the second oldest profession, is to educate those in power about complicated issues that they are asked to rule upon. However, too often, those paying the lobbyists to educate, have a dog in the race, whose ultimate victory benefits the dog owner, rather than the public served by the ruling politician.

It all stems from the ability of government, through force, to promote the goals of some citizens at the expense of others. In all cases of rent seeking, resources are diverted from production to political action.

While the government has always had the ability to take stuff from some to benefit others, the Constitution intends that this power is granted to benefit the overall general welfare of a community, state or nation.
One such example, in which Dr. Jay Lehr, the senior author of this article was peripherally involved, was a regulation of refrigerants under the Clean Air Act. Commonly used refrigerants were outlawed under the guise of reducing gases in the atmosphere which were erroneously thought to be destroying the ozone layer. High altitude ozone, an inorganic molecule with the chemical formula O₃ (in contrast to the more common O2 molecule), is thought to protect our eyes from damaging radiation from the Sun. 
We now know such concerns were immensely exaggerated. Regardless, the use of an inexpensive refrigerant was temporarily outlawed in favor of a patented refrigerant costing nearly ten times as much.
In a rare victory for the good guys, EPA’s ruling against the inexpensive refrigerant was over-turned. In the court case the plaintiffs (the good guys here) correctly said, “industry intervenors are rent-seekers trying to use the government to foreclose their competitors’ products, not to foster the development of new ones.” In the environmental arena such deviousness is common.
Unfortunately, the output-expanding, positive-sum activities of market discovery, innovation, and production are increasingly being replaced by rent-seeking behavior depending on political clout. People redirect their energies to gaining political influence, and thus taking more time and energy away from other productive activities. Many businesses invest heavily in lobbying because they see it as a cost-effective way to beat their competition. 
They also do it to slow the rising costs of complying with environmental regulations which now make up a major portion of the $1.9 trillion cost of all Federal regulations. Many of these regulations are the result of successful lobbying by environmental activists. Examples of this are the ever-smaller allowable concentrations of emissions from industrial processes that cannot possibly cause harm to the public. 
Environment radicals have dramatically increased their political clout with left-leaning government employees who participate in the ‘sue and settle’ game with the government that actually finances their continual efforts to thwart industry. The US Chamber of Commerce explains:
“Sue and Settle” refers to when a federal agency agrees to a settlement agreement, in a lawsuit from special interest groups, to create priorities and rules outside of the normal rulemaking process. The agency intentionally relinquishes statutory discretion by committing to timelines and priorities that often realign agency duties. These settlement agreements are negotiated behind closed doors with no participation from the public or affected parties. As an example, between 2009 and 2012, EPA chose not to defend itself in over 60 lawsuits from special interest advocacy groups. These cases resulted in settlement agreements and EPA publishing more than 100 new regulations – including the Clean Power Plan.

Alternative energy companies invest hundreds of millions of dollars a year on a form of rent seeking, namely lobbying government officials to require utilities to purchase their products and taxpayers to pay for their subsidies and tax breaks.

Examples of rent-seeking in the heavily-subsidized wind and solar power industries are easy to find. NextEra Energy Inc. is a Florida-based utility that has grown into a green Goliath almost entirely by taking advantage of government support. It then sells its ‘green power’ to utilities around the country that are required by their states’ laws to produce a portion of their energy from so-called renewable sources.
Excelon Nuclear, a division of Exelon Generation which operates the largest fleet of nuclear power plants in the US, is another case in point. Excelon has been a vocal supporter of the dangerous man-made global warming hypothesis, while hyping its emission-free energy, and lobbying for a ‘carbon tax’ that it’s fossil fuel competitors would have to pay. Similarly, Chesapeake Energy, once a major supplier of natural gas, gave $26 million to the Sierra Club to attack its rivals in the coal industry.
And, of course, environmental advocacy groups invest in lobbying to advance their own agendas, and their resources rival or exceed those of the business community. Organizations like Environmental Defense use fear of catastrophic climate change to raise money using slick direct mail campaigns.
Rent-seeking sometimes makes strange bedfellows, a phenomenon Bruce Yandle, Dean Emeritus of Clemson University‘s College of Business and Behavioral Science, labeled “Bootleggers and Baptists” in a 1983 article. These two special interest groups involved worked together to outlaw alcohol sales in some counties and on Sundays (see here for a history of this phenomenon). 
Rent-seeking behavior negatively affects more than just the efficient use of resources. When the public realizes the extent to which interest groups and elite members of society use rent-seeking for their own benefit, the legitimacy of government suffers and the very foundation of our democracy is eroded. It is something we should highlight and roundly condemn at every possible opportunity.


Note: Portions of this article were excerpted from Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels (CCRII: Fossil Fuels), produced by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) published by The Heartland Institute, with permission of the editors Joseph Bast and Diane Bast. The authors strongly recommend the book for a complete expo of the fallacies behind the climate delusion.

Avatar

Dr. Jay Lehr is a Senior Policy Analyst with the International Climate Science Coalition and former Science Director of The Heartland Institute. He is an internationally renowned scientist, author, and speaker who has testified before Congress on dozens of occasions on environmental issues and consulted with nearly every agency of the national government and many foreign countries. After graduating from Princeton University at the age of 20 with a degree in Geological Engineering, he received the nation’s first Ph.D. in Groundwater Hydrology from the University of Arizona. He later became executive director of the National Association of Groundwater Scientists and Engineers.

Tom Harris is Executive Director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition, and a policy advisor to The Heartland Institute. He has 40 years experience as a mechanical engineer/project manager, science and technology communications professional, technical trainer, and S&T advisor to a former Opposition Senior Environment Critic in Canada’s Parliament.

Use the code ‘OUTLOUD’ and save 15%
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
16 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Harris
2 years ago

I wonder how long it will take for the “Dave James” person, or is ‘he’ really a group of people, to show up. 3, 2, 1……

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Tom Harris
2 years ago

Mr. Tom Harris wrote, “So, one naturally wonders: is there a single person named “Dave James” who must be spending most of his life posting comments to oppose me (as many of his comments show considerable research), or is there a team of researchers and posters who post under the name “Dave James?” Curious to hear what people think.” (Source Comments Section of “Getting Ahead of Earth Day’s 50th Anniversary” By Dr. Jay Lehr & Tom Harris, Jan 21, 2020 America Out Loud)
Rather than address my actual arguments, Tom Harris attacks me and speculates that I am more than one person because “many of his comments show considerable research.” Mr. Harris implies my polite and direct comments are unfair and also encourages others to target me. It does not take a “team of researchers” to see the flaws in Dr. Jay Lehr’s and Mr. Tom Harris’ opinion pieces. By relying on speculation and personal attacks, Mr. Harris shows the weakness of his arguments.

Russell Cook
Russell Cook
Reply to  Tom Harris
2 years ago

Took me a while to find it in your Facebook timeline, but here’s a screencapture gem https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1068319153339444&set=p.1068319153339444&type=3&theater from November 2018 where I spotted just how quickly ol’ Dave arrived at the comment section for an article you co-authored with Dr Tim Ball. Could be he was running relatively late arriving here due to his increased “duties” — self imposed or otherwise — of stalking other CFACT authors over at CFACT’s article pages.
To verify the extent of this unhelpful appearance, America Out Loud readers can click on the authors’ link at the top of the article or at the bio line at the bottom and go through the pieces to count up how many times “Dave James” is NOT one of the first , if not routinely THE first commenter critic to arrive at your articles or the ones you’ve co-authored with others. I’m familiar with his 2016-to-present uninterrupted comment stalker behavior history at your online articles/co-authored articles elsewhere. Other readers familiar with this unique stalker situation might guess that your placement of a comment before the too-predictable arrival of this fellow might prompt him to perhaps be embarrassed about further corroding his already suspect appearance. Apparently not, however. Rather than indulge him further in future comment sections, I’d suggest creating a highlighted prominent link to a page you could place in your bio line, offering readers info they can use to judge for themselves whether this particular commenter account really is a sincere ordinary individual who merely seeks to dispute your claims, or is one with a deliberate character assassination vendetta agenda against you. I can readily prove “Dave James” also a comment stalker of my comments elsewhere, he demonstrated it again with another out-of-the-blue reply over at the PBS NewsHour yesterday to one of my stand-alone comments on a purely political topic unrelated to global warming.

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Russell Cook
2 years ago

Russell Cook is a blogger and a fellow Heartland associate of Mr. Harris. (Source archived bio of Russell Cook on the Heartland website) One of Mr. Cook’s roles is “get in and fight back” in comment sections with people who take issue with false and misleading op-eds by Heartland associates. (Source “Exploratory Journeys with Tom Harris” Episode – 17, Nov 27, 2019: Tom interviews Russell Cook)
Instead of commenting on Tom Harris’ and Dr. Lehr’s opinion piece or disputing my criticisms of it, Mr. Cook falls back on petty insults. Mr. Cook has the false belief that politely disputing Dr. Lehr’s and Mr. Harris’ arguments is “a deliberate character assassination vendetta agenda against (Tom Harris).”
Name-calling and personal attacks are irrational so I don’t use them. Clear, direct and well-supported arguments are far more convincing than insults and unsupported assertions.

Dave James
Dave James
2 years ago

Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Tom Harris write that “…environmental advocacy groups invest in lobbying to advance their own agendas, and their resources rival or exceed those of the business community.” However, the lobbying budgets of fossil fuel industry and the business community dwarfs that of environmental advocacy groups. (Source “Environment” OpenSecrets dot org)
In economics rent-seeking means seeking to increase one’s share of existing wealth without creating new wealth. Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr assert advocates for environmental regulations are rent seekers. This is contradicted by Dr. Lehr’s and Mr. Harris’ own statements on the benefits of environmental regulations.
According to Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr, “1968 began a major legislative effort by scientists to bring knowledge of our environment to bear on procedures and regulations that could staunch the unnecessary outpouring of industrial, municipal and domestic waste into the air we breathe, the water we drink and swim in, the water wells we pump from and the soil in which we grow our food.
Between 1972 and 1980, Congress passed a safety net of environmental laws that adequately protected every medium of our environment. They spawned an environmental improvement and protection program during the ensuing two decades that became the most successful grass roots, self-improvement program in our nation’s history.” (Source “We Must Loudly Contest Environmental Myths”
By Dr. Jay Lehr & Tom Harris, Jan 7, 2020, America Out Loud)

Jenna Bellman
Jenna Bellman
2 years ago

Great article by Tom: Dave James’s attacks are totally unfounded, sad to see people resorting to bringing up irrelevant things to supposedly prove their point.

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Jenna Bellman
2 years ago

Jenna Bellman, you assert my comments are attacks and irrelevant but provide nothing to support your assertions. In rational debate, vague and unsupported assertion are less than compelling.

Russell Cook
Russell Cook
Reply to  Jenna Bellman
2 years ago

@Jenna: Correct, I could have written the March 11, 2020 at 3:27pm comment reply by “Dave James,” he is just that predictable. Want to needle the guy on his history of irrelevant character assassination efforts? Ask him what prompted him to begin exclusively stalking Tom Harris at Tom’s online articles back in early 2016, and why he felt compelled to bring up the Heartland Institute name in connection with Tom in his very first comment screed against Tom. And regarding a subsequent one from his early stalking days, ask him how the phrase “He who pays the piper calls the tune” is NOT implied character assassination. Screencapture of that gem here. —> http://gelbspanfiles.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/DJames-he-who-pays-piper-1024×691.jpg

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Russell Cook
2 years ago

Instead of commenting on Tom Harris’ and Dr. Lehr’s opinion piece or disputing my criticisms of it, Russell Cook repeats his petty insults and implies that bringing-up the Heartland Institute’s relationship with Mr. Tom Harris is “irrelevant character assassination.” However, Mr. Harris writes in his by-line for this opinion piece, “Tom Harris is… a policy advisor to The Heartland Institute.”
Mr. Cook asserts my comment, “He who pays the piper calls the tune” implies an attack on Tom Harris’ character. However, Mr. Harris and I were politely discussing the relationship between the Heartland Institute and the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC).
Insults and false arguments are not the signs of a well-reasoned post.

Dale Mullen
Dale Mullen
Reply to  Jenna Bellman
2 years ago

Jenna: It’s been Dave James’ hobby to chase after Tom Harris, which he has been doing for some time. Apparently with nothing important or better to do, this is how he tries to pretend to the online world that he is something other than an obnoxious troll.
In short, he is better ignored and sent off to the corner to play with himself…

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Dale Mullen
2 years ago

Like Tom Harris and Russell Cook, Mr. Dale Mullen has the false belief that Dr. Lehr and Mr. Harris opinion piece is above criticism. The reason American Out Loud provides a comment section is to discuss and examine the arguments made. The “marketplace of ideas” assumes weak and irrational arguments will perish and strong and well-supported arguments will succeed.
Instead of commenting on Tom Harris’ and Dr. Lehr’s opinion piece or disputing my criticisms of it, Mr. Mullen launches personal attacks. Mr. Mullen’s name-calling is an extremely weak argument.

Russell Cook
Russell Cook
Reply to  Dale Mullen
2 years ago

@Dale Mullen: The “Dave James” commenter is a total mystery to me. I cannot fathom how a person can operate in such a disingenuous fashion, where so many of his defense/offense comment replies are intellectually dishonest false premises (e.g. the sidestep in his March 11 6:42pm comment about his years-old “He who pays the piper” remark being little more than a polite discussion item). The man attempts to pass himself off as a casual commenter offering well-intended basic free speech criticisms, all the while hoping nobody will ever dive into his commenting history which irrefutably establishes his stalker fixation on Tom Harris. Speaking of that, a point of clarification about what Tom’s March 11 comment pointed to: while this “Dave James” Disqus System comment account is just short of 4600 comments dating back to the spring of 2016 (where the average daily post is 3 comments per day EVERY day), its comment total toward the end of January 2019 was just over 2000 comments. Within just this last 12 months, the guy piled in over 2500 more comments, still pretty much all aimed at Tom or his article co-authors, and lately, CFACT authors who are arguably separated by only one degree from Tom. Be generous and put the new tally down to 2400 over the last 365 days back from today, and the new average works out to around 6½ comments per day, a sizable jump.
Wait for it, the pretty much guaranteed response from “Dave James” will be a bot-like comment saying something similar to, “Childish name-calling is not the sign of a well-reasoned post.” / “You offer nothing addressing the content of the Harris / Lehr article.”

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Russell Cook
2 years ago

Mr. Russell Cook asserts the phrase “he who pays the piper, calls the tune” is not polite discussion but an intellectually dishonest false premise which “irrefutably establishes his stalker fixation on Tom Harris.” Mr. Cook mistakes polite debate for irrational personal attacks and vice versa.
If Mr. Russel Cook wants to “get in and fight back”, then he could defend Dr. Lehr’s and Mr. Harris’ opinion piece with polite and well-reasoned arguments. However, Russell Cook relies on petty insults while never attempting to support Dr. Lehr’s and Mr. Harris’ opinion piece. Mr. Cook weakly attacks me rather than honestly addressing my arguments.
Mr. Cook’s main point is that I am too critical of Tom Harris and the authors at CFACT. Mr. Cook suggests my polite criticisms of various authors on CFACT are actually attacks on Tom Harris, “CFACT authors who are arguably separated by only one degree from Tom.”
Mr. Cook’s implies that Tom Harris and the authors at CFACT should be above criticism but that makes no sense. Neither CFACT nor America Out Loud limits its comments section to only people who share the authors points of view. If the arguments of Tom Harris and the various other authors at CFACT cannot survive open and honest debate, then they have not made strong arguments.

Tom Harris
2 years ago

When one poster, in this case, the “Dave James” person or group, virtually always posts the majority of comments after our pieces no matter where or when they appear, you know something’s up. Indeed, if anyone thinks this is just a random poster who just happens to show up, take a look at his posting history https://disqus.com/by/disqus_JzQ88MTX2I/comments/.
This Disqus profile – https://disqus.com/by/disqus_JzQ88MTX2I/following/ – shows that since March 31, 2016, Mr. James has made 4,592 comments. That is an average of more than 3 comments per day EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK EVERY WEEK OF THE YEAR FOR FOUR YEARS. Here is a sample of some of his many, many posts apparently trying to discredit my writings in online article comment sections: https://www.google.ca/search?site=&source=hp&q=%22Tom+Harris%22+%22Dave+James%22&gws_rd=cr&ei=nyGDWefuDavcjwSb-oK4DA . I already explained to Mr. James that many of his points are either wrong or misleading . I will not waste any more time explaining this to him, unless other people bring up the same or similar questions.

Dave James
Dave James
Reply to  Tom Harris
2 years ago

Tom Harris is not a fan of open and honest debate. Rather than address my criticisms of this opinion piece, Mr. Tom Harris makes the unsupported assertion that he has shown my points are either wrong of misleading somewhere else. If Mr. Harris has confidence in the strength of his arguments, then Mr. Harris wouldn’t refuse to discuss his and Dr. Lehr’s opinion piece.
Mr. Harris is mistaken. It is not my words which impact Mr. Harris’ and Dr. Lehr’s credibility. It’s theirs.
Dr. Lehr’s and Mr. Harris’ statements on Jan 7, 2020 regarding the benefits of environmental regulations, “Between 1972 and 1980, Congress passed a safety net of environmental laws that adequately protected every medium of our environment. They spawned an environmental improvement and protection program during the ensuing two decades that became the most successful grass roots, self-improvement program in our nation’s history” are not consistent with their premise in this opinion piece that environmentalism is a gold mine for rent seekers.

Dave James
Dave James
2 years ago

Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Tom Harris false assertion that environmental advocacy groups resources “…rival or exceed those of the business community” is not new. Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr asserted the public was wrong to view environmental groups as “the Davids in a battle with the Goliath industrial complex across the world.” (Source “The BIG MONEY in The Climate Change Delusion” by Dr. Jay Lehr & Tom Harris, Nov 19, 2019, America Out Loud”)
Mr. Harris and Dr. Lehr asserted energy companies like Exxon-Mobile “…do not spend more than a tiny fraction of the sums that environment and conservation organization have…” However, the total annual revenue of the 14 environmental groups listed by Dr. Jay Lehr and Mr. Tom Harris is $2.4 billion in 2012. Exxon’s annual revenue in 2012 was $480.5 billion – more than 200 times larger. Exxon is only one fossil fuel company.
Given this massive disparately in revenue it is entirely appropriate to compare environmental and conservation organizations as “Davids” compared to the “Goliath” of the industrial complex.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is for educational, general information, and entertainment purposes only and is never intended to constitute medical or legal advice or to replace the personalized care of a primary care practitioner or legal expert.

While we endeavor to keep this information up to date and correct, the information provided by America Out Loud, its website(s), and any properties (including its radio shows and podcasts) makes no representations, or warranties of any kind, expressed, or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability with respect to its website(s) or the information, products, services or related graphics and images contained on the website(s) for any purpose.

The opinions expressed on the website(s), and the opinions expressed on the radio shows and podcasts, are the opinions of the show hosts and do not necessarily represent the opinions, beliefs, or policies of anyone or any entity we may endorse. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

At no time, nor in any event, will we be liable for any loss, or damage, including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss of data or profits arising out of, in an association of, or connection with the use of this website.

Through this website, users can link to other websites that may be listed. Those websites are not under the control of America Out Loud or its brands. We have no control over the nature, content, or availability of those sites. America Out Loud has no control over what the sites do with the information they collect. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation, nor does it endorse the views expressed with or by them.

Every effort is made to keep the website up and running smoothly. However, America Out Loud takes no responsibility for, nor are we, and will not be liable for being temporarily unavailable due to technical difficulties beyond our control. America Out Loud does not sell, trade, nor market email addresses or other personal data.

Exposing Russia as a Military Fraud, Is China Next?

Exposing Russia as a Military Fraud, Is China Next?

If we had looked closely in those intervening years, we could have seen the clues of their demise. Many in my field (CE/CI) did, but the world had changed. Politicians facing the prospective loss of political control through fear-mongering of something ⏤ Russia then and China now ⏤ limited any real responses that could have achieved a safe world with Russia in it…

Take a Look at the Positive Side of Anarchy

Take a Look at the Positive Side of Anarchy

The only way to achieve liberty and peace is to restore law and order. And the only way to restore law and order is to literally crush the forces of evil. When that begins to happen, we do actually see the positive side of tyranny and anarchy. Conflict is a bedfellow of oppression. Therefore we must end the conflict and, in doing so, end the tyranny. Here’s the positive side of this war…

It’s a LONG-HAUL with COVID-19

It’s a LONG-HAUL with COVID-19

The context is that about 50% of those hospitalized with COVID-19 develop post-COVID symptoms. Severe outpatients also are affected. Characteristic symptoms include headache, hearing loss, tinnitus, loss of olfactory function, sleep disturbance, muscle aches, weakness, fatigue, and chest or abdominal pain…

Be the One.

Be the One.

Be the one — no longer willing to huddle together in the helpless band — the one who dares to join the fight. Another will follow you and then another, and in a flash of time, that bleeding hulk of our nation — once the great light of liberty to the world, now barely flickering — will rise again to throw off the wolves like it has done before, sending them scurrying for safety…

Major Medical Mystery: Why Some People Despite Exposure Don’t Get COVID

Major Medical Mystery: Why Some People Despite Exposure Don’t Get COVID

A small fraction of Americans have escaped COVID infection. CDC uses a figure of 60% for those infected, while the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington says that 76% have been infected. The remainder may have escaped exposure or been exposed but escaped infection. The latter people are the subject of the medical mystery…

Correcting America’s Course Back to the Constitutional Rule of Law

Correcting America’s Course Back to the Constitutional Rule of Law

The US Constitution must scrupulously be followed, especially by the judiciary. It is not for judges to make laws; it is for them to observe and rule on the constitutionality of issues before them. Their oaths, taken upon their confirmations, should include the understanding that their failures to follow judicial protocols would end in their termination…

Does Joe Biden Aspire to be America’s Last President?

Does Joe Biden Aspire to be America’s Last President?

Most ominously, no American administration has ever seemed so entirely unconcerned about hemorrhaging political capital. And that lack of concern about voters’ approval can only mean that this administration no longer believes it relies on political capital (the consent of the governed) for power. We can only assume that this Marxist-aligned administration intends to authorize itself with whatever power it requires to achieve its ends…

America Out Loud 6 years

Celebrating 6 incredible years fighting to restore liberty and justice to our beloved America.

Your Source for Free Speech, Talk Radio, Podcasts, and News.

 

Here we take on the challenges of our generation so that we can preserve future generations. Please consider making a contribution in the fight for liberty!

iHeartRadio

The APPS are free; the mission is priceless!

Free APP
Healthycell

Podcast Networks

Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Pandora
Tunein
iHeart
Stitcher

Subscribe and Listen on Your Favorite APP

Our Columnists and Show Hosts

Truth For Health

Apple Podcasts

COVID Solution Summit

Apple Podcasts

Evacuating Americans & fully-vetted Afghan's at Risk - Help Us!

Apple Podcasts

Empowering and mentoring conservative trailblazers from Generation Z to win!

Apple Podcasts

Turning Point Action is Recruiting Precinct Chairs - Become a Grassroots Warrior Today!

Apple Podcasts

URGENT - KEEP NINE
Please join us to protect the Supreme Court:
Sign the Petition!

Apple Podcasts

The LATINO USA EXIT from the Democrat Party, click for details...

Apple Podcasts

Fighting corporate censorship and ensuring voter integrity...

Apple Podcasts

Support wounded and fallen police officers. The Wounded Blue.

Wounded Blue
Share via
Copy link